This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/28/labour-leadership-courts-millionaire-donor

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Labour’s leadership was never a matter for the courts anyway Labour’s leadership was never a matter for the courts anyway
(30 days later)
He lost. But whatever the outcome of the proceedings brought by Michael Foster against Jeremy Corbyn, the perceptions were always going to be bad. That a millionaire Labour donor mounted a legal challenge to have Corbyn’s name removed from the leadership ballot paper looked like a wealthy contributor trying to meddle in a political process.He lost. But whatever the outcome of the proceedings brought by Michael Foster against Jeremy Corbyn, the perceptions were always going to be bad. That a millionaire Labour donor mounted a legal challenge to have Corbyn’s name removed from the leadership ballot paper looked like a wealthy contributor trying to meddle in a political process.
It looked even worse, coming so soon after the Labour party’s national executive committee (NEC) disenfranchised more than 100,000 new members and raised to £25 its fee to become a supporter – and thus to have a vote in the leadership contest.It looked even worse, coming so soon after the Labour party’s national executive committee (NEC) disenfranchised more than 100,000 new members and raised to £25 its fee to become a supporter – and thus to have a vote in the leadership contest.
Still, it was the “apparent manipulation” of party rules around the leadership contest that prompted this high court case. A former media agent, Foster stood as a Labour candidate in the 2015 election, while his family has donated some £400,000 to the party.Still, it was the “apparent manipulation” of party rules around the leadership contest that prompted this high court case. A former media agent, Foster stood as a Labour candidate in the 2015 election, while his family has donated some £400,000 to the party.
He did not think Corbyn should automatically appear on the ballot, despite an NEC ruling that the incumbent did not need to secure 20% backing from Labour MPs to stand again.He did not think Corbyn should automatically appear on the ballot, despite an NEC ruling that the incumbent did not need to secure 20% backing from Labour MPs to stand again.
The high court did not agree, ruling that the decision to allow Corbyn to stand “was correct in law”.The high court did not agree, ruling that the decision to allow Corbyn to stand “was correct in law”.
Related: Labour has been adrift. Owen Smith can bring it back to land | Polly Toynbee
This was a futile exercise on several levels. One constitutional expert described the legal case as a “waste of time”, because any high court decision could have no bearing on the NEC ruling, itself an interpretation of party rules. What exactly could a court compel the party (not a company, subject to company law) to do?This was a futile exercise on several levels. One constitutional expert described the legal case as a “waste of time”, because any high court decision could have no bearing on the NEC ruling, itself an interpretation of party rules. What exactly could a court compel the party (not a company, subject to company law) to do?
But more than that, it seemed ill-advised to prolong this particular agony with a legal challenge, given that there is already so much bad blood within the Labour party over its leadership crisis.But more than that, it seemed ill-advised to prolong this particular agony with a legal challenge, given that there is already so much bad blood within the Labour party over its leadership crisis.
Perhaps mindful of this, Corbyn’s challenger, Owen Smith, was of the view that the courts should not overturn the NEC ruling. If the party must have a leadership election, it is surely better to stop fighting over the terms and get the thing over with.Perhaps mindful of this, Corbyn’s challenger, Owen Smith, was of the view that the courts should not overturn the NEC ruling. If the party must have a leadership election, it is surely better to stop fighting over the terms and get the thing over with.
Now that the court case is over – and can we please assume it won’t be challenged? – the party can fully and civilly engage with the actual policies and political substance of this leadership context. In truth, that is what Labour, regardless of who is leading it, desperately needs to focus on.Now that the court case is over – and can we please assume it won’t be challenged? – the party can fully and civilly engage with the actual policies and political substance of this leadership context. In truth, that is what Labour, regardless of who is leading it, desperately needs to focus on.