UPDATE STATEMENT ON RAJIV MENON KC
/The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers welcome the news that Rajiv Menon KC won his appeal against the decision to prosecute him for contempt of court. The Court of Appeal’s judgment on 12 May confirms that the trial judge’s decision to refer Rajiv directly to the High Court for contempt proceedings was unlawful as the Crown Court does not have the power to initiate contempt proceedings in that way. Accordingly, the High Court’s subsequent decision to progress the proceedings and set directions was also unlawful and the Court of Appeal have quashed the proceedings.
We note that the Court of Appeal has left open the possibility of the trial judge recommencing contempt proceedings by a different route. Contempt proceedings should never have been initiated in the first place. It amounted to a serious misuse of a draconian and punitive procedure which was entirely inappropriate in these circumstances. We hope that this will therefore be the end of the matter but will stand in solidarity with Rajiv should there be any further proceedings. We invite all those involved in the criminal justice system to do the same.
STATEMENT OF SOLIDARITY WITH RAJIV MENON KC
/The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers stands in solidarity with Rajiv Menon KC regarding his prosecution for contempt of court. Rajiv represented the first defendant in the recent trials of six pro-Palestine activists arising from direct action taken at a facility in Filton, Bristol in August 2024. The facility is owned by Elbit Systems UK, a subsidiary of an Israeli arms company.
The trial judge referred Rajiv to the High Court to consider contempt of court proceedings against him following the closing speech he delivered to the jury at the end of the first trial. This is a shocking and unprecedented attack on a highly experienced, leading criminal defence barrister for doing his duty to fearlessly and passionately defend his client.
Media reporting regarding these proceedings has noted that there are no known previous instances of a barrister being prosecuted for contempt of court over a closing speech. Such an approach risks having a chilling effect on advocates in the future. Barristers’ independence is a fundamental principle of the justice system. They do not act on behalf of the court. Barristers must robustly and diligently defend their clients and present their clients’ cases and should not have to do so under fear of prosecution.
We are deeply concerned that these proceedings have arisen in the context of a protest trial, which in recent years have seen increasingly draconian restrictions imposed by judges regarding what defences can be advanced and what defendants and defence barristers are permitted to say to juries. The stark difference in approach compared to other criminal trials suggests a clear intention of ensuring guilty verdicts and fears in some quarters of the law that jurors may acquit protestors according to their conscience, as is their right. This is coupled with increasingly severe sentences for those who are found guilty. In that context, the proceedings against Rajiv represent a further attack on the right to protest and on those who exercise that right, and an attempt to further limit the protection afforded to protestors of being tried by a jury.
We invite all those involved in the criminal justice system, including the Criminal Bar Association and the Bar Council, to condemn this prosecution and call for it to be dropped, and to give their support to Rajiv.
HALDANE STATEMENT ON BANNING PALESTINE SOLIDARITY MARCHES
/The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers notes with concern recent statements from politicians including the Prime Minister suggesting that Palestine solidarity marches may be stopped or banned. We are equally concerned that the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, has called for a “moratorium” on such marches, and claimed that it is “impossible” for them not to “incubate” antisemitism.
We condemn recent antisemitic attacks around the country and extend our solidarity to the Jewish community. However, the response to such events is for communities to stand together against violence. What should not and cannot be allowed is a clampdown on the right to protest on unsupported and overbroad grounds. To suggest, as Mr Hall and others have done, that Palestine solidarity marches have anything to do with the attacks we have seen is both wrong and dangerous.
For more than two years, hundreds of thousands of people, including Jewish campaigning organisations and anti-racist activists, have turned out to express solidarity with the Palestinian people and to oppose genocide. The police already have a range of powers under existing legislation they can use, and which we have seen used, in order to deal with anyone suspected of offences. Any restriction on freedom of expression and assembly must be lawful, necessary and proportionate.
It is striking that, even as these threats are made, the Met has refused the Palestine Coalition’s preferred Nakba Day route on 16 May while clearing Central London for a far-right mobilisation called by Tommy Robinson on the same day. There is no justification for the threats to the right to protest we have seen in recent days.
The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers will support all appropriate legal challenges to any ban or sweeping restriction imposed on Palestine solidarity marches. We stand with all those exercising the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and assembly in solidarity with the Palestinian people.
Haldane Event, 28 April 2026: Who Controls the Future of Work
/
Who Controls the Future of Work: Can we have a progressive, pro-worker AI strategy?
AI is reshaping the workplace at speed. Governments, tech giants and management consultants are driving the agenda, while workers and unions are working to catch up.
The stakes are not just jobs. They are also pay, control, working conditions, and who benefits from the wealth technological change creates.
This event asks whether progressives can move beyond reacting to AI and start shaping it. How do we defend workers, democratise technological change, and build a genuinely pro-worker strategy for the future of work?
We are bringing together speakers from across the trade union movement and legal sector for a serious discussion about the narratives, organising, policy and legal frameworks needed to get there.
The evening will include speakers, a panel discussion, open conversation and a chance to connect with others working on these issues.
Pelican House, 144 Cambridge Heath Road, Bethnal Green London E1 5QJ, 28 April 2026, 7pm
Hybrid event: join in person or online.
Speakers:
Adam Cantwell-Corn, Tech Policy Lead, TUC
Kate Jones, AI Policy Officer, UNISON
Aparna Surendra, Algorithm Governance Lead, AWO
Chaired by Liam Welch, Co-chair, Haldane
Sign up via Eventbrite here:
Who Controls the Future of Work - Eventbrite
The event is free to attend and spaces are going fast, so please reserve a place in advance.
A Zoom link will be sent to registrants through Eventbrite ahead of the event.
Haldane Society AGM: Tuesday 24 February 2026
/The Annual General Meeting of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers will take place on Tuesday 24 February 2026 from 6:30pm, in person at Pelican House (Common Room), Bethnal Green, and online via Zoom. Attendance in person is encouraged where possible.
This is a members-only AGM. Please ensure your Haldane membership is active before attending. If your membership has lapsed, or if you would like to join for the first time, please visit haldane.org/join in advance.
Programme:
6:30pm – Guest talk and Q&A: Fahad Ansari (Riverway Law)
7:15pm – AGM business
The Zoom link and AGM papers will be sent to members the day before.
Get involved:
Members are warmly encouraged to consider standing for election to the Executive Committee. If you are interested in becoming actively involved, please email secretary@haldane.org. Members are also welcome to submit political motions for discussion at the AGM.
Statement by ELDH on the USA’s Illegal Act of Aggression Against Venezuela
/We draw attention to the statement published by our affiliate organisation, European Association of Lawyers for Democracy & World Human Rights (ELDH), condemning the illegal act of aggression by the United States against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
The statement sets out in detail the legal basis on which the United States’ actions constitute a violation of international law, undermine the international legal order, and pose a serious threat to international peace and security.
You can read the full statement here:
ELDH states:
“We strongly and unequivocally condemn the acts of aggression carried out by the United States against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. These actions constitute a grave and flagrant violation of international law, undermine the international legal order, and pose a serious threat to international peace and security…
We call upon European States and the institutions of the European Union to publicly and unequivocally denounce these acts of aggression, reaffirm their commitment to the UN Charter and international law, and refrain from any action that may contribute to or legitimize unlawful uses of force.
We further urge Member States to request an urgent meeting of the United Nations Security Council to address this situation, to demand the immediate release of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and to take all necessary measures, in accordance with the Charter, to uphold international peace and security and ensure accountability for violations of international law.”
Statement from our President, Michael Mansfield KC, on hunger strikers in custody
/The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers continues to express its grave concern at the situation facing hunger strikers currently held in custody.
We are grateful to our President, Michael Mansfield KC, for setting out the wider legal, humanitarian and constitutional context in which this protest has arisen, and for his assessment of the treatment of those involved.
Michael Mansfield KC states:
“A central and crucial point of the hunger strike protest in custody is about the custody itself. It arises in the context of a completely broken criminal justice system in which the prison population of 80,000 is at capacity with insufficient staff and accommodation; and a system of trial which is stacking a backlog of 18,000, entailing a wait of two or more years: equivalent to a four or five year sentence.
Without more this destroys two basic principles: the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial process. Waiting for endless months in constrained circumstances is in itself unbearable, even for those waiting on bail. Often 23-hour-a-day lock-ups.
But for the hunger strikers it is far worse. That’s why they have had to take the only route that is left. They are treated as if they are convicted terrorists of the most heinous kind. Their means of communication by phone call or mail are monitored and scrutinised so severely that they are denied, stopped or curtailed - on grounds of national security - because ‘of course’ they are ‘guilty’ of obstructing government from contributing to massive damage against civilian populations in breach of all the rules of international criminal law you can imagine.
The same rationale is applied to restricted visits by family members and to ‘non-association’ orders which have resulted in solitary confinement. This is the enactment of the famous Carroll comment on the UK system of criminal justice from the mouth of the Queen of Hearts: ‘Sentence first; verdict after.’
It is hardly surprising that independent medical opinion finds the degree of appropriate management and critical care sorely lacking for these cases, many of whom are at risk of death on any of the days leading up to Christmas.
Despite repeated pleas, Government - especially Lammy and Timson - have either ignored or refused even the bare minimum of a meeting. A meeting accords with Government policy and protocol frameworks concerning prison safety. Essentially, they recommend an early review aimed at bringing about a resolution by a number of obviously interested parties, including representatives of the prisoner.
The initial basis for refusal was straight out of populist dogma: to even speak to these innocents would be a sign of weakness, and anyway it might open the floodgates for all prisoners. The idea that the mainstream prison population would be incentivised to risk death in order to improve prison conditions or achieve bail is to them utterly perverse and without any foundation.
Talking is hardly going to elevate, or in some way unfairly favour, these young conscientious individuals. It’s the other way round. Talking might end the discrimination and, for a change, provide those who are detained a fair hearing - another threatened principle - equality of arms.
It’s on a par with the calamity of Lammy’s reasoning for drastic cuts to jury trial; perverse and without evidential foundation.
But then one of the unspoken benefits for government, should the cuts be carried out, is precisely these cases. Many of the public order, protest and criminal damage cases will still be waiting years for trial (it’s not the jury causing the backlog) but will no longer be tried by juries, which have a ‘nasty’ tendency to acquit. Much more efficient to leave it to a single judge, many of whom have already displayed real antipathy to the issues relating to the ECHR and proportionality, duress of circumstances and necessity, in the firm belief that convictions will ensue.
We need to treasure the legacy of Messrs Bushel and Lilburne – hence the campaign to defend our juries.
May the strikers be part of that tradition and live to achieve the justice they seek.”
Message from our Vice President, Lord John Hendy KC, following the passage of the Employment Rights Act
/The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers notes the passing of the Employment Rights Act, following Royal Assent, and commends the work of our Vice President, Lord John Hendy KC, who played a leading role in its development.
As a long-standing advocate for workers’ rights and collective labour protections, John’s contribution has been instrumental in shaping the legislation and advancing the wider debate on employment law reform and the rights of trade unions.
Commenting on the significance and limitations of the Act, John Hendy states:
“There is no doubt that the new Act will benefit many workers. And the repeal of the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act and most of the Trade Union Act 2016 is a real step forward.
But the Bill is only a shadow of Labour’s original plan set out in A New Deal for Working People. In particular, the failure to address a single legal status for workers will only encourage employers to seek to recategorise workers to avoid giving them the new (and existing) rights.
The Act also missed the opportunity to enact a statutory process for sectoral collective bargaining across the economy. And the New Deal demanded that industrial action law conformed to the international obligations ratified by and binding on the UK. The Act does not do that.
Furthermore, the Act largely relies on individual litigation for enforcement but the average wait for a tribunal hearing is just under one year, awards are generally low and one third are never paid.
A second Act will be needed to finish the job.”
The Haldane Society recognises the passage of the Act as a practical step forward for working people, while reaffirming the need for continued legal and political work to secure a genuinely transformative framework for labour rights in the UK.
