by Jeremy Newmark

The matter-of-fact Office of Judicial Review ruling, reprimanding Judge Bathurst-Norman for making observations based upon personal political views, may seem a little lame. Despite the involvement of the Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice, this will not overturn the trial verdict itself; it is very hard to retry people once they’ve been found Not Guilty.

Nevertheless, coupled with last week’s confirmation by William Hague that Parliament will now consider new laws to prevent abuse of Universal Jurisdiction, this decision represents a significant setback to those working to import the Israel/Palestine conflict into our judicial systems by engaging in what has been aptly described as “Lawfare”.

Groups including the Board of Deputies and Zionist Federation were right to pursue a series of official complaints against Bathurst-Norman. This was always about more than the grotesque comparison between Israeli actions and Nazi atrocities. This was the thin end of the wedge. It opened the possibility of UK Foreign Policy being made in our courtrooms, circumventing the democratic process.

This is not just a matter of Israel Advocacy. Lawfare also threatens to impact upon our lives as British Jews. Other recent cases have used legal justifications which argued that vandalism and disruption in the UK can be legalised by political anger at events in the Middle East. Ironically, they claim that international law gives them the right to commit these crimes. This trend surfaced in the assault on BICOM’s office during Operation Cast Lead, the attacks upon Carmel Agrexo warehouses, and vandalism of Starbucks branches during anti-Israel protests. Less dramatically, but arguably more significantly, attempts to challenge the legal status of Jewish schools based upon their teaching of Zionism show how prevalent Lawfare is starting to become.

The Office of Judicial Review may appear to have only slapped Bathurst-Norman on the wrist. In fact it has established an important precedent – that political attitudes to the State of Israel will never be an acceptable defence for criminal activity. This is a serious setback for those who seek to institutionalise the delegitimisation of Israel in the UK.

Jeremy Newmark is Chief Executive of the Jewish Leadership Council, and a member of the Board of the Fair Play Campaign Group

This is a guest-post by Gavin Gross

I was at Elton John’s sold-out concert last night at Ramat Gan stadium, and thought this greeting he delivered was spot-on and deserves wide distribution.

Elton told the crowd that he was happy to be back in Israel (he played here in 1993), and in a reference to anti-Israel boycotters who called on him to cancel the show, proudly proclaimed “ain’t nobody gonna stop us from coming here.” He said that as a musician his job was to spread love and peace, and that “we don’t cherry-pick our conscience,” a line for which he received extended applause.

I took this to be a sharp dig at the hypocrisy and sanctimoniousness of figures in the West who focus their ire almost exclusively on Israel, and particularly at his fellow musicians who have recently cancelled their shows here, such as Elvis Costello, the Pixies, Gil Scott-Heron and others.

How many musicians have cancelled their concerts in America because of the thousands of civilians the U.S. military has killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and in drone attacks in Pakistan?

This is a guest-post from Stop the Boycott

• UCU Congress begins this weekend, running from 30th May – 1st June, in Manchester
• This year, UCU Congress will debate three motions that relate to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

• The first of these, SFC14, encourages the Union to build links with Palestinian academics and unions

• The second motion, SFC15, is called “Palestinian Solidarity, BDS, and Histadrut”
• It reaffirms UCU’s support for the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel “within legal constraints”
• It forces UCU to establish and fund a “research centre into complicity with Israeli breaches”, a BDS website, and an annual pro-boycott conference
• It demands UCU severs all ties with the Histadrut, the Israeli TUC
• An amendment to this motion would refer the decision on Histadrut to a special committee

• The third motion, SFC16 “Ariel and West Bank Colonisation”, formally starts the procedure to institute an academic boycott against Ariel College

• Additionally, a motion SFC17, called “UCU invitation to Bongani Masuku of South Africa”, comes from Oxford University’s UCU branch
• It was submitted in response to UCU’s invitation of Bongani Masuku to a UCU boycott conference this winter
• It dissociates UCU from his views and actions, and formally censures those who invited Masuku to the conference

• Stop the Boycott’s 2007 polling showed that the Union’s membership is largely moderate and neutral on the Middle East
• However, UCU Congress is always unrepresentatively hostile to Israel and has a record of supporting discriminatory policies

• If the motion “Palestinian Solidarity, BDS, and Histadrut” passes, UCU will be converting itself from a Trade Union into am organisation focused on promoting division and discrimination
• Sally Hunt holds the international portfolio on the Trades Union Congress’ General Council
• She cannot hold this position, which requires her to work closely with the Histadrut, while her Union is undermining these ties

Donate Here to support Stop the Boycott.

Last week we highlighted PSC’s new boycott campaign, and how its publicity was targeting some companies whose only link to Israel is to have Jewish owners.

Yesterday the PSC quietly amended the advert for their campaign.

Spot the difference:

Before

After

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign is the leading organisation pushing the boycott of Israel in the UK.

Its website currently has a graphic (below) which says “Get Involved: Boycott Israeli Goods”. The words are on top of the logos of various companies which people are supposed to boycott.

PSC's boycott graphic - Click for larger version

What are these companies? Some are a bit unclear, but we could recognise the following names or logos:

Continue reading ‘Who does PSC want you to boycott?’ »