After bringing a judicial review against the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), former London mayor Ken Livingstone and former Labour councillor Pam Bromley have accepted a settlement offer from the equalities watchdog.
In its report of October 2020, the EHRC singled out Livingstone and Bromley for allegedly having ‘contributed’ to ‘unlawful harassment related to Jewish race and religion’ by the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
Livingstone and Bromley brought a legal challenge against the EHRC at the end of 2020, which was aimed at overturning parts of the quango’s controversial report. It was initially expected that the case would reach court by the end of 2021 and permission was given for it to proceed to trial by a senior High Court Judge, indicating it had real merit.
However, the case has already run on for 32 months and there is no prospect of a final judgment in the near future. It has also become increasingly complex. For example, in February 2023, the court gave permission to the pro-Israel lobby group Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) to intervene in the case.
The CAA, which lobbied the EHRC to investigate the Labour Party in 2018, was seeking to defend the EHRC report’s findings, despite the EHRC already being represented by an expensive legal team. The group is now unable to make its arguments in court despite likely having spent tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.
Pro-Israel activists like David Hirsh have attempted to use the EHRC report to claim that questioning ‘antisemitism’ allegations is itself a form of anti-Jewish prejudice and harassment, although this has failed to translate into any kind of legal precedent.
Despite the legal merits of the case remaining strong, Livingstone and Bromley have accepted a ‘drop hands’ deal offered by the EHRC, in which each side withdraws from the case and bears its own costs.
As a result of case management disputes, the case ran on for almost three years, which is highly unusual for a judicial review. Further delays and availability issues meant that the case was not expected to be heard until later this year. There would also have been a very real possibility of an appeal being brought from either side, which would have potentially taken a further year or longer.
The EHRC used over £215,000 of public money to defend itself. It is believed that the Labour Party and CAA also spent tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees, which they are unable to recover. Livingstone’s and Bromley’s costs amounted to no more than £35,000.
Ken Livingstone and Pam Bromley said in response to the EHRC’s settlement offer:
“We believe that, deep down, the EHRC understands that its investigation was flawed and that it acted unlawfully. That’s probably why they were willing to settle the case without recovering a penny of their exorbitant costs.
“We wanted to bring this case because we believe in freedom of expression. We were worried that the purpose and effect of the EHRC report would be to shut down criticism of Israel by giving credence to false accusations of ‘antisemitism’.
“Our concerns were well founded. When the EHRC report first came out, some pro-Israel propagandists claimed that it was a legal precedent that could be used against anti-Zionists. We thought it was important to challenge that. However, the report and the EHRC itself have now been widely discredited as being flawed and partisan.
“We have done enough to question the EHRC report. Rather than fighting this case for potentially another year or more, we believe we need to refocus our resources on tackling the Israel lobby’s current efforts to stifle pro-Palestine speech in schools, universities, and other sectors.”
More info:
1. Livingstone and Bromley brought the judicial review in order to question the EHRC’s finding that their remarks about ‘antisemitism’ in the Labour Party were not protected under Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Legal work on the case began in December 2020 and, as a result of numerous delays, was not expected to reach court until later this year, with judgment likely to be in 2024 and then a very real prospect of an appeal taking at least another year.
2. The legal challenge was supported by the Left Legal Fighting Fund, a central fund to assist activists, protesters, and whistleblowers. The Fighting Fund was established at the end of 2019 by former Labour MP Chris Williamson from the costs he won after his High Court victory against the Labour Party.
3. For further enquiries, please contact [email protected] in the first instance.
If you would like your interests… published, submit via https://dorseteye.com/submit-a-report/
Join us in helping to bring reality and decency back by SUBSCRIBING to our Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ1Ll1ylCg8U19AhNl-NoTg and SUPPORTING US where you can: Award Winning Independent Citizen Media Needs Your Help. PLEASE SUPPORT US FOR JUST £2 A MONTH https://dorseteye.com/donate/
