Politician Bob Stewart has had his conviction for a racially aggravated public order offence quashed at Southwark Crown Court.
Mr Stewart, MP for Beckenham in south-east London, told Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei to “go back to Bahrain” during a row outside the Foreign Office’s Lancaster House in Westminster on December 14 last year.
Mr Stewart, who was a Conservative at the time, was convicted last November for a racially aggravated public order offence in relation to the incident.
However, his conviction was overturned on Friday following an appeal.
Mr Justice Bennathan said that, while the words spoken by Mr Stewart amounted to abuse, the bench did not believe that it caused Mr Alwadaei harassment, alarm, or distress.
Mr Stewart, 74, had been attending an event hosted by the Bahraini embassy when protester Mr Alwadaei shouted “Bob Stewart, for how much did you sell yourself to the Bahraini regime?”
During a heated exchange, Mr Stewart replied: “Go away, I hate you. You make a lot of fuss. Go back to Bahrain.”
He also told Mr Alwadaei to “get stuffed, Bahrain’s a great place, end of”.
In footage played during his appeal, he added: “Now you shut up, you stupid man.”
The court heard that Mr Alwadaei came to the UK from Bahrain as a refugee.
He said that he was tortured for attending a protest against the Bahraini regime, and this led him to flee.
Mr Alwadaei said he wanted to question Mr Stewart about his support for Bahrain.
“Those that would affiliate themselves with a regime that is so corrupt, they should be questioned for their affiliation,” he said.
Asked about Mr Stewart’s reply, that he “go back” to Bahrain, he said he felt “dehumanised” by the remarks.“
To me the context was very clear, that I am not wanted, that I am not welcome in Britain,” he said.
However, during cross-examination Mr Alwadaei said that he could not hear what Mr Stewart was saying to him.
“At the time I could not hear what he was saying,” he said.
Asked to clarify what exactly he did hear, he said he heard “go back”.
He said he then watched the video back after the incident, and that he then reported the incident to the police.
Summing up the bench’s decision to overturn the conviction, Mr Justice Bennathan said that Mr Alwadaei’s response during the incident did not suggest that he had been caused distress.
“The fact that even after Mr Stewart’s abusive comment, Mr Alwadaei continued to address him in similar terms, and at a similar pitch, would scarcely suggest to an observer that he was caused any upset, alarm, or distress,” he said.
Mr Stewart remained stoic following the judgment, simply nodding his head.
He then hugged and thanked his supporters, who had packed out the public gallery of the court.
Mr Stewart is a former British Army officer who was stationed in Bahrain in 1969 and has described himself as a “friend” of the Middle Eastern country.
During his evidence on Friday, he denied that his comments were racist.
Instead he claimed that he simply meant to tell Mr Alwadaei that he could protest safely if he were to return to Bahrain.
“(I said) go back to Bahrain because I know it to be a very decent place and I thought you would get a decent hearing there,” he said.
He said he was “upset” by Mr Alwadaei’s remarks as they were “audible” to everyone in the queue to the event.
He said he felt the remarks meant “that I was a corrupt man and that I had accepted money from Bahrain”.
He added: “I had not. I was upset by this.”
He added that when he said “I hate you” he meant “I hate what you are saying”.
He was asked if he was racist.
“I don’t think so, it is the last thing I am,” he said.
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 hereComments are closed on this article