[ad_1]
Jeremy Corbyn will file a formal lawsuit against the Labor Party for suspending the whip, in a case that, according to allies of the former Labor leader, is intended to show that there was an agreement with Keir Starmer’s office to reinstate him to the party.
The Guardian has seen evidence of exchanges between key members of Starmer’s office and Corbyn representatives, suggesting there were private meetings in the run-up to the party’s decision to lift its suspension from the party.
Later, Starmer ordered that the Labor whip be withheld from Corbyn until he apologizes and removes the comments made after the equality watchdog’s investigation into anti-Semitism in the party.
Corbyn’s attorneys filed a pre-action disclosure request with superior court Thursday night. “This will all be in the public domain soon,” said a source involved in the discussions.
A Labor source said: “Any allegation that there was a deal or an attempt to determine the outcome of any disciplinary process is incorrect.”
Corbyn has not directly apologized for the claim that the magnitude of the problem investigated by the Equality and Human Rights Commission was “dramatically exaggerated for political reasons” by opponents and the media, but has since issued a clarifying statement saying that it was not his intention to “tolerate anti-Semitism or belittle concerns about it.”
It is understood that Corbyn’s legal team is attempting to put into the public domain evidence of what the former Labor leader will claim was a deal worked out by Starmer’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, and his deputy, Simon Fletcher, with the secretary general. from Unite, Len. McCluskey and former shadow cabinet minister Jon Trickett, acting on behalf of Corbyn.
His advisers say they have evidence of two key meetings, one in person and one at Zoom, where the choreography of Corbyn’s disciplinary process was allegedly discussed.
The legal team is also expected to claim that Starmer, McSweeney and Labor deputy leader Angela Rayner met McCluskey and Trickett in the opposition office boardroom leader in parliament the day after the report. EHRC and the suspension of Corbyn.
Labor sources do not deny that the meeting took place, but say it was at McCluskey’s request and that Starmer had publicly said he wanted Corbyn to apologize. It is understood that Starmer told his office that he did not want to participate in any decision related to the convening of the disciplinary panel.
Corbyn’s allies will claim that their clarifying statement was agreed upon over the course of the next 24 hours in Zoom calls and WhatsApp messages between McCluskey, Trickett, McSweeney and Fletcher.
The claim, fiercely denied by Labor sources, is that it was agreed that early release of the statement would lead to a swift disciplinary panel of the party’s governing body, the national executive committee, who would be recommended to administer only the lightest sanction.
The legal action is also expected to allege that another meeting took place at Zoom between Corbyn’s advisers and Starmer’s chief of staff, where it is alleged that the final sanction was discussed and agreed. This has also been denied by Labor.
The release of the statement, which came on the morning of the panel’s deliberation, drew the ire of Starmer, as well as Jewish Labor members and the British Jewish Board of Deputies, due to the lack of a formal apology.
The final decision of the NEC panel was, in fact, to issue Corbyn a stricter sanction, a formal warning, but it is understood that the panel received legal advice that the party’s suspension would be open to challenge in court.
Corbyn has been told the whip will be put on hold for three months while an investigation is under way, and has been told by whips chief Nick Brown to “unequivocally, unequivocally and without reservation” apologize for his claims. made after the EHRC Report.
