Formal advice
A magistrate has received formal advice for misconduct after a member of the public complained that a comment he made in a private WhatsApp group was “racially prejudiced”.
The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) confirmed that magistrate Derek Muhammad was sanctioned following a complaint from a member of the public who said they had experienced “distress” as a result of the comment.
In his defence, Muhammad denied the comment was racist, arguing it had been “taken out of its context”. He said it was made as part of “a private intellectual discussion about the complex legacy of Winston Churchill and the colonial history of Britain”, according to the published decision, and that it was intended as “a criticism of colonial exploitation” rather than an expression of “racial animus toward people with whom he shares ancestry”.
Muhammad, who was appointed to the magistracy in 2007, cited his long and unblemished record of public service and suggested the complaint was “vexatious and insincere”.
A nominated committee member of the South-East Region Conduct Advisory Committee found that Muhammad had posted the comment, and that it was “racially inappropriate as it could be interpreted as expressing a negative view of people from a particular group or background”. The committee member found that, “regardless of Mr Muhammad’s intention or actual belief, the comment could be perceived to call into question his impartiality, independence or integrity”, and that this amounted to misconduct.
In recommending formal advice, the committee member noted that it was a single comment posted in a private group and that Muhammad had not intended to cause offence, and acknowledged his previously unblemished conduct record. However, she also noted his “failure to show remorse or awareness of how his comment could be perceived”, despite being an experienced magistrate.
so… what was the message?
The way the JCIO handles cases like this is frankly risible (and so in turn are the stories run on them). There is hardly any discernible detail whatsoever on the comment made, so it’s near impossible to understand how any reader can form a view on whether the decision is fair or reasonable.
Completely agree
Or how anyone is supposed to avoid making the same mistake
You can’t express any opinion publicly if you’re on the bench, it seems.
A District Judge (MC) got hauled over the coals for liking a pro-Palestinian message not so long ago.
There is absolutely nothing wrong about the Magistrate’s comment. Britain must come face to face with its vulgar brutal colonial past based on the rape, robbery, pillage and plunder of Africa, Asia and the Americas. Winston Churchill is one of the archetypes of the imperialist colonial project of domination. The 1943 Bengal famine, which killed up to 3 million people, is described as a “man-made” crisis caused by Winston Churchill’s British war policies prioritizing European supplies over Indian lives. While war-time inflation and local hoarding existed, unrefuted research indicate the refusal to divert food shipments, the seizure of rice/boats, and the diversion of grain to well-supplied European stockpiles aggravated the starvation.