The Post Office scandal – biggest miscarriage of justice in British history

There is a huge scandal in Britain at the moment. 

In 2019, the High Court ruled that the Post Office's Fujitsu's Horizon IT system contained inherent bugs, glitches and errors which had erroneously flagged up account shortfalls. However, by this point, the Post Office had forced at least 4,000 sub-postmasters – the individuals running local branches – to make repayments based on this data.

The Post Office, their investigators, and Fujitsu employees, essentially lied to cover up the widespread problems with Horizon. This cover up was instrumental in this miscarriages of justice which resulted in malicious wrongful convictions and resultant fatalities, and ruination of lives. There probably needs to be a criminal prosecution of certain Post Office management and relevant Fujitsu individuals. They knowingly instigated vexatious litigation, misled the courts, and appropriated serious sums of money from the sub-postmasters who 'repaid' money that was never missing. Then, they received bonuses on the money they stole and the tax they reclaimed. (More info: BBC News)

The government is trying to pass the Post Office exoneration bill to overturn these convictions.

The problem with a legislative approach is as follows: 

• It creates two kinds of precedents:
• When the next scandal comes along, there will be a political clamour for 'something to be seen to be done'. If the government of the day simply refuses, and leaves it for the courts to correct; then inconsistency will lead to accusations of favouritism. 
• It gives government latitude to interfere by fiat with other things best left to the courts, e.g. declaring that an landlocked African country was safe when it was not. Other examples could follow in due course. What if, as opposed to exoneration; a future Parliament passes a law that maligns a given group as being 'guilty' of some crime? 
• There is also a rule of law problem with laws that have retrospective effect. It would entail changing the law of, let's say, assault which would lead to previous convictions being reassessed. The rule of law requires that legislation doesn't move in that direction.
• Some of the sub-postmasters may be guilty. What if, in due course, an investigation reveals that around 10% of all blanket-acquittals were actually guilty? It would taint the acquittal of the 90%.
• Some innocent defendants might fall through the net, depending on how the Act is drafted.

What is really needed is for the government to ensure resources allow these cases to be heard quickly by the Court of Criminal Appeal. Whether via the Criminal Cases Review Commission (which refers cases back to the Court of Appeal) or through a special legal unit that acts as solicitors to the convicted postal workers, or a combination of the both, is a matter of detail. The Criminal Cases Review Commission has been chronically under-resourced. Presently, without their prior approval, none of these old convictions can be sent to the Court of Criminal Appeal. 

However, judges can be remarkably innovative when the need arises. I wouldn't be surprised if a vehicle arises (e.g. an individual appeal) to take the findings from the Horizon Inquiry and make a generally binding decision; namely, that postmaster convictions based on Horizon evidence were fundamentally flawed and unsafe, and that an individual conviction could only stand if the case was re-prosecuted.

I was struck by a comment from Nicholas Cooke KC in an interesting article in the Guardian:

I am very concerned that the proposed legislation will have the effect of covering up the extent to which failings in the criminal justice system allowed this appalling miscarriage of justice to occur.

If this is swept under the carpet, the courts won't adjust to account for this blind spot. Perhaps a judicial direction to a jury?

It is far preferable that court cases are dealt with by the courts.

Academic and romantic painters of early 19th century – National Gallery

This blog is a write up on room 45 of the National Gallery. 

The art here focuses on the academic teaching of executing compositions of historical, mythological and religious subjects in the romantic tradition. 

The overall Romantic movement - which includes artists like Francisco de Goya, Eugene Delacroix etc. - have a psychological and emotional depth that is evoked. For me, I have always been drawn to the 19th century romantic landscapes (e.g. JMW Turner). It's art trying to reach the sublime - that sense of awe when observing mankind against the power and majesty of nature shown in grand scale. In Europe, it was partially a response to the Industrial Revolution, and a yearning to return to the 'simplicity' of the open-air countryside, a form of escapism. When it comes to people; Francisco de Goya, as a great example, was able to exhibit humanity as a sublime force of its own.

✲✲✲

Monsieur de Norvins by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres

Captivating - even beguiling.

There is a lot of depth to this painting.

The sitter is Monsieur de Norvins. He was made Chief of Police in Rome in 1811 - when it was painted. I.e. before Napoleon's fall in 1814.

His face is fascinating; body at an angle, his head and especially the eyes scrutinizes and studies us. Eyes seem to narrow slightly, and his lips closed and pursed, as if to curse. One eyebrow raised just slightly? I love his thick raggedy hair - quite dashing even. Altogether, he strikes me as being a somewhat guarded and even forbidding character. That red ribbon marks him as a Chevalier (Knight) of the Légion d'Honneur, which was the highest French distinction for military and civil accomplishments created by Napoleon. 

The vibrancy in the colour is striking and sumptuous. Those 18th century silky-white shirts and neckerchief-cravats really look beautiful against his black greatcoat and opulent silky red-maroon curtains.

According to the NG:

Norvins was a supporter of the Emperor Napoleon – and later wrote a very successful four-volume biography of him – and his political allegiance is shown by the Napoleonic gesture of placing his left hand inside his jacket.

There is a very interesting article which delves into the later-concealed pentimentos of the Napoleonic period. The fall of Napoleon and the shift in power to the Bourbon monarchy meant it was dangerous to exhibit overt loyalties to the former Emperor.

✲✲✲

Don Andrés del Peral by Francisco de Goya

An engaging portrait - vulnerability and frailty leavened by a certain comfortable elegance. 

The languid eyes, grey wispy hair, the left side of his face slightly drooping (perhaps an illness?).

It makes for an intriguing persona. It seems Peral - along with Goya - was employed at the royal court in Madrid. So, they must have known one another.

I am not sure if he's drawing something out of a pocket though. That's a classic Napoleon stance.

✲✲✲

The Duke of Wellington by Francisco de Goya

This is Arthur Wellesley. He was born in Dublin and became the first Duke of Wellington.

I think this painting captures something of Wellington. A certain cautiousness. Alertness. He is certainly not short of military awards.

After defeating Napoleon at Waterloo, the Duke of Wellington purportedly broke down in tears due to the appalling loss of the battle, and didn't care to be congratulated on his victory.

Here he is depicted after his liberation of Spain from the French at the battle of Salamanca in 1812. 

✲✲✲

The Emperor Napoleon I by Horace Vernet

I really do love Napoleon.

The background smoke is apt. Those lone wisps of hair seem a bit peculiar on Napoleon; but Vernet captures a guy who isn't the most dashing - but has the feel of 'au destin'.

To me, it's his rags-to-riches story which is entwined in his legacy.

On the one hand, I know that Napoleon was very careful at curating his own image. He regularly misreported his losses among his men in battles, and frequently exaggerated the losses of his enemies. He was alive at a time when propaganda played a significant role in the upper echelons of military life and around the time of revolution. In other respects he was quite lucky because - by the time he began to rise - the French revolution had killed huge portions of the senior military officers. Also, a common misconception still resonates about Napoleon's supposed height. But this can be attributed to us, in Britain, pushing the idea that he was short, among other things.

On the other hand, he seems to have been genuinely remarkable - esp. during the time of Romanticism in art. He revolutionized warfare and military leadership through meritocracy and the corps system. Napoleon defeated coalitions of other European major powers - alone - during France's most extreme tumult & unrest. He lead expeditions to Egypt (giving us all the Rosetta stone), and then coronated himself as emperor. 

The romantic fate: where, at the end, he lost everything and was imprisoned on a small island.

✲✲✲

Afternoon in the Tuileries Gardens by Adolph Menzel

Lovely.

What is very striking to me is how Adolph Menzel can capture the visual aesthetics of a summery French afternoon. Reminds me a bit of impressionism in this Paris gardens.

Adolph Menzel is an artist I don't know much about. I did a Google search and his other works seem v. beautiful.

Sheer detail: two children playing under their father's legs, a girl in the back crying, the shadow of the trees' branches and leaves.

✲✲✲

Rienzi vowing to obtain Justice for his Brother's Death by William Holman Hunt

You cannot mistake the subject of this painting.

Cola di Rienzi (1313-54) was a Roman who declared the reestablishment of the Roman Republic. He sought to represent the populace of Rome against the wily machinations of the nobles that dominated the city. Here, his youthful and indomitable spirit is clear. Clinched fist, youthful champion of the peoples against the barons; only to be counterposed by the horses' backsides against them.

The brother as blond and youthful, innocent-like, with wreath of flowers in his hand. Strange that the brother is the only one furious. The other soldiers - towards the fore - merely observe nonchalantly and whisper to themselves.

Signifying the end of innocence?

✲✲✲

Evening on the Lake by Camille Corot

Evokes the quiet, gloomy and elegiac. 

The unwinding of a lovely sunny afternoon (boat coming into shore) - with its inherent nostalgia - as the sun sets, and darkness creeps in. I really do love the calm & unruffled waves painted across this lake and its shimmering reflections.

It's unsettling a bit; and a bit peaceful.

I like that red dot, a red chapeau on the fisherman's head?

I think we can see Corot's influence on impressionists and the en plein air style. I remember he was Berthe Morisot's art teacher.

Glynis Johns (1923-2024) – RIP to Mrs Banks from Mary Poppins

Mrs Glynis Johns – thank you for 100 wonderful years of entertainment! 

This Disney classic was such a huge part of my childhood. 

Go fly a kite up to heaven!

Antisemitism at university campuses

Background: Last month, there were Congressional hearings on antisemitism in American universities – notably following the recent upsurge of anti-Jewish hate in the Western world following October 7 (e.g. usual nasty chants "from the river to the sea" etc.). The presidents of three major US universities (Harvard, University of Pennsylvania, MIT) proved themselves incredibly incompetent on answering the most basic of questions: whether the calling for the genocide of the Jews would violate their campus rules of harassment or bullying. Their answers to this basic question is that it would violate the university's code of conduct – "depending on context" and if "speech becomes conduct".

Yesterday, Dr. Claudine Gay - former President of Harvard - has finally resigned following the strong (and justified) backlash, and the threat of major donors withdrawing money. It also seems that Dr. Gay is guilty of plagiarism which is another serious reason to step down. In this post, I will discuss the culture of antisemitism at universities. 

✲✲✲

Part of the problem is that these presidents have taken the responsibility for their university's policies and practices. Both Claudine Gay and Elizabeth Magill were asked directly if calls for genocide constituted a violation of their university's code of conduct, whether it constituted bullying. Her response was to state that Penn had a "serious decision to make" in reviewing the 'genocide' policy in campus. What does that mean? It's an evasion of responsibility, at best. At worst, and in fact, it is a suggestion that tolerance of calls for genocide is something worthy of consideration. At a time when moral clarity is exigent, these academics chose to dissemble and give cover to the worst expressions of antisemitism in recent times.

Another aspect that scares me is how antisemitism is backed into our institutions of higher learning: "depending on context". Part of these presidents rationalization is that calling for genocide is fundamentally acceptable if it does not lead to action and/or doesn't target an individual. Using that logic, would it ever be acceptable for a student to start chanting racist slurs, as part of a mob on campus, at African-American students because of the conflict in South Sudan, let's say? Or, shouting that the George Floyd's murder was justified, in context, at some black students? Of course not.

When Jewish students say they are feeling unsafe and harassed, and that campus antisemitic speech is threatening; it shouldn't be equivocated. Otherwise it's a shameful moral hypocrisy. History has made these bursts of antisemitism an ominous and existential threat to Jews. They know all too well where these slogans and marches and slurs lead. It should never be contextualised and shouldn't matter whether gentiles can 'identify with it personally'. When Jewish students say they feel threatened, universities should listen and act, as opposed to dancing around semantics.

However, I think our present antisemitism comes from two places:

1. I think people don't regard Jew-hatred – physically or mentally – in the same way as hatred of other minorities. The logic here is that the hatred of a 'peoples' is based around their position in the framework of 'oppressor vs oppressed'. For whatever reason, Jews have been firmly planted in the 'oppressor' category. As such, the hatred & pain inflicted on Jews can be downplayed, legitimised, or denied. Hence, it is "context"-dependent – as opposed to being objectively wrong. If this was any other minority, such attacks would be completely unacceptable and not subject to any 'debate'. Harassment towards blacks or Muslims or gays etc. would never have any "context" to it, and would be regarded as nasty bigotry. But, when it comes to the Jews, there is a "context" that can explain it.
2. These colleges are scared of upsetting certain extremely vocal groups of radical students. They don't want to discipline these students for harassing Jews on their campus. Gay's initial statement (two days after the October 7 Hamas attack) did not firmly condemn the attacks. It also didn't address serious concerns on campus about certain aggressive student groups blaming Israel. Gay did not speak out against the pro-Palestinian student groups who had outrageously condemned Israel as being "entirely responsible for all unfolding violence" following the attack by Hamas. It's all very depressing. Something is very warped in our universities: late to condemn Hamas's barbarism ... but quick to condemn Jews for Israel's response to that barbarism. 

✲✲✲

The BBC has a similar problem as Harvard: Today's Daily Telegraph has a lamentable article criticising the BBC's flawed reportage on the resignation of Dr. Claudine Gay. I haven't read the BBC article (which has since been deleted!) but it seems – just like our universities – that in their warped view of reality, Harvard/Gay are the victims here. The BBC claimed that Claudine Gay was the victim of America's "campus culture wars" as opposed to her inability to condemn the calling for a genocide as unacceptable! Talk about avoiding reality! 

✲✲✲

For antisemitism at British universities: this anonymous article in The Guardian (Why is antisemitism so rife in UK academic settings? I have never found student life more difficult) is a very sobering read: (excerpting only a bit)

Our Jewish Society president had the mezuzah (a protective Jewish prayer scroll) ripped from his door. At a freshers’ event, one Jewish friend told me that she was called a “coloniser” and “race traitor” (the latter by virtue of her non-European descent). I know male students who have removed their kippot (skullcaps) and others who have hidden their Stars of David. On Instagram, I saw students posting pictures of paragliders, celebrating Hamas’s massacre. I waited five long days for my university to condemn “appalling attacks by Hamas” and stress “that there is no place for antisemitism or hate of any faith at Oxford”. An Israeli student whose relatives were murdered at the Nova festival has returned home, telling me she felt safer there than on campus.

The silence we encounter stands in stark contrast to the sensitivity and outspoken support displayed by staff and students to those touched by other events, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Beyond Oxford, Jewish students have experienced similar incidents of antisemitism. In Manchester, posters with the words “kill more Jews” and “Yids” have been displayed. On Instagram, a university Jewish society was sent the message: “Wherever you are in the world, we will take you out of your homes and perform a dance of victory and happiness over your bodies”; another was sent a threat, accompanied by a video of beheaded babies, reading: “You must be killed all of u till the last naziest of you” [sic]; a university rabbi received a direct message that said: “You massacred innocent Muslims, I hope you die too.”

Houthi rebels, Suez Canal and UK airstrikes

Good on Britain.

It seems the UK is one of the few European powers (along with France) exerting their weight to protect our shipping lanes from terrorists. 

The Suez Canal is a critical choke-point (as we know from the 1950's Suez crisis): 12% of global trade and 30% of global cargo traffic go through it. Choking off the Suez Canal threatens the global economy – with the biggest victim being Europe. 

I think the Europeans are fine delegating this responsibility to Biden because these Houthis are not like the Somali pirates – with AKs and Zodiac inflatable rafts. These 'rebels' have helicopter gunships. As Iranian proxies – holding large chunks of Yemen – are way better funded. The US is probably the only nation with a navy capable of the kind of global force projection needed here.

An American problem is that President Biden promised during his presidential campaign to stop the war in Yemen. As such, he delisted the Houthi from the US terror list, stopped providing US intel regarding Houthi targets, halted weapon sales etc. The current mess is largely due to US political support being half-hearted.

Finally, it is worth noting that, as the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels have been attacking civilian ships, their actions constitute war crimes. All being done ostensibly against Israel and to further Hamas' interests.

The Houthis have stated that they would continue to “carry out their military operations against the Israeli enemy,” and have “implement[ed] the decision to prevent Israeli ships from navigating the Arab and Red Seas in support of the oppressed Palestinian people.” However, the five ships are not military objects; all five are commercial vessels with civilian crews. The Houthis have not presented any evidence to demonstrate that anything on board of the ships could have constituted military objects.

“The Houthis are claiming that they’re carrying out attacks on behalf of Palestinians, when the reality is that they’re attacking, arbitrarily detaining, and endangering civilians on ship crews who have zero connection to any known military target,” said Michael Page, Middle East and North Africa deputy director at Human Rights Watch. “The Houthis should immediately release the hostages and end their attacks on civilians caught in the crosshairs of their declared war on Israel.”