Lawyers For Israel Oppose Conscience

Former Ambassador, Human Rights Activist

Two months ago I wrote an article entitled “Fascist judges” about the concerted move by judges in England to outlaw jury nullification.

Despite the long and established history of juries refusing to convict for laws they view as an abuse of power by the state, climate protestors have been jailed for contempt simply for trying to tell juries why they acted.

Four out of five defendants have now been found guilty of intent to cause criminal damage in the “Shenstone 5” trial over the blockade of an Elbit factory.  Judge Chambers had ruled similarly that the defendants could not put the motive for their actions to the jury.

You may recall that when protesting outside another Elbit factory a few days ago, I had a policeman read out an order accusing me and the small group with me of “criminal intent”.

Chambers told the jury they were legally allowed only to decide the facts, not moral right.

The prosecution had argued, extraordinarily, that the defence of “necessity” could only be made if the defendants could identify the specific part number of a component, which specific weapon it had been put into, and prove which specific Palestinian had been killed by that weapon.

That the plant indubitably made components of weapons which killed Palestinian civilians was not enough.

We now know that Judge Chambers was in receipt of communication from Lawyers for Israel during the course of the trial, seeking to reinforce the new doctrine that jurors are not allowed to give a verdict according to conscience.

This really is a new doctrine. Every law school teaches the famous cases where juries refused to acquit on principle and against the direction of the judge.

It is to me quite extraordinary that outside parties are permitted to contact a judge during a trial in order to motivate him against a defendant.

I suspect anyone other than “Lawyers for Israel” who did this would be in trouble.

Just three days ago Mike Lynch-White was sentenced to a cruel 27 months for damaging property at a non-violent protest at yet another Israeli weapons factory in England.

There is plainly a state policy of vicious repression in play.

Fairly recent examples of “Jury nullification” or “perverse verdict” include the demolishers of the Coulston statue, and the 2001 protestors against Trident who admitted they intended to cause damage. Akk were acquitted despite being plainly guilty on the facts.

In 2021 a jude directed the jury to convict Extinction Rebellion protestors who damaged Shell HQ, specifically stating they had “no defence in law.” Yet the jury refused to convict.

The most famous example in my lifetime was my friend, and member of this blog’s below the line community, Clive Ponting. The jury would not jail him for telling the truth, that Thatcher sank the old Argentine battleship General Belgrano as it headed away from the Falklands.

The current concerted judicial effort to outlaw jury nullification is of huge concern. It is of no surprise to see the hand of Israel attempting to guide the judiciary, in the interests of defending its weapons industry.

Of massive concern too is the growing number of political prisoners in the UK. Julian Assange is rightly the most famous. But how many prisoners are there currently in British prisons whose “crime” is political?

Adding together environmental activists, anti-lockdown activists, peace activists and others, the list of the UK’s political prisoners is alarmingly long. Is any NGO maintaining a constant count? Is there perhaps a need to found such an NGO?

I do not trust Amnesty when it comes to the UK as the leadership is too Starmer adjacent.

The moves in England to outlaw jury nullification and those in Scotland to abolish juries in sexual assault cases, are part of a major impulse to state authoritarianism shown also in the new UK Public Order Act, the Orwellian named UK Online Safety Bill, and Scotland’s equally Orwellian named Hate Crime Act.

This onslaught against civil liberties is caused by the nervousness of the entire political and oligarch classes, wh are scared of their own citizens as the wealth gap ever increases.

That political class unanimity is proven by the undisguised support of Keir Starmer and the so-called “Labour Party” for all of these repressive developments.

Shamefully the SNP MPs have been sending out stock replies on Assange that fully support the UK government line.

Convictions based on “intent” to do something you have not actually done, are generally dubious. The Shenstone defendants have been told by Judge Chambers they will get prison sentences. Expect these to be vicious.

Doubtless there will be victory celebrations at Lawyers for Israel.

————————————————

Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]

Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.

The post Lawyers For Israel Oppose Conscience appeared first on Craig Murray.