Rajiv Menon KC Wins Appeal Against Contempt Charge in Filton Palestine Action Trial

A leading human rights barrister, Rajiv Menon KC, won an appeal against a contempt of court charge after a trial judge sought to refer him for prosecution over his closing speech during a case involving six Palestine Action activists.

“- Published A leading barrister has won a reprieve from facing an unprecedented contempt of court case over his alleged conduct during a trial of six Palestine Action activists”

BBC

The Filton, near Bristol, trial concerned a 2024 direct action protest at an arms factory of the Israeli subsidiary Elbit Systems UK, and the proceedings were described as possibly the first brought against a barrister in respect of a jury speech in living memory.

BBC

In the appeal, Menon’s solicitor, Jenny Wiltshire of Hickman & Rose, said: “Rajiv is delighted that the court of appeal has found in his favour and decided that the Filton trial judge did not have the power to refer him directly to the high court”.

Wiltshire also said she was “hopes that this is now the end of the matter,” after the court of appeal allowed the challenge and said the trial judge should reconsider the matter in light of its ruling.

The Guardian reported that the case arose from a trial in which Justice Johnson had forbidden lawyers from inviting the jury to disregard the court’s rulings of law or to apply the principle of jury equity, and the court of appeal said the judge lacked the power to make a direct reference to the high court.

While Menon’s contempt case was stopped, the Times said Palestine Action activists may be sentenced as terrorists after a raid on an Israeli-linked defence firm in Filton caused more than £1 million of criminal damage.

The Times named Charlotte Head, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema Rajwani, 21, as those found guilty of criminal damage last week, and it said Corner was also found guilty of causing grievous bodily harm after he fractured a police officer’s spine during the raid.

Middle East Eye

The Times reported that Mr Justice Johnson, in a pre-trial ruling, found the charges in the case had a “terrorist connection,” and it said sentencing is due on June 12.

Defend Our Juries described the prospect as a “grave miscarriage of justice” that should be “a matter of public outrage,” and it argued that secret terrorism sentencing would allow protesters to be tried for ordinary offences without juries knowing this when they convict.

The BBC said the Court of Appeal stopped Menon’s forthcoming case because it was procedurally flawed, but left open the possibility the challenge could be resumed under different rules, depending on whether the trial judge sends it to the Attorney General, Lord Hermer, for him to consider.

The dispute over jury equity centered on what Menon told jurors during the first Filton trial, where the BBC said Justice Johnson issued detailed directions including an order that none of the barristers could refer in their speeches to “jury equity”.

“Victory for Palestine Action Lawyer Accused of Contempt of Court A judge took action against him because he informed a jury of their right to acquit”

Novara Media

The BBC quoted Justice Johnson’s view that Menon’s closing speech had the effect of “invite the jury to disregard my directions,” and it said the barrister denied ignoring the judge and said he was performing his duty to represent Charlotte Head.

In the Guardian’s account, the trial judge referred Menon because he considered the barrister had contravened rulings forbidding lawyers from inviting the jury to disregard the court’s rulings of law or to apply jury equity, and it said none of the defendants were convicted of any offence in the first trial.

The Justice Gap reported that the court set aside directions made by Lord Justice Edis, who had ordered that Menon face a substantive contempt hearing in June, and it said the court ruled the Administrative Court and Divisional Court had no jurisdiction to consider the contempt allegation without an application by the attorney general.

The National Scot said the Court of Appeal judges concluded Justice Johnson did not have the power to make a direct reference to the High Court and that the case should now be sent back to Justice Johnson to consider the next steps, leaving the procedural path tied to the Attorney General.