We are preparing to file court proceedings! – Labour Acivists for Justice reports

The cases being pursued by Labour Activists for Justice are likely to come to a head in the near future.

Here is an update from 25 November. A further one will be issued very soon.

We are preparing to file court proceedings!

Can you please help with our costs?

The Labour party disciplinary process has been condemned by the EHRC as fundamentally unfair to complainants and respondents.  This is not surprising.  Many of us who have had direct experience of the process can vouch for the fact that it is not fit for purpose. It is an opaque process, granting confidentiality to those accusers whose complaints are investigated, while treating the accused as if they were already guilty, and making vague accusations against people without letting them know the case against them or by what standards they are being judged.

It is fundamental to natural justice that an accused should know their accuser (unless there is very good reason for this not to be the case).  This requirement (confirmed by the EHRC) is, however, dispensed with by the Labour Party as a matter of course.  Indeed, the EHRC found that the Labour Party did not even always record the identity of complainant.  The accused is therefore kept in the dark about who the accuser is, or even if there is more than one.  The accused cannot therefore identify whether there might be other motivations for the complaint, including potential factionalism. Since the motives of the accusers cannot be challenged, the accused is denied a full opportunity to respond.

This is just one of the many unfairnesses identified by the EHRC that have pervaded the Party’s disciplinary processes and which still have not been addressed.  Indeed, we have tried valiantly since July to engage with the Labour Party (and others have preceded us) in order to encourage the Party to address the unjust and inequitable nature of their disciplinary processes and the devastating effect it has on the lives and well-being of those the Party chooses to target.

When the Labour Party finally engaged with our legal representatives they rejected all our reasonable submissions out of hand but without providing any adequate explanation.  It was not therefore surprising to discover that the EHRC’s report agreed with our concerns.  It recommended that the current procedure is so unfair that the party must put in place a new fair, transparent, independent process.

The Labour Party has now publicly confirmed that it will implement the recommendations of the EHRC report and will put a new process in place.  But extraordinarily, they have refused to stop the unfair current investigations, suggesting that the Report is not for us: it is for complainants and ‘The Jewish Community’.  This is not only offensive, particularly to those of us who are Jewish, it is also simply wrong.  The Report identifies fundamental unfairness to complainants and respondents irrespective of their ethnic background or religion.  And it completely contradicts the Party’s public statements that it accepts and is currently implementing the EHRC’s recommendations by designing a whole new process for investigations.

The Labour Party cannot continue to act in blatant disregard of the recommendations of the EHRC when it suits them, while saying, in a blaze of publicity, that they accepted those recommendations and would act on them in full.  It is time to hold them to account. We now have no option but to file our claim in court. We hope to file within a matter of weeks.

We are deeply grateful to all those who, because they share our views on this issue, have so generously supported this cause already.  We would not be where we are without you.  We still need your help please, so we are asking again for further donations at this stage to fund court action – not just for ourselves, but for all those who have been targeted and to prevent others in the future from having to suffer the same fate. This should be for the benefit of all Party members, and for all those who believe in the rule of law and fair process.

Thank you. Solidarity.

Comments (13)

  • Janet Crosley says:

    This condition of secrecy and double standards is destroying trust in the LP. Thank you for holding them to account . I will happily give what I can to help .

  • Roshan Pedder says:

    We owe you! Thank you. I’ve contributed.

  • Dave Bradney says:

    “But extraordinarily, they have refused to stop the unfair current investigations, suggesting that the Report is not for us: it is for complainants and ‘The Jewish Community’.”

    The EHRC is an official body, so the report is for the whole of the UK public, not just for a section or sections of it.

    We willed the EHRC into being, through the democratic process, and we paid for it to do this work, so we own its findings.

  • John C says:

    The rule of law, the commitment to due process and a reverence for natural justice, by which is meant the principles which govern judicial review, are the best defence against antisemitism that a state or any organisation can provide. This is where the Labour Party is most vulnerable to and deserving of criticism, not for the ignorant and intemperate remarks of some of its members.

  • Stephen Richards says:

    The Big Labour Party Lie! For CONFIDENTIALITY see SECRECY & ANONYMITY. However the EHRC employs the same hidden procedure; 70 anonymous & secret complaints about what & by whom? Not for your eyes!

  • Doug says:

    Would perk us all up if JVL listed all cases in pipeline at moment that you are aware of, so we can see some light at the end of the tunnel
    Are you allowed to update us on the case against JVL, is it still happening

  • James Lenoel says:

    Solidarity with all those Jewish members who continue to fight for a safe space within the Labour Party. As a non-Jew I had to resign when £600k was allegedly paid to those involved in Ware’s fictional Panorama episode.

  • Harriet Bradley says:

    I have experienced the appalling injustice of the disciplinary process twice, on trumped upcharges. In no other ‘court of law’ would anonymous accusations lead to suspension BEFORE A HEARING. TRuly this is more like the STASI than anything else. The psychological impact on long term Labour activists is truly devastating especially if your case is picked up by the media . I owe thanks to JVL for the support it gave me with my case.

  • Ndaizivei Scholastica Esnathy Paul says:

    All those concerned with challenging racism, discrimination, bullying and harassment in all their forms should work together to support this action. The new complaints process to be implemented should in my opinion apply to all forms of racism and Labour members should be allowed input into the process. I strongly believe in an intersectional wholistic approach to tackling racism. We must not allow ourselves to be divided. Solidarity with the oppressed.

  • John Dunn says:

    How can I donate and help with the costs?

    Answer: Go to https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/justice-4-labour-party-members/

  • rc says:

    Defenders of the LP leadership prate about the status of the EHRC (at least in part, and to specific audiences) deriving from its having been instituted by a -gasp – LABOUR GOVERNMENT! Apart from the painful point that this argument would justify the criminal aggression against Iraq, does the argument not backfire? If those are the sort of ‘achievements’ which we should aspire to through a grovelling pursuit of opinion polls, should we not think again about the unqualified fawning on the Main Sewer Media (such as the Mail and the Sun) and ‘focus groups’ – and remind ourselves of Rosa Luxemburg’s point that we do not pursue power to implement our principles, but advocate our principles in order to gain power (the ‘reformist’ Social Democratic Rightwing had a very peremptory way of dealing with her!)

  • Tim says:

    “We do not pursue power to implement our principles, but advocate our principles in order to gain power” – Rosa Luxembourg

    Excellent quote, duly memorised!

Comments are now closed.