Alison Chabloz and the Jews

[White Dragon]

Alison Chabloz

Last Friday, District Judge John Zani convicted Alison Chabloz over her long social media campaign blaming Jews for the world’s every ill. She seemed to particularly enjoy baiting the Jewish community by claiming that Jews deserve persecution, that Auschwitz was a “theme park”, and naming individual Holocaust survivors who she said had fabricated their accounts.

Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) made complaints to the police about Ms Chabloz but we were by no means the first. Dozens of people had gone before us, to no avail. Indeed Ms Chabloz complained to her local force that Jews were harassing her on social media and for a time they treated her as a victim.

When Ms Chabloz posted one of her more repulsive videos, (((Survivors))), on YouTube and Twitter, CAA again complained, only this time we were ready to enforce the law ourselves.

Our pro bono lawyers, led by the renowned Jonathan Goldberg QC, made preparations so that as the six-month deadline for prosecuting the offence closed in with no signs of the authorities taking action, we launched a private prosecution. Eventually, fearing embarrassment, the CPS decided to take it over (to their credit, assigning an outstanding legal team to the case).

From the authorities initially claiming that no crime had been committed, District Judge Zani ruled that Ms Chabloz was guilty “by some considerable margin”.

Importantly, through this case, we have been able to secure judicial backing for the internationally-accepted definition of antisemitism, and an extremely detailed ruling that Holocaust denial, when intended to wound, is “grossly offensive” and therefore likely to be a criminal offence in most contexts.

Perhaps even more importantly though, we have highlighted the authorities’ gross dereliction of duty when it comes to prosecuting antisemites. The conviction of Ms Chabloz is part of a series of legal battles between CAA and the state.

A week before, another antisemite, Jeremy Bedford-Turner, was sentenced to a year in prison over an antisemitic speech. To bring him to justice, CAA’s lawyers had had to battle the CPS in court for thirteen months.

We constantly receive reports of new crimes from the community and we will keep fighting for justice in court, and winning. But the real question here is why, left to the state, these antisemites would go unpunished.

Gideon Falter is chair of CAA

https://www.thejc.com/comment/commen...alter-1.464847

[White Dragon]

Holocaust denier Alison Chabloz should not have been prosecuted

Even in the swamps of social media, Alison Chabloz stands out in virulence and disrepute. Till she was barred from that platform, she used Twitter to spread ceaseless antisemitic abuse and the poisonous fraud of Holocaust denial.

When political commentators, including Jonathan Freedland and me, made mild criticisms of Jeremy Corbyn, she compared it to the crucifixion of Christ.

Last week, Chabloz’s campaigning caught up with her as she was convicted on three charges of posting grossly offensive material online. The material consisted of grotesque “satirical” songs on YouTube that described Auschwitz as a theme park and the Holocaust as a hoax.

I don’t expect many JC readers to agree but this case should never have been brought. Chabloz should be free to continue with her noisome trolling.

It’s a difficult case to make when, extraordinarily and horrifyingly, antisemitism has become a potent issue in British politics because of the failure of Labour’s leadership to recognise it and root it out.

Chabloz’s output is offensive and hateful. And given that it won’t be very long before the Holocaust passes beyond living memory, it’s vital to keep educational activities vigorous so that future generations know. All of these things are true and I feel them keenly. Ten members of my family perished in the Holocaust and I owe it to these of my forebears to defend historical truth.

It is legitimate for civil society to regulate the exercise of speech. Racists and Holocaust deniers don’t have access to the pages of The Times or to the BBC’s airwaves; nor (though it’s a finer judgment) should they have a right to post on Twitter or Facebook, which are publishers and not just public forums.

Yet a free society cannot legislate to protect the feelings of its citizens. If we protect people from being offended, there is no limit to the incursions on free speech that the principle would justify. It’s easy to see how it would shade into the censorship of books or cartoons that offend religious sensibilities.

Free speech is tested by its most difficult cases. There is a human right to be a xenophobe and to express foul conspiratorial opinions. With revulsion but a clear conscience, I’ll defend Chabloz’s liberty to lie and defame.

Oliver Kamm is a leader writer and columnist with The Times

https://www.thejc.com/comment/commen...-kamm-1.464825