Labour’s latest purge: bias, hostility and prejudice

JVL Introduction

Below we post an article by Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi on her expulsion from the Labour Party. Here we put her case in the wider context of the leadership’s current strategy.

As we enter a new year of uncertainty and danger in almost every region of the world, the UK Labour Party presents a strange and – some might say – ludicrous spectacle. How does it respond to right-wing Conservative threats to the right to strike and protest, to plummeting living standards and rocketing cost of living, to growing divisiveness and bigotry, global environmental breakdown, whole populations fleeing famine, flood and war? By purging those in the party who veer even slightly from the path dictated by the leadership, including left-wing Jews.

NOT by upholding the principles party members and supporters hold dear, NOT by taking the lead in solidarity with the oppressed and those standing up for their rights. No, it is taking its support base for granted, scrabbling for Tory votes, competing to appear tough on immigration and “disruptive” strikes, winning accolades from the likes of Nigel Farage and Jeremy Clarkson. And just to show how ardently it opposes racism in all its forms, it has pledged friendship to the most right-wing Israeli government ever and marked the Jewish festival of Hannukah by terminating the membership of Stephen Marks, an elected member of the  National Constitutional Committee; of Heather Mendick, a leading party activist in the London Borough of Hackney; and of Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, suspended shortly after winning election to the  National Executive Committee.

JVL said in a statement, “In suspending and then expelling Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi the party has disenfranchised the thousands of members who elected her to the National Executive Committee. They have been deprived of her voice as one of the nine directly elected constituency party representatives. This disregard for democracy is an attack not just on Naomi but on the rights of all members.”

Naomi has submitted an appeal which you can read in full by downloading this pdf. It outlines the many ways in which the process against her is marked by bias, hostility and prejudice against her as a left-wing Jew.

You can see a YouTube video in which Naomi and Heather discuss the implications of the latest expulsions.

A statement calling for Naomi’s reinstatement to the NEC is gathering signatures here.

My appeal against “termination”

By Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi

According to party rules, an appeal can be lodged if the findings of the NEC are “tainted by bias or unsupported by the evidence”, or if the evidence provided fails to prove that “a prohibited act” has been committed. My appeal is soundly based on both of these grounds.

Confidential information leaked

Blatant bias is clear from the way in which news of my membership being “terminated” was leaked to a hostile journalist, Lee Harpin, who tweeted before I was aware of it: “Naomi Wimborne Idrissi – co-founder of JVL – has been expelled from the Labour Party, multiple sources confirm tonight.”.

I have submitted a formal complaint calling for an investigation to identify and discipline those responsible for the leak, which infringes the party’s Code of Conduct on Confidentiality and Privacy,  contradicts the privacy warning the Governance and Legal Unit (GLU) sends to all recipients of its disciplinary communications, and may have involved accessing private emails – a breach of the Labour Party’s obligations under the Data Protection Act 2018.

There have been multiple occurrences of similar leaks and data breaches in cases brought against party members whose views differ from those of the current leadership. This behaviour shows a complete lack of respect for the duty of care owed to members, as well as hypocrisy in demanding confidentiality from those being so scandalously treated. It is time those responsible were brought to book.

Targeted as a left-wing Jew

I was the only Jewish representative elected to the NEC in the 2022 elections, standing on a platform based on my role in defending Jewish and non-Jewish party members against unjust accusations of antisemitism and as a campaigner for justice for Palestinians. When I was subjected to public vilification, far from showing the duty of care which is due to an elected NEC representative, the party sided with my attackers, deploying a flimsy allegation to strip me of my elected role.

No action was taken against non-Jewish members of the NEC who joined in publicly abusing me, while I, a Jewish woman party member, faced punitive disciplinary action. These acts of commission and omission demonstrate bias against me and are offences defined in the rule book as representing “hostility or prejudice based on religion or belief.”

The EHRC have been informed about the growing evidence that Labour is disproportionately targeting Jewish members.

Silenced for an alleged “prohibited act”

Bias, hostility and prejudice are evident in the timing of my suspension and manipulation of the disciplinary process against me. My administrative suspension in September 2022, three weeks after being elected to the NEC, was based on an alleged “prohibited act” in September 2021 – taking part in a panel discussion organised by a number of groups including Resist, LAW and LIEN which had been proscribed two months earlier. I took part in order to contribute a legitimate, alternative Jewish point of view to a discussion titled McCarthyism and Starmer’s Labour Party. There is no logic in  construing this as supporting any organisation.

The discussion was recorded and was publicly available online for a year before it was deployed as a pretext for charging me with “supporting” three of the groups involved in arranging the event. If merely delivering a speech is evidence of “supporting”, then Wes Streeting should be disciplined for “supporting” an anti-Labour organisation by delivering a keynote speech at the leading conservative think tank Policy Exchange.  Of course he has not been – and nor should he be, any more than I should for my appearance in a panel discussion.

I submitted detailed evidence explaining why I was not guilty of the alleged “prohibited act” but it was ignored, suggesting that the outcome was a foregone conclusion. The charge of supporting a proscribed group, criticised by the Forde Report, does not require any convincing evidence. It depends on a catchall phrase in the rules: “otherwise supporting (as may be defined by the NEC)”.

Proscribing groups disapproved of by the leadership permits it to silence and exclude members found guilty by association, without having to prove any actual misdemeanour. There have been numerous such expulsions over recent months, including some very prominent individuals – film-maker Ken Loach, Bakers’ Union president Ian Hodson, councillor and former PPC Pamela Fitzpatrick, UNISON National President Andrea Egan to name but a few.

What hope of a genuinely independent appeal hearing?

My appeal demonstrates that my expulsion is based on bias, lack of evidence, breach of confidentiality and hostility and prejudice towards me as a left-wing Jew. I have asked for assurances that it will be heard by a genuinely independent individual or group that can guarantee transparency, fairness and natural justice. These are characteristics lacking from the GLU and the supposedly Independent Review Board and Independent Complaints Board, all of which operate under the aegis the General Secretary. I await the response of the appeals team with interest.

PDF files attached:

Notice of Investigation and Administrative Suspension

NWI submission to GLU investigation

Notice of Termination of Membership

NWI Expulsion Appeal