When the Labour party set up the Equality and Human Rights Commission just over a decade ago, it probably never dreamed it could itself be the subject of a statutory investigation.

The crisis over antisemitism in the party has again reached an acute point, with the resignations of MPs including heroic Luciana Berger, the suspension of Chris Williamson for saying the party had been “too apologetic” over antisemitism, and the ongoing revelations about the leadership interfering with disciplinary processes.

When people look back on Labour and Jeremy Corbyn’s response to antisemitism, the question is unlikely to be whether the party became institutionally antisemitic, but when. I do not make that statement lightly. But as a Jew, a former Labour voter and a human rights lawyer, I believe it is accurate. I am relieved that the EHRC looks likely to launch a formal investigation into the party so that, finally, through the fog of partisan nastiness that has enveloped this sensitive issue, we may achieve some clarity. Full disclosure: I have been instructed by the Campaign Against Antisemitism, assisted by its team of volunteers, to persuade the EHRC that it is time for it to step in.

This is not just about Jewish people. If Labour is to be trusted as the party of government, it must open itself up to this process.

The Macpherson report described institutional racism as the “collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin”. The genius of the concept is that it recognises that organisations needn’t be full of obvious racists for a discriminatory culture to develop, as racism can also be “seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping”.

Macpherson was concerned with processes, attitudes and behaviour. Let’s start with behaviour. There have been an unacceptable number of serious instances of antisemitism involving Labour MPs, officials and members. Jon Lansman, the head of Momentum, recently said that Labour had “a much larger number of people [than originally thought] with hardcore antisemitic opinions which, unfortunately, is polluting the atmosphere in a lot of constituency parties and in particular online”. A number of elected counsellors and now an MP have been suspended. The Jewish Labour Movement, which has been linked to Labour for almost a century, submitted a dossier of hundreds of antisemitic incidents to the EHRC and will vote next month on whether to remain affiliated with the Labour party.

Now consider processes. For an institution to properly handle complaints of discrimination, it must have effective grievance and disciplinary processes. Labour’s are a complete mess. They are ineffective, opaque and undermined by political interference, and were criticised by the cross-party home affairs committee in 2016 and by Shami Chakrabarti in an internal Labour report of the same year.

Labour’s processes have also been stacked with people who make a joke of any claim to impartiality. Peter Willsman remains on the key national executive committee despite being recorded saying of 68 rabbis’ statements on antisemitism that he was “not going to be lectured to by Trump fanatics making up duff information without any evidence at all”. Stephen Marks now sits on the national constitutional committee, a panel of people that finally determines antisemitism complaints. This is despite him having referred to such complaints as “imagined” and being a key member of Jewish Voice for Labour, an organisation whose head recently told BBC radio that an incident is only antisemitic if it includes a sense of impending violence – a definition that is as false as it is irresponsible. In recent weeks, journalists have exposed the fact that, contrary to repeated public assurances, Corbyn’s office has been interfering with disciplinary matters.

Then there is culture. A strong culture of denial and victimisation has developed. Diane Abbott said in 2016 that it was “a smear to say that Labour had a problem with antisemitism” and reportedly watched on as her constituency Labour party passed a motion blaming the “right wing of the party” for the crisis. Williamson said in 2017 that “antisemitism smears” were a “dirty, lowdown trick”. John McDonnell remains the honorary president of the Labour representation committee, which has branded antisemitism accusations as “propaganda” from the “ruling class”.

On social media, victims of antisemitism are disbelieved and attacked. An ecosystem of victimisation has developed, from popular Facebook groups to the ‘alt left’ media, which enthusiastically supports conspiracy theories about Jewish MPs and activists, while the party leadership watches on and sometimes implicitly approves.

There have been useful efforts by Momentum to educate its membership on the basics of antisemitism. But these only serve to highlight the failure of the Labour party to provide education of its own. And since many take their cues directly from Corbyn, education is irrelevant unless he himself shows insight and empathy. Articles do occasionally appear in his name expressing how seriously he takes antisemitism (“and all other forms of racism”) but actions speak louder than words.

Taken together, the failures in leadership, processes and culture have created a toxic brew. For a party with a history of being at the vanguard of anti-racism, it hurts. But, nonetheless, it cannot continue. The EHRC exists to make the country a fairer place for everyone. There are few more important tasks than ridding the potential future government of institutional racism.

• Adam Wagner is a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers