One day, your life and future may depend on a jury. The integrity of that legal process is in peril right now | Imran Khan
Why This Matters
Key context: <p>When a barrister is cited for contempt because of his argument to a jury, as happened in a Palestine Action trial, the risks affect us all</p><ul><li><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jul/23/palestine-action-trial-lawyer-prosecution-criticised-rajiv-menon-kc">Palestine Action barrister’s prosecution criticised as ‘chilling’</a></p></li></ul><p>Within days of Mr Justice Johnson’s decision to seek <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/may/12/palestine-action-trial-lawyer-wins-appeal-contempt-court-charge">contempt proceedings against Rajiv Menon KC</a> because of that barrister’s closing speech to the jury in a Palestine Action criminal damage trial, I happened to be making a closing speech to a jury. Neither the case nor the personnel of my case are relevant to what happened next, but it is telling that counsel for the prosecution appeared to invoke Mr Justice Johnson’s imprimatur to rebuke me for stepping over the boundary as to what was acceptable to say to the jury.</p><p>Thankfully, nothing of substance came of that. Not so for Menon. On 22 June 2026, Mr Justice Johnson handed down his approved judgment in Menon’s case such that he now faces a possible two-year prison sentence for defending his client in what was, it seems to me, in accordance with his professional duties and obligations.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jul/23/trial-by-jury-barristers-contempt-of-court-palestine-action">Continue reading...</a> This development from The Guardian highlights ongoing changes in the sector.
When a barrister is cited for contempt because of his argument to a jury, as happened in a Palestine Action trial, the risks affect us allPalestine Action barrister’s prosecution criticised as ‘chilling’Within days of Mr Justice Johnson’s decision to seek contempt proceedings against Rajiv Menon KC because of that barrister’s closing speech to the jury in a Palestine Action criminal damage trial, I happened to be making a closing speech to a jury. Neither the case nor the personnel of my case are relevant to what happened next, but it is telling that counsel for the prosecution appeared to invoke Mr Justice Johnson’s imprimatur to rebuke me for stepping over the boundary as to what was acceptable to say to the jury.Thankfully, nothing of substance came of that. Not so for Menon. On 22 June 2026, Mr Justice Johnson handed down his approved judgment in Menon’s case such that he now faces a possible two-year prison sentence for defending his client in what was, it seems to me, in accordance with his professional duties and obligations. Continue reading...
Curation & Context
This page summarizes a public news report from The Guardian. Global News Hub provides the "Why This Matters" takeaway using editorial insights and AI curation to give readers rapid, high-value context before they click through to read the full article.