Appeals process? What appeals process?

JVL introduction

Six weeks ago Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi submitted an appeal against her expulsion from the Labour Party. She did it within the 14-day deadline notified to her in an email on December 15 saying her membership had been terminated. Since then she has heard nothing – no information about who will hear her appeal, how or when. Not even an acknowledgement that her submission has been received.

Such treatment would be reprehensible if it occurred in a regular workplace or other institution. But in the Labour Party – the principal organisation claiming to represent working people in the UK – it has become the norm. Some members have lingered for more than a year with no response to appeals against expulsion or suspension despite numerous requests for information.

Here Naomi sets her own experience in the context of a culture in which the party’s  bureaucracy serves a leadership that is increasingly contemptuous of the rights of members.

A letter calling for Naomi’s reinstatement as an elected NEC member has been signed by more than 1700 current and former Labour Party members. Please add your name and circulate it.

Follow these links to see video clips in which Naomi explains about her expulsion, the establishment efforts to destroy the movement around Jeremy Corbyn, and the campaign to silence Palestinian voices and purge the Labour left.

With thanks to Mintpress for the original 18 minute interview (note it includes ads).

Appeals process? What appeals process?

By Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi

After I was elected to the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party last August, as one of five grassroots candidates standing to represent members in the constituencies, friends started taking bets as to how long it would be before a pretext was found to prevent me taking my place on the NEC. The answer was, just over three weeks. On September 22, 2022 I was suspended for allegedly committing a “prohibited act”. My protestations of innocence were ignored and expulsion followed on December 15, my 70^th birthday.

The “Notice of Outcome of NEC Panel Decision: Termination of Membership of the Labour Party” I received on that day stated:

“You have the right to appeal this decision on the grounds set out at Chapter 2, Clause I.6 of the Rules. Should you wish to do so please submit any appeal within 14 days of the date of this letter, in writing to the address at the top of this letter, or by email to [email protected].”

On December 28, 2022, I did as advised and emailed [email protected], copying my letter to the leader and general secretary of the party and to the Chair of the NEC Disputes Committee. My appeal set out a number of reasons why my “termination” should be reversed, primarily because it was based on bias, hostility and prejudice against me as a left-wing Jew.

I asked to be notified who would hear my appeal, when a hearing would take place and what form of representation would be available for me. I also noted that I had been obliged to submit a complaint regarding the leaking of information about the disciplinary finding against me and a possible connected data breach.

At the time of writing this blogpost (February 12, 2023) I have received no response at all to my appeal and no information on the progress of my complaint since an initial acknowledgement on December 20.

“Prohibited acts”

From the scant information available (I am citing reports posted by conscientious NEC member Ann Black following meetings on January 17 and January 24), it appears that I am one of 331 members referred to exclusion panels in 2022 charged with the “prohibited act” of supporting a proscribed organisation. In 91 percent of cases the result was expulsion. The rules allow for expelled members to appeal, as I and many others have done.  None that I know of have received even the courtesy of an acknowledgement, some of them after many months have passed and after sending repeated requests for updates. A disproportionate number of those treated in this cavalier fashion are Jewish.

Take Stephen Marks for example. Elected in November 2018 to the National Constitutional Committee, Stephen was administratively suspended in July 2021 for the crime of having signed petitions organised by groups that the NEC had just proscribed. The petitions pre-dated the groups’ proscription by up to five years. Despite repeated appeals for the lifting of his suspension, from Stephen himself and from leading members of his local party in Oxford, he heard nothing from the Disputes team which dishes out these punishments until the end of December 2022, when he was summarily expelled. News of his and my expulsions circulated along with that of a third Jewish member, leading Hackney activist Heather Mendick, all neatly timed – or so it felt to us – to fall just as Jews were celebrating the Hannukah festival.

JVL co-chair Leah Levane was suspended in August 2021 and then expelled (“auto-excluded”) the following month. She wrote immediately asking about her right to appeal. She has heard nothing since.

Another JVL officer, Graham Bash, a party member for half a century, appealed against his expulsion in November 2021. He has received no response from the party.

An Oxford JVL member Andrew Hornung appealed against expulsion in December 2021. The party has not responded.

Pam Laurance, a member of JVL from Brent Central CLP, was suspended in March 2022. She appealed and sent several reminders. She has heard nothing.

Of course it’s not only Jews who suffer the humiliation and distress of such treatment. Pamela Fitzpatrick, a Labour Councillor for 8 years and Parliamentary candidate in Harrow East in 2019, appealed against expulsion in November 2021. She has had no communication from the party since then, despite numerous emails requesting an update.

Conduct unbecoming

The party is failing to deal with appeals such as mine and the others mentioned above in a manner befitting an organisation claiming to represent labour movement values.

As Ann Black has noted, long delays punish the person whether or not their appeal eventually succeeds, and lengthy suspensions of members holding elected office damage the reputation of the party as well as the individual. Members waiting six months or more for their appeals to be heard may suffer permanently damaging consequences such as being replaced as councillors, candidates and role-holders (as in my case).

One would expect a significant organisation such as the Labour Party, seeking election to government representing working people, to treat its members with at least as much care and respect as a reputable employer or public institution. It is standard trade union practice to seek for their members disciplinary procedures which accord with natural justice. The Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service ACAS and most leading trade unions publish guidelines for their members.

According to the Labour Party Rule Book, the bodies eligible to hear appeals are the National Constitutional Committee (NCC – Chapter 2 Clause 1.6) and the Independent Complaints Board (ICB – Chapter 1, Clause XI.2). The NCC –  of which Stephen Marks was an elected member until his suspension in 2021 –  is the relevant body in the case of appeals to do with alleged prohibited acts. The rules refer to procedural guidelines but provide no indication as to how, or in what timeframe, appeals should be dealt with.

According to ACAS, appeals should heard by someone not previously involved in the case and that person should be more senior than anyone who has played a part in the case to date. They should invite the person making the appeal to a meeting as soon as possible, giving written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing and the right to be accompanied. Unison guidelines state that appeal meetings will normally take place within 14 days of receipt of a written notice of appeal.

There is an expectation of symmetry between deadlines imposed on the person against whom a sanction has been applied and those imposing the sanction. This convention is routinely flouted by the Labour Party where there are – as we have seen – numerous cases of members waiting many months for suspensions to be upheld or revoked, expelled members being told they have 14 days to appeal, and their appeals then remaining unanswered for a year or more. This is an unacceptable situation that needs to end.

Party leader Keir Starmer, elected in 2020 promising unity, has developed the habit of talking about “my Labour Party.” These are not the words of someone leading a democratic party in which all members are valued.  I have written to the leader, and to General Secretary David Evans whose staff implement disciplinary decisions, and also to members of the NEC, making the above points. The letter concludes:

I look forward to hearing from you without further delay regarding the next stage of my appeal and trust that others in analogous situations will be similarly notified.

Sincerely,

Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi