The entire international jury of the Venice Biennale has resigned nine days before the opening of the world’s most prestigious contemporary art exhibition, throwing the 2026 edition into unprecedented turmoil. The five-member panel, led by Brazilian curator Solange Farkas, left after declaring it would not award prizes to artists from countries whose leaders face International Criminal Court arrest warrants — a decision that directly targeted Russia and Israel. The Biennale’s organisers, under president Pietrangelo Buttafuoco, had earlier decided to permit Russia’s return for the first time since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a move that set the stage for a bitter confrontation between artistic principles and geopolitical realities.

The jury’s stand reflected a deepening belief among curators that art institutions cannot remain neutral when states are accused of crimes against humanity. Yet from Rome, the government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni made clear it did not share that view. Meloni publicly distanced herself from the jury’s boycott, describing the decision to host Russia as one she would not have made, but insisting the Biennale remained autonomous. The culture ministry sent inspectors to Venice the day before the resignations, fuelling speculation of political pressure — though the ministry denied any intention to override the foundation’s independence. Meanwhile, the European Commission had already frozen a €2 million grant in protest at Russia’s inclusion, underscoring a broader rift between EU institutions and Italy’s right-wing government.

The fallout has scrambled the Biennale’s entire awards structure. In the wake of the resignations, organisers created two new “Visitor’s Lion” prizes to be decided by public vote, postponed the official ceremony from May 9 to November 22, and confirmed that both Russia and Israel would now be eligible for all awards. Viewed from Kyiv, this appeared as a capitulation to Moscow’s soft-power ambitions, with Ukrainian critics arguing that art should not provide a platform for a regime under international sanctions. From Tel Aviv, the Israeli sculptor Belu-Simion Fainaru had already threatened legal action for racial discrimination after the jury’s exclusion, adding a further legal dimension to the crisis.

Analysts in London note that the Biennale’s predicament exposes a structural weakness in large international exhibitions that try to separate art from politics in an age of polarisation. The departure of the jury — composed of respected figures from Brazil, Australia, Spain, the United States and Italy — deprives this edition of the very curatorial authority that gives the Golden Lion its credibility. With the decision to defer prizes and hand selection to visitors, the Biennale risks reducing its judging process to a popularity contest while failing to resolve the fundamental question of whether complicity is a price worth paying for cultural engagement. As the May 9 vernissage approaches, the art world watches to see whether the Biennale can rebuild its institutional integrity before the next crisis arrives.