Council’s boycott of Israeli goods banned under new law
CITY CITED AS EXAMPLE OF ‘NEED FOR’ LEGISLATION
COUNCILS and other public bodies are to be banned from imposing boycotts or sanctions against foreign countries under measures set out in the Queen’s Speech.
The Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions Bill will prevent public bodies from adopting their own approach to international relations and engaging in measures which “undermine community cohesion”.
Leicester City Council passed a non-binding motion in 2014 to as far as possible “boycott any produce originating from illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank until such time as it complies with international law and withdraws from Palestinian Occupied territories”.
The proposed legislation, which follows a commitment in the 2019 Conservative General Election manifesto, is aimed overwhelmingly at campaigns targeting Israel.
Ministers said they are concerned such actions can “legitimise and drive” antisemitism in the UK.
Accompanying documentation released with the speech said the government has “zero toleration” for such discrimination which pits different communities against each other.
It specifically cited motions passed by Lancaster City Council in 2021 and by Leicester City Council to boycott goods from Israeli settlements in 2014.
The Bill will give the government the power to ban public bodies which are already subject to public procurement rules from conducting their own boycott campaigns against foreign countries and territories.
It will also stop public bodies from taking a different line to the government on sanctions and foreign relations.
Leicester’s ban was challenged by Jewish Human Rights Watch (JHRW), which claimed the council had breached its own equalities rules.
However, the case was thrown out by the Court of Appeal in 2018.
City mayor Sir Peter Soulsby said at the time: “Their argument has been trounced in the judge’s decision. I strongly resent the implication it is not possible to criticise the Israeli government without being antisemitic.”
The council has never been able to say exactly what items it had bought from the occupied territories before the boycott and has admitted the decision had had no impact on its purchasing.
However, Sir Peter said: “It was never anticipated to have a major impact (on our purchasing).
“It was a powerful gesture to show support for the plight of the Palestinians.”
Council barrister Kamal Adatia said: The ruling totally endorses Leicester’s approach to handling this motion, and has made no change whatsoever to the way in which councils can pass such motions in future.
“The judgement is a landmark – not for organisations like JHRW, but for all local councils.
“It recognises their fundamental right to pass motions of this nature and makes it clear that they can, like Leicester, fully comply with their equality duties when doing so.”