Analysis comment News

Former parliamentary candidate Pamela Fitzpatrick serves notice of legal action on Labour after auto-expulsion threat

Labour’s 2019 general election candidate for Harrow East facing auto-exclusion – but puts party on notice as petition to support her receives wide support

Pamela Fitzpatrick, who stood for Labour in Harrow East at the 2019 general election and serves as a councillor in the borough, has put the party on notice of legal action if it goes through with its threat to ‘auto-exclude’ her for being interviewed by Socialist Appeal – more than a year before Labour’s right-dominated national executive voted controversially to ‘proscribe’ the left-wing group along with three others that organised within the party.

Fitzpatrick was interviewed in May last year about why she wanted to become Labour’s general secretary – and has put Labour on notice of legal action if it pursues its intended action:

Article 7 of the Human Rights Act – instituted by the Labour right’s hero Tony Blair – makes ‘retrospective’ punishment illegal in a court of law:

Article 7 of the Human Rights Act

Article 7 means you cannot be charged with a criminal offence for an action that was not a crime when you committed it.

This means that public authorities must explain clearly what counts as a criminal offence so you know when you are breaking the law.

It is also against the law for the courts to give you a heavier punishment than was available at the time you committed an offence.

Yet his fans are now busily doing exactly that – and abusing the NEC’s decision on auto-exclusion in the process, which laid down explicit guidance about what constitutes ‘support’ for Socialist Appeal:

22.This paper asks the National Executive Committee to CONFIRM the following:

23.That it considers Socialist Appeal to be a political organisation that is incompatible with membership of the Labour Party under Chapter 2, Clause I.4.B of the Labour Party Rule Book.

That it considers, inter alia, that the following acts constitute “support” for Socialist Appeal under Chapter 2, Clause I.4.B of the Labour Party Rule Book:

a. Selling the Socialist Appeal newspaper;
b. Writing for the Socialist Appeal newspaper;
c. Running Socialist Appeal street stalls;
d. Describing oneself as a supporter of Socialist Appeal;

Fitzpatrick did none of these – and merely agreed to an interview, as a would-be candidate for a senior Labour position, with a group that was perfectly acceptable to Labour at the time.

As well as her own notice of legal action, Fitzpatrick’s supporters have also started a petition in her defence and against the whole anti-democratic principle of auto-exclusion that has received widespread support, including from others in a similar position such as Jewish councillor Jo Bird:

Aghileh Djafari-Marbini, who started the petition, said: 

We would never do this in a court of law, so why are we doing it in the Labour Party? It really worries me that we are taking that approach.

The Labour right’s cowardly war on its members continues, but not without resistance. Those who wish to sign the petition defending Cllr Fitzpatrick can do so here.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to without hardship, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. Thought police at it again.Yes lets see the Labour party throw more members money away,in legals,its better than siphoning it off and in a roundabout way it hastens the final whistle on the enemy within..ITs turning onto a pantomine with the Circus and the clowns arriving soon inin Brighton.t

      YES 🎊‼️🎊‼️🎊‼️
      That’s the way to do it

  2. Bravo anyone who successfully Sues them but they won’t stop till all dissent is silenced and all ‘contentious’ groups are removed or defanged: JVL will go while Labour friends of Palestine is safe under the control of the right.
    I would love to see a final action banning them from using the name ‘Labour’ and stopping them from calling the party ‘Socialist’. After that they can have the ruins.

  3. Owing to illness I was unable to post on this site for several months although I read the articles and comments most days.
    I am horrified at just how low the party has sunk under Starmer. The man either doesn’t want Labour ever to get into government or he is a complete fool and I don’t think he is a fool. Over the last few months he has alienated those of Irish and Kashmir decent along with the Socialists, Muslims/Arabs and Anti Zionists who he has been offending and hounding since day one. Now he’s dragging us further down into the gutter by seeking to sanction someone for giving an interview to a “proscribed” organisation before it was “proscribed”. As if the fact that the Labour Party under Starmer seeks to control what we can say and to whom we can say it is not bad enough, Starmer is trying to apply punish people retrospectively.
    If Pamela takes legal action it is unlikely that she will lose and once again the leadership will be exposed as the right wing undemocratic censoring cabal that it is. As soon as the Starmer backing PLP accept that he is making Labour unelectable they’ll oust him to save their own skins ( and generous salaries expenses and perks). Couldn’t happen to a nicer bloke!

    1. Every member of the Labour Party is guilty unless they prove themselves innocent. But guilty of what? Answer: not being a Zionist (racist).

  4. lundiel – “but they won’t stop till all dissent is silenced and all ‘contentious’ groups are removed or defanged” Correct. They r doing as they said openly and repeatedly.

    It was obvious, but how could it be appreciated by those who STILL believe even one line of FACT they should FACE threatens us❓❓❓
    Soft limp dripping pap of myths is what some prefer to hear and read.
    UTTERLY pathetic‼️‼️‼️

    MUCH worse is to come, MADE possible by our lot who ACTIVELY protected, enabled and gifted CONTROL, eg by keeping the internal report away from the membership. They STILL talk about unifying with SIR starmer and STILL fail to appreciate Pamela is doing EXACTLY that which should have been done and MUST be done.

    Instead we got ceaseless craving to convert the unappeasable even by sacrificing THOUSANDS of members under any bus.

    lundiel, NOTHING has been learnt. WE are our own worst enemies.

    Pamela 🎉🌟🎉🌟🎉🌟 has done what should have been done to Hodge, Blair, Mandelson, Starmer etc instead of the CONSTANT appeasements.

    I challenge anyone to name a single FOLLOW THROUGH of FIGHT against parasites, when we HAD more than enough control needed to defeat them. Name one… THAT’s our biggest problem. NOT externalities.

    This tragedy was brought on ourselves by our own. It is ridiculous to have expected the parasites to act any differently as they had ALWAYS acted; SEE their actions for four years plus a fifth, yet STILL claim “the party is unified”, and WE must “unify with” “the party” that “is unified”. Think of the staggering mindlessness of that.

    1. Er signpost, did you somehow miss the GS telling CLPs that they mustn’t pass motions or comment on the EHRC report or Jeremy having the whip withdrawn etc, etc, etc, and numerous people being suspended for doing so?!

      So perhaps you could remind us what happened when the LP (under Jeremy’s leadership) condemned the Panorama hatchet job. Signpost knows damn well that when the MSM and the majority of the PLP are hostile to you – along with the JLM and the CAA and LAA and LFI and CST and BoD and the Jewish newspapers AND the Tory leadership and the LibDem leadership – it didn’t matter a jot how much control of the LP you may have had, so his line about having ‘more than enough control needed to defeat them’ is just complete B/S.

      And signpost knows of course what happened when the LP said it was gonna take disciplinary action against Margaret Hodge – ie that ALL of the above were condemning and vilifying and demonising the LP and Jeremy courtesy of the MSM, along with mountain-loads of faux outrage, as a consequence. And Hodge herself – in TOTT black propaganda fashion – likening it to the Nazis targeting the Jews (in the years prior to the Holocaust) in Germany in the 1930s. You can see for yourself how totally fraudulent signpost’s rhetoric is, because if – as he says/claims above – that ‘we’…. ‘STILL claim “the party is unified”‘, then HOW could ‘we’ ALSO be saying – as signpost THEN says/claims – that ‘WE must “unify with the party”.

      Needless to say, if you were saying that ‘the party is unified’, then you wouldn’t be saying that ‘WE must unify with the party’!!! But you see the signpost shill thinks readers are so stupid – and hang on his every word! – that they won’t notice such a glaring contradiction!

    2. These actions have been simmering ever since the left were outwitted over clause4. Now it’s a horror show.

  5. This has been bewing since at least 2017.

    After I received my letter (november 2017), I requested a Subject Access Request (SAR), this was in December 2017 and under the law I should have recieved my SAR within 40 days. The law on data protection was subsequently amended in May 2018, but still did not affect my right to see the data the Labour party held on me, in fact it tightened the rules the party had to follow. The party delayed and obfuscated for almost two years, even ignoring my MPs requests to speak to the General Secretary, to try and help me obtain my SAR. My MP was accused in early 2019 of antisemitism (coincidence?) and gave in to party pressure and told me “there is nothing I can do for you”.

    I employed the help of a solicitor and the Information Commissioners Office, who FOUR times instructed the central administration (twice) and the CLP secretary (twice) to provide me with the information I was entitled to in law.

    When Labour finanlly gave in to my solicitors and the Information Commissioners Office my SAR was finally produced, in September 2019 it showed the adminstrations mindset was, even in 2017, on the road to Labour party totalitarianism.

    One of the charges, among the misquotes, innuendo and downright lies was this little gem from the CLP secretary. In this case, “they” meaning me and refers to a converstation I had on facebook in a private group –

    “They also engage with others, whose standing in the Labour Party or otherwise is not known but it is suspected that they are not Members of the Labour Party”.

    So it appears, that members need to check before engaging on social media, that others in a group, or conversation are also members of Labour, and only members of Labour, otherwise the social media police will get you. Romania under the dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu springs to mind.

    1. YES Nemtona‼️ ALMOST totally correct except – “This has been bewing since at least 2017.”

      The FACTS are “This was” FULLY BREWED long b4 2017. We’ve all heard of TURBOCHARGED purging of so called “militants” by Kinnock, continued by Mandelson’s Blair Straw Hodge Blunket who MILITANTLY master misnaming anything and anyone, for their parasitic gain alone.

      OUR lot then accept definitions, often OVER estimating the benefit of satire & sarcasm. Repeating inaccurate definitions eg; PARASITIC warmongers twisters and filth as “centrists”, “moderates” “labour” etc does us and the general public GREAT harm.

      Branding often comparatively decent people “militants” “far left” “extreme left” is TOTAL RUBBISH. Finland example (amongst a few countries with TOP life satisfaction) r not millitant etc. They see Socialism as the “CENTRE GROUND” of COMMON SENSE.

      What we see, PRECEEDED 2017 by decades. No need read about the doings. Parasitic actions r quite basic + easily seen. One need not spend even thirty minutes reading of it except to get easy material to demolish ALL entryist clams of a-S etc.
      I HEARD and read determined parasitic intentions plans, frequently and clearly AS SOON as Jeremy stood 4 the leadership. THATS why i joined to HELP counter their intentions with my member votes. It’s a painful surprise to have found ceaseless appeasements, people sincerely believing the parasites SUDDENLY changed recently.

      That’s why i’m intensely disappointed, many STILL believe group whining has some useful purpose. That has no benefit to us and only keep parasites in place and stronger.

  6. That over half of the PLP nominated Starmer raises three questions:
    1- Does the majority of the PLP suffers from poor political judgement on a massive scale as to believe Starmer could restore the Labour Party to electoral success?
    2- was Starmer the very best the PLP could offer? None of the other two candidates standing for the leadership had much to offer either in terms of effective leadership. If RLB is a measure to the quality of the SCG them, the left is in real trouble.
    Whatever the answer to the two questions above what is clear is that the PLP lacks talent and sound political judgement. It raises another important question:
    -Does it help to be somehow intellectually mediocre if you wish to become a labour MP? In my opinion it applies equally to the right and left of the PLP and those in between. Who can forget Corbyn’s attempts at appeasing his political enemies within the Party, McDonald U turns, Malhotra’s complaint on alleged breach of parliamentary privilege, McNanus Sin Fein’s father Cllrs?
    Thus, Starmer and his minions know that Starmer isn’t going to win the next General Election. The plan is to dispose of the left within the Labour Party to ensure that it never raised its head in the foreseeable future. Corbyn’s near win in 2017 is the staff of their nightmares.
    There are a lot of Labour MPs already old enough to access their Parliamentary’s pensions, so it Labour loses seats at the next General Election it doesn’t really matter. The others no old enough will walk into well paid jobs for services rendered to the neoliberal cause.
    In summary the right of the Labour Party is working hard to ensure that the Labour Party disappears as a political force, so that they can join the LibDems in a new political party without the left.

    1. For the majority of the plp, membership and voters the only thing that really matters is that house prices keep rising. All other arguments about how the economy is run are secondary and 63% of British households are buying their own homes. That gives centrists the inbuilt majority to do as they will and as you say, losing the next election doesn’t really matter.
      The futures not all bad though, the centrist/right wing dominated parties have no choice but to put up wages in the low pay sectors, or open up to migrants, that’s one result of Brexit. Another is the London property market is in big trouble unless it’s propped up by foreign buyers. Covid and Brexit have made London somewhere you want to move away from and if the London market collapses the rest will surely follow. A few hundred thousand people in negative equity could see the political landscape change fundamentally and no one will remember the name Starmer except as a footnote in neoliberal history.

      1. One caveat to this – Big landlords are buying up properties in London (and probably elsewhere) and they are in it for the long term. They don’t need to worry about people not paying rents for a while like the folk who have one or two rental properties and are servicing buy-to-let loans. The big boys will just keep hold of these houses (because they show up in the assets column) and put rents up and up. A major bank (Lloyds I think) recently announced that it is to buy a portfolio of houses for rental purposes – something like 40-50K houses. So, not sure about the collapse in house prices.

    2. Maria, “Does it help to be somehow intellectually mediocre if you wish to become a labour MP? In my opinion it applies equally to the right and left of the PLP and those in between”.

      I worked with one right wing PLP member in the 1980s. He was groomed for and when the time came he stepped into the previous MPs shoes. My experience of another, when I asked him if I was “persona non grata”, he asked me what that meant.

      So I think the answer to your question can only be yes.

    3. Maria: The Blairites weren’t bothered about electoral success when they nominated Starmer (who they had lined up for several years to become the leader once they’d ‘toppled’ Jeremy), and the over-riding objective/plan was to completely ‘exorcise’ the left from the LP *AND* forever stigmatise them as anti-semites and bullies and homophobes etc, with more than a little help from the MSM and the Jewish newspapers and the JLM and CAA and BoD et al. So they didn’t somehow make a mistake in nominating Starmer, as you suggest, and he is doing an excellent job from their point of view.

  7. Nemtona, I find one reason for your suspension mind blowing. Following that logic, Labour Party’s members shouldn’t date let alone married non LP’s members. You are right Ceausescu comes to mind.

  8. Not sure this is a winner and that something similar has been tried before and failed, nothing wrong with the proposition but Labour make their own rules and are the sole arbiter of how those rules are interpreted, hope I’m wrong

    1. charming64 – “Auto-da-fé purge” as in “Don Carlos”. (just a tit bit)

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: