PRESS RELEASE
SENIOR BLACK JUDGE SUES THE MINISTRY
OF JUSTICE, JUDICIAL CONDUCT INVESTIGATION OFFICE (JCIO) ALLEGING BREACHES OF
THE EQUALITY ACT 2010 IN MISCONDUCT PROCEEDINGS
 |
| Judge Peter Herbert |
D. PETER HERBERT O.B.E., a practicing human rights barrister,
and Chair of the Society of Black Lawyers, who sits as a Recorder, part time
Immigration Judge and Employment Judge has today launched an action in the
Central London Employment Tribunal after conciliation efforts with the Ministry
of Justice (MOJ), failed to produce any response from the Respondents.
The MOJ
currently face 5 cases alleging race discrimination and victimisation.
The complaint against Judge Herbert arose after a short
speech he gave at a meeting protesting the judicial decision to bar the former
Mayor of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman from holding public office for a period
of five years. Herbert was introduced as a human rights barrister but
inadvertently referred to his being a Judge in a humorous aside in the context
of speeches criticising the Judiciary as being all “white, male and middle
class”.
Herbert mentioned racism by his colleagues had in the past been a
problem and questioned in general terms the judgment of the Electoral College
Judge decision as being discriminatory on racial grounds without naming the
Judge.
The matter was identified by the JCIO when it appeared on a
You Tube video and was subsequently subject to a complaint by two individuals
purporting to be independent members of the public.
Judge Herbert, represented by solicitors, Mishcon de Reya,
alleges that the decision by Justice Undersell to refer this matter for misconduct,
and his subsequent decision as the Nominated Judge to recommend a formal
warning against Judge Herbert is discriminatory on racial grounds, amounted to
victimisation, and was fundamentally flawed as it failed to consider the
protection offered by s27 of the Equality Act 2010 which prevents victimisation
for those that raise racial discrimination under the EqA. Neither the JCIO, not
the Nominated Judge appeared to consider or even mention the provisions of the
EqA, not the right to freedom of speech under Article 9 read together with
Article 14 of the ECHR.
Judge Herbert alleges that there was an attempt to suspend
him from all his judicial sittings on November 6th, for no apparent
reason, as this matter was first brought to his attention on 12th
July. The President of the South Eastern Circuit, Lord Justice Sweeney signed the letter
requesting he voluntarily suspend himself after consultation with Bran Doyle,
the President of the Employment Tribunal and Michel Clements, the President of
the Immigration Tribunal. This request to suspend is believed to have
originated from a report made by Ms Joanna Holmes, a civil servant at the JCIO.
Judge Herbert was informed of this in person at a Criminal
Judges Judicial training course by Sweeney, who stated he was only the
“messenger’ and that he would be “turned away” if he attempted to sit at Harrow
Crown Court on Monday 8th November. After written representations Sweeney lifted this suspension and the matter allowed to proceed on an undertaking
the Judge Herbert would not make any “controversial comments”.
It is believed
that the suspension was only lifted after Judge Herbert pointed out that three
white male Judges at the Immigration Tribunal had been allowed to continue in
office despite a far more serious allegation of racism and on-going
victimisation and bullying against a colleague of African descent. Despite the
case being lodged in the ET the victimisation has continued against this Judge.
In a recommendation to the Lord Chief Justice and Lord
Chancellor, the Nominated Judge acknowledged Judge Herbert’s 20 years of
holding part time Judicial Office and his contribution to equality and
diversity recognised by the award of the O.B.E. in January 2010.
He also made a
distinction with the absence of any misconduct if the criticism had been made
in a “forensic setting”. Judge Herbert’s alleges this is a false distinction
and was made to protect the many white Judges who do criticise the decisions of
others at a range of legal conferences. The rules them selves make no such
distinction.
The Lord Chief Justice, and Lord Chancellor, has the power to
suspend, reprimand or even disbar Judge Herbert from judicial Office. Judge
Herbert is of the view that neither will wish loose face by admitting a
fundamental error by the JCIO or a failure by a senior Judge to apply the
Equality Act 2010.
Judge Herbert, who is a member of the Commonwealth Magistrates
and Judges Association, the Pan African Lawyers Forum and the National Bar
Association (USA) has the full support of a range of legal and community
organisations in the UK including the Society of Black Lawyers (SBL), the
National Black Police Association, the Association of Muslim Lawyers, the
Association of Black Probation Officers and variety of community organisations
across the UK.
“It is a sad day for me
personally and for the Black and minority community generally when we are
treated with such a blatant disregard for the law in a manner that seeks to
control our right to freedom of speech. This is reminiscent of the worst
colonial excesses that our forefathers were subject to in the days of empire.
The suggestion that we are equal under the law remains an illusion when our
colour determines our professional lives. This is exactly the same way my
people are treated on the streets and in the Courts themselves. I will fight
this action for all those that follow me.”
David Neita,
spokesperson for the Society of Black Lawyers commented,
“We are all told that
we are all equal under the law. It now seems that Judges in England and Wales
are above the law, at least if they are white, male and middle class”.
Courtney Griffiths Q.C.
commented,
“Given the under
representation of BME Judges in the Crown Court @ only 7% (60 out of 840
Recorders), the targeting of Peter Herbert appears to be founded in a rather
colonial and myopic view of who is entitled to speak out on race issues. Cases
such as this are a clear message to BME lawyers not to take judicial office and
to remain invisible to our communities.
Imran Khan solicitor for Baroness Doreen Lawrence commented
“Peter has been known
as one of the leading advocates for social justice over the years and this
attempt to silence him harks back to the days before the murder of Stephen
Lawrence where race was a four letter word that simply could not be uttered by
anyone in authority”.
Baroness Doreen
Lawrence,
“The targeting and
victimisation of Peter Herbert is a clear demonstration that no matter what
your achievements or expertise your experience is no better than a young black
man on the street who is seen as a threat to the justice system simply on
account of the colour of their skin.”
Michael Mansfield Q.C
‘In a world where free speech is
being eroded from all quarters, the freedom to identify and comment upon
perceived racism is vital. Discrimination is not always writ large, it is often
elusive and masked. Without the facility for robust critique we will be a
poorer and less fair society '
Milton Grimes Esq,
based in Los Angeles, the lawyer for the late Rodney King commented,
“Having been to the UK
on several occasions to speak out against racism in the criminal justice system
it seems that the British establishment cannot tolerate or accept the presence
of black Judges, let alone acknowledge their contribution to the system of
justice”.
Lee Jasper, Chair of
the London Race and Criminal Justice Consortium, commented,
Institutional racism in all its repugnant and toxic glory, continues to effect British black people, whether as suspects, defendants, defence solicitors, prosecutors or judges.
Both he and the Home Secretary Theresa May have now highlighted the scandal of racism in policing and the judicial process. This action against Peter is an attempt to silence and intimidate a UK black judges from highlighting racism, pure and simple.
Peter is a leading community activist who has an exemplary record of public service and would not face this action if he was white, male and middle class. This highlights the continued racial bias that exists in the British Judicial system which gives significantly longer sentences to African, Caribbean men and women, denies them bail has been allowed to exist for over 25 years since statistics were first published pursuant to s95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991.
Benjamin Crump, the
President of the National Bar Association (USA), commented,
“The NBA is appalled at
this attempt to discipline the leader of our sister organisation in the UK. We
have worked with Peter since we visited the UK in 1992 and stand shoulder to
shoulder with him in fighting this disgraceful attempt to silence him in a
manner not applied to his white colleagues. We will take this matter up with
the President of the American Bar Association, Ms Paulette Brown, the first
African American President of the ABA.”
If the matter goes for trial and any misconduct is upheld
against Judge Herbert it will almost certainly result in the cross examination
of Underhill J, the Lord Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor on issues of
race discrimination.
Ironically, that is likely to provide all three individuals
with more training then either has ever had to experience in their careers to
date.
The case is due to be heard later in 2016 and estimated to
take some 5 days.
For further comment
please contact:
Lee Jasper Campaign
Co-ordinator and Press Spokesperson:
Tel 07984 181 797;
email: lee-jasper@live.com;
