Shahrar Ali vs GPEW

The judgement is in on the Shahrar Ali vs GPEW case.

Excerpts from the ruling:

“I find that by removing him as spokesperson in a procedurally unfair way, GPEx discriminated against Dr Ali because of his [gender critical] protected belief contrary to section 101 of the Equality Act.” (Judge Hellman, 250, p. 56)

“Dr Ali’s removal was, in summary, procedurally unfair in that he was dismissed for breaches of the SGCC [Spokespeople Code of Conduct] although GPEx failed to identify, consider, or make findings in relation to any such breaches.” (Judge Hellman, 246, p.56)

“Dr Ali also seeks a declaration that he has been subjected to unlawful discrimination. I grant the declaration sought, although it does not obviate the need for damages.” (Judge Hellman, 274, p.65)

GPEW response

The Chair of the Green Party executive, Jon Nott, said:  

“We are pleased that the court has recognised that a democratic political party has the right to select those who speak for it on the basis that they can and will communicate and support party policy publicly.  

“We welcome the findings in the judgment that members of political parties have ‘fundamental party rights’ which include the right to disagree, to advocate for and against policies and positions adopted or proposed in the party, and to organise for those who agree with them and against those who do not, and that the Equality Act is not intended to interfere with those rights. 

“The party acknowledges that there were procedural shortfalls in how we deselected one of our spokespeople. We apologise for failing in this instance to live up to the standards that both we and the court expect.”

didlaw response