John McDonnell offers to be witness for suspended JVL party member
JVL Introduction
Resistance is growing to the arbitrary actions of the Labour Party in suspending activists up and down the country for expressing solidarity with Jeremy Corbyn and opposing the diktats of the Acting General Secretary in banning discussion of a range of topics of great interest to members.
Here John McDonnell rallies to support Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi a JVL activist and vice-chair of Chingford and Woodford Green CLP who, together with the chair of that CLP Gary Lafley, has fallen foul of these new arbitrary bans.
And, we have reposted an unusually even-handed MSM report which appeared in the Evening Standard. See below.
This article was originally published by LabourList on Fri 4 Dec 2020. Read the original here.
John McDonnell offers to be witness for suspended JVL party member
Loading article text…
These suspensions are obviously completely out of order, and also contrary to the the EHRC report and recommendations that state that under Section 10 of the Human Rights Act, members can speak out or comment on aspects of the disciplinary procedures.
This kind of purge is reminiscent of the Stalin purges in the 1930s and 40s, and are antisemitic in themselves as it seems that left-wing Jewish members, vulnerable ones at that, who have an honourable record on action against racism and as supporters of all human rights, are being targeted. The Labour Party should be investigated and challenged on this record. To silence these voices are probably against Party rules and certainly breach Section 10 of the Human Rights Act, and bring the Labour Party into disrepute.
….. and not just the Human Rights Act.
the Labour Party is regularly acting in defiance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (sections 2 and 19) which was adopted by the UN (including the UK).
It is UNIVERSAL, and so it doesn’t exempt anyone, not even members of the Labour Party who don’t agree with Starmer – and I thought that he was supposed to be a lawyer.
Disgraceful suspension of the lovely, decent, socialist Naomi> Solidarity with her and other recently suspended members of the LP.
Agree Abe.
It’s a bit late John, you should have defended Socialist Jews much earlier on, the damage has been done. That’s not to say you should not support Naomi but don’t then spoil it by in any way speaking up for the JLM or the LFI who have been the major cause of the Party’s current chaos.
Suspending somebody for describing Corbyn’s suspension as unjust goes beyond the 1930s Stalinist purges. Is the Labour leadership sleepwalking into some kind of inquisition?
I love the stuff from the GS about undermining “the Labour Party’s ability to provide a safe and welcoming space for all members, in particular our Jewish members”. Which Jewish members does he mean? Clearly not the ones who have just been suspended.
I have been a trade unionist for over 50 years and a member of the Labour Party for 40 years. However I have felt compelled to end my membership of a party in which it has become a crime to criticise the state of Israel for acts against Palestinians which are contrary to international law. The Labour Party is even suspending Jews for being “anti-Semitic” when they do this. It would s shameful that a leader supposedly stands for the rule of law should preside over this. I am disgusted. From where I stand, The Labour Party no longer supports the weak or allows free speech.
This is getting ridiculous. Its been obvious from the start that its about anti Socialism and not anti Semitism, David Evans needs removing for a start and people have to stand in solidarity with persecuted members
It is a melancholy reflection on the state of politics in Britain today that a member of the Labour Party can be suspended because she declared her solidarity with another member who had just been found “not guilty” after an investigation into a trumped up offence by the National Executive Committee.
Have we gone through the looking glass, like Alice, and entered the world of the Red Queen ? Is the party’s general secretary, David Evans, now demanding “sentence first and verdict afterwards…..” ? The answer seems to be “yes”, because what other explanation can there be for such irrational, arbitrary and autocratic behaviour
There are two clauses in the European Convention on Human Rights which bear on the present lunacy in the Labour Party – Article 10, which deals with freedom of speech, and Article 11 which covers freedom of association (the right to form trade unions or a political party).
The European Court of Human Rights (as opposed to the Convention) has described freedom of expression as “one of the basic conditions for the progress of democratic societies and for the development of each individual”. If that is the case, then the attempt to silence members and to suppress discussion on political issues within the Labour Party means that the leadership – both political and bureaucratic – has embarked on a policy which is anti-democratic and fundamentally at odds with the human rights convention which Britain helped to write in 1951.
The Labour Party as a corporate body may not be legally bound by Article 10 (which means that members cannot look to the convention to protect their right to free speech within the party), but Article 11 is a different matter. The European Court of Human Rights has frequently heard cases involving the rights of political parties. How bizarre, then, that although the existence of the Labour Party is protected by both the convention and by decisions of the Court, it can apparently deny members the most basic rights to freedom of speech under Article 10.
Such a position is illogical, unreasonable, unfair and undemocratic. To deny members the right to speak freely brings the Labour Party into disrepute and it dishonours the sacrifices made in the past by those who were willing to risk their freedom – and sometimes their lives – in order to win the right to dissent from authority.
Comparisons to Stalin’s purges are ludicrous and indicate a total lack of knowledge and imagination. See, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge.
My father’s family were gypsies – Irish tinkers & travellers. Where is our ‘safe space? We are not recognised, even by the IHRA. There are no memorials; no homeland…….not even recognition of what happened @ Auschwitz. Why am I not surprised that if I dare criticise IHRA or EHRC that I will be threatened with expulsion from the Labour Party.
I understand that Sir Keir Starmer seems to take instruction from the Board of Deputies, but no political party in any healthy democracy, should be dictated to nor accept demands made by any religious group. Ephraim Mirvis has made it quite clear that he despises ‘Socialism’ & praises AIPAC for preventing the election of Bernie Sanders & Jeremy Corbyn. This is not democracy in action.
The failure of the 4th Estate to investigate & question begs more questions about ownership & control. Why does MSM not hold our ‘Guardians & Protectors’ to account? Why are there no questions asked about the EHRC as all panelists are political appointments. More serious questions could be asked about the relationship between Doughty Street Chambers; Adam Wagner & Sir Keir Starmer. Whose interests does Adam Wagner serve; the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism or the Guardian Newspaper? How independent are the EHRC commissioners, appointed on whose recommendations? How many panelists work for Pinsent Mason & how many contracts have they enjoyed courtesy of chums in gov’t? The class war is over.
All this reminds me of Orwells prediction. The Ministry of Truth is right here in the UK. History is what we say it is. I expect nothing less from the extreme Right who now own the Conservative Party but when our own leaders dismiss democracy we are in real trouble. Orwells description of IngSoc comes to mind.