A FORMER senior Labour staffer has lost a High Court bid to force the party to reveal who it believes leaked an internal report into the handling of allegations of anti-Semitism.
An 860-page report on Labour’s governance and legal unit, which found “no evidence” of anti-Semitism being handled differently from other complaints, was leaked in April last year.
The internal investigation carried out in the final months of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership concluded that “factional opposition” towards the former leader contributed to “a litany of mistakes” hindering efforts to tackle the crisis.
Emilie Oldknow – Labour’s former director of governance, who is also married to shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth – wants to bring claims for defamation and misuse of private information over the leaking of the report, which contains more than 500 references to her.
At a remote hearing last week, her lawyers asked the High Court to grant an order requiring Labour to reveal “the identity or identities of those responsible” for the leak so she can sue them.
In a ruling on Monday, Justice Tipples refused Oldknow’s application for an order forcing Labour to disclose who it “reasonably believes” was responsible for the leak.
READ MORE: Kirsty Strickland: It is in Anas Sarwar’s interests to make Scottish Labour pro-indyref2
The judge said that “a request such as this smacks of fishing”, adding that requiring the party to identify who it thinks may have leaked the report “will be doing no more than identifying a list of who it reasonably believes are to be the culprits”.
She said: “There is therefore no certainty that the information sought will lead to the identification of the wrongdoer or wrongdoers.”
Mrs Justice Tipples found there was “a real risk that the order sought by the claimant will reveal the names of innocent persons”.
She added that this posed “a very real potential to cause harm to any innocent persons as they will then find themselves threatened with legal proceedings, which they will then have to defend”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel