OPINION
Keir Starmer doesn’t care about Britain (Image: PA)
In his Munich speech, Vice-President Vance rightly identified the death of freedom of speech in the UK. This has been delivered by a regulatory and legal framework designed to shut us up and a highly politicised criminal justice system.
We need look no further than the Attorney General’s office to see the sickness in our midst. The AG is an individual called Lord Hermer. This man argued that Shamima Begum should be allowed to return to the UK; he defended Abid Naseer, an operative; he previously represented Abu Zubaydah, a former Guantanamo Bay detainee, fought for compensation for Rangzieb Ahmed, a convicted terrorist, and represented Mustafa al-Hawsawi, an alleged terrorist.
He represented illegal migrants in Chagos seeking to come to the UK and advised Caribbean islands on reparation claims against the UK. As recently as 2023 he represented Gerry Adams, long accused of IRA membership in the 1970s and 80s which he denies. His repugnant list of actions goes on and on…
He donated to ’s leadership campaign in 2020 and duly became the first AG in over a hundred years not to have already served in Parliament. Starmer simultaneously ennobled him and shortly after also appointed him to the Privy Council, which looks incredibly inappropriate.
Lord Hermer is an anti-British left-wing extremist. Starmer is the same. Following the Southport killings, Starmer described all those protesting as “far-right”. Whatever happened to the notion of innocent until proven guilty?
Of course those rioting should have faced the full force of the law, but the Prime Minister had no right to second guess the political leanings of people genuinely concerned about the state of the country. Neither should the criminal justice system have been used to arrest and imprison peaceful protesters whose worst was saying things.
Within days over a thousand people were arrested and hundreds were convicted. Amongst those convicted were dozens of people who had not been violent. Their crimes related to what they had said or posted on social media.
Peter Lynch, a man with no past criminal record, was charged with violent disorder. For reasons not clear, he pleaded guilty even though all the evidence offered against him was of what he had said, not done. He was sentenced to two years and eight months in prison. He hanged himself in prison two months later.
Then there is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, aka Tommy Robinson.
Now let me be clear, I am not a supporter of Tommy Robinson. Indeed, I understand he has said and done some despicable things in his past. But I am a defender of free speech and equality under the law.
He is in prison having defied a court order not to show a film found to have been defamatory towards a Syrian schoolboy. As bad as it was, it was a civil, not criminal offence. That film was of course readily available and had been seen many millions of times already. The decision to bring contempt proceedings looks like a political decision.
When judging Robinson’s treatment, as hard as that may be, it is important to put to one side his views. An injustice against any British citizen, no matter how distasteful, must never be a taboo subject.
That is why reports of his rights as a prisoner being abused are worrying. He is being held in solitary confinement, reportedly for his own safety. Today it may be him, tomorrow it could be you.
A politicised criminal justice system, no matter who the victim, must be called out. Especially in the United Kingdom, which has given the world so much in the way of liberty.