LABOUR will pay "substantial damages" to whistleblowers over "defamatory and false allegations" made following a Panorama investigation into antisemitism.
The party, which has issued an apology, was sued by seven former employees, who criticised the leadership’s handling of discrimination complaints in the BBC documentary.
They argue that Labour had subsequently attempted to undermine their reputation.
The ex-employees worked in the party's governance and legal unit and were responsible for the investigation of allegations of misconduct by party members. They sued Labour after it issued a press release describing them as having "personal and political axes to grind".
The legal action followed the broadcast in July 2019 of a BBC Panorama programme titled: "Is Labour Anti-Semitic?"
Katherine Buckingham, Michael Creighton, Samuel Matthews, Daniel Hogan, Louise Withers Green, Martha Robinson and Benjamin Westerman all had concerns there was "a lack of commitment" by Labour to properly investigate anti-Semitism within the party, the High Court heard on Wednesday.
At a brief hearing in London, their barrister William Bennett QC said: "The whistleblowers were highly critical of the Labour Party's approach to tackling anti-Semitism within its ranks."
He told Justice Nicklin: "Before the broadcast of the Panorama programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about the whistleblowers."
Bennett said Labour "accused the whistleblowers of having acted in bad faith during and after their employment with the intention of harming the Labour Party", allegations he said were "untrue and defamatory".
He added: "The Labour Party is here today to set the record straight and to apologise unreservedly to the claimants for the distress and embarrassment that the publication of the false allegations have caused them and for the continuing damage that has been caused to their reputations.
"The Labour Party also has agreed to pay substantial damages to the whistleblowers."
Since taking over as Labour leader from Jeremy Corbyn, Keir Starmer has vowed to crack down on antisemitism.
Mark Henderson, representing Labour, told the court: "The Labour Party acknowledges that these claims about the claimants are untrue, and we retract and withdraw them and undertake not to repeat them.
"The Labour Party is here today to publicly set the record straight and to apologise to the claimants for the distress and embarrassment that it has caused them."
At the same hearing, Labour also apologised to John Ware – the journalist who made the Panorama programme – for falsely accusing him of "deliberate and malicious misrepresentations designed to mislead the public".
Bennett said Labour had alleged that Ware "invented quotes, flouted journalistic ethics and ... knowingly promoted falsehoods" in pursuit of "a pre-determined outcome to the question asked by the Panorama programme".
He added that the party had agreed to pay "substantial damages" to Ware.
In a statement, the claimants' solicitor Mark Lewis said: "Today in the High Court, the Labour Party retracted its false allegations made about the Panorama programme asking whether Labour was anti-Semitic.
"The answer was a clear 'yes'. Labour chose to double down and attack the programme's presenter, John Ware, and the whistleblowers rather than addressing the truth of the problem.
"It is ironic that the workers' party chose to act as disgruntled bosses who had been caught out."
He added: "This is just the start. Actions are being taken against those who repeat the libels, and will be taken against those who choose to do so in future. An honest opinion has to be based upon facts.
"Regrettably, there are too many out there who do not bother to check the facts when the facts do not support their factional view."
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