A judge who spared jail for three women who displayed images of “paragliders” at a protest is at the centre of a storm after ‘liking’ a pro-Palestine social media post.
Deputy Senior District Judge Tan Ikram Liked the LinkedIn post by a barrister last month calling to “free Palestine” and branding Israel a “terrorist”.
A Downing Street insider said that it had referred the “deeply troubling” case to the Attorney General.
The source said: “Serious questions are being raised in government on how a judge posting this online was able to preside over this landmark case and what this means for the sentencing decision. It’s deeply troubling.”
The Judicial Office said Mr Ikram did not know he liked the post and that it was a genuine mistake.
The three women who displayed the images at a pro-Palestinian march in central London a week after Hamas terrorists used paragliders to enter Israel for the October 7 attack were found guilty of a terror offence on Tuesday.
Heba Alhayek, 29, and Pauline Ankunda, 26, attached pictures to their backs with tape, while Noimutu Olayinka Taiwo, 27, stuck one to the handle of a placard.
But Mr Ikram said he had “decided not to punish” the defendants because their lesson had been “well learned”.
He handed each woman a 12-month conditional discharge, meaning they will not face punishment unless they commit further offences.
Lawyers for the group had suggested they were pictures of a parachute emoji rather than paragliders, and that flying-related images were a common symbol of peace in the region.
Former home secretary and attorney general Suella Braverman said she was “shocked and deeply concerned at these findings”.
She told The Times: “We must have confidence that judges are impartial and act in the interests of justice at all times. This raises serious questions about the sentencing of these despicable criminals and there must be an immediate review.”
Politician-turned-broadcaster Nigel Farage said there were “very serious questions” about Mr Ikran’s impartiality.
Speaking on his GB News show last night, he said: “It seems to me pretty extraordinary on the face of it, that somebody who was sitting as a judge, and in particular, sitting as a judge in this particular case, liked that sort of comment on LinkedIn.
“I think this raises very, very serious questions about his impartiality. One of the things I don’t like about America is the politicisation of its judiciary. I thought here in this country, we were free of it.
“It would appear with every year that goes by they become more and more political.”
Judicial guidance issued last year states that judges known to have strong views on relevant topics should consider whether it is appropriate to hear a case.
The post which was liked by Mr Ikram was by Sham Uddin, a barrister who is standing to be an independent MP in east London
It said: “Free free Palestine. To the Israeli terrorist both in the United Kingdom, the United States, and of course Israel you can run, you can bomb but you cannot hide — justice will be coming for you.”
