Venice Biennale expert jury resigns over inclusion of Israeli and Russian participants

The Venice Biennale is supposed to be the art world’s big international showcase — part exhibition, part national prestige contest, part market signal. This year, the awards system blew up before the public opening. The entire five-member international jury resigned on April 30, just days before Biennale Arte 2026 opened on May 9, after a fight over whether Israel and Russia should be considered for prizes. La Biennale’s answer was blunt: keep both countries in, cancel the normal jury awards for now, and let visitors vote later instead. ### What actually resigned? Not a side committee — the main international jury. The panel had been appointed for the 61st International Art Exhibition, “In Minor Keys,” and included Solange Farkas as president, plus Zoe Butt, Elvira Dyangani Ose, Marta Kuzma, and Giovanna Zapperi. On April 30, La Biennale said it had received all of their resignations. (labiennale.org) ### What were they objecting to? The dispute was about awards eligibility, not basic participation. The jury had taken the position that it would not consider for prizes countries whose leaders are under ICC charges for crimes against humanity. In practice, that meant Israel and Russia. That is a narrower move than banning pavilions outright — but at the Biennale, prizes matter a lot, because they shape prestige, reviews, and future careers. (labiennale.org) ### So did Venice exclude Israel and Russia? No — and that is the core of the clash. La Biennale did not adopt the jury’s standard. Instead, after the resignations, it created two “Visitors’ Lions” and said awards would be decided by the public on November 22, the show’s last day, with all participating countries eligible. Basically, the institution chose procedural neutrality over the jury’s political filter. (timesofisrael.com) ### Why is a public vote such a big deal? Because Biennale prizes are usually elite judgments, not audience contests. The Golden Lion and related awards are part of how the art world decides what mattered this year. Switching to visitor voting changes the meaning of the prize itself. It is a bit like replacing a festival jury with applause meters — still a result, but not the same kind of result. (labiennale.org) ### Why are Israel and Russia the flashpoint? Because the Biennale sits in the middle of two overlapping arguments — whether cultural institutions should isolate states tied to wars and alleged atrocities, and whether artists should be judged through the actions of governments. Russia’s pavilion has already been politically fraught since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Israel’s participation has become a major pressure point across museums and festivals during the Gaza war. (labiennale.org) The jury tried to draw a line using ICC charges; Venice refused to make that line official. ### Was anything else unusual this year? Yes — the whole edition is already carrying extra weight. “In Minor Keys” is proceeding with the support of curator Koyo Kouoh’s family, and the show includes 100 national participations and 110 invited participants across the main exhibition. Iran, meanwhile, is not participating. So the awards controversy landed on top of an edition that was already unusually charged and closely watched. (timesofisrael.com) ### What does this change for the rest of the Biennale? The immediate effect is legitimacy trouble. If visitors choose the winners in November, critics can say the institution ducked responsibility. If Venice had backed the jury’s standard, others would have said it turned prizes into a geopolitical blacklist. Turns out there was no clean option left once the jury and the institution split in public. (labiennale.org) ### Bottom line? This is not just an art spat. It is a test of who gets to define neutrality at a global cultural event — curators and jurors, or the institution that owns the stage. (labiennale.org 1) (labiennale.org 2)