Tory Demand for Probe
The Attorney General has ruled out a review into the sentencing of pro-Palestine protesters, despite the judge being dragged into a bias row. Senior Tories have demanded a probe after Tan Ikram "liked" anti-Israel content before going easy on three women over terror charges.
Judge's Social Media Activity
Mr. Ikram liked a post that read: "Free Free Palestine. To the Israeli terrorist, you can bomb, but you cannot hide." This seemed to endorse a social media post about Israeli "terrorism." Downing Street referred the case to the Attorney General, but it is understood that it does not qualify for review.
Summary Magistrates Court Case
Undue leniency cases only apply for crown court judgments, whereas this was a summary magistrates court case. Mr. Ikram, a deputy senior district judge, decided "not to punish" the three women who had displayed images of paragliders – which Hamas used to enter Israel – at a march in October. They received 12-month conditional discharges at Westminster magistrates court this week after he told them: "Your lesson has been well learnt. I do not find you were seeking to show any support for Hamas."
Judge Denies Knowledge
Mr. Ikram liked a LinkedIn post three weeks ago that read: "Free Free Palestine. To the Israeli terrorist, you can bomb, but you cannot hide." He denied knowledge of doing so and said "if I did, then it was a genuine mistake."
Call for Sentence Review
Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman insisted: "Utterly shocking that a member of the judiciary may have behaved in this way. Judges must be impartial and beyond reproach. The sentence must be reviewed."
