Regulator rejects complaint against barrister who tweeted ‘victory to the intifada’ on 7 October

The Bar Standards Board’s Independent Decision-Making Body (IDB) has dismissed a complaint against the Garden Court Chambers barrister Franck Magennis, who uses a picture of Hamas terrorists breaking into Israel on 7 October as his Twitter/X banner.

The complaint was made in a private capacity by solicitor Simon Braun, who told Jewish News that he was “livid, but not surprised,” at the decision by the IDB.

Franck Magennis, who represents numerous Palestinian clients, posted a comment on Twitter/X on 7 October last year in which he wrote: “For almost two decades ‘Israel’ has trapped more than two million people in an open air prison for the ‘crime’ of being insufficiently Jewish. We owe Palestinians our solidarity in their struggle against this naked racial domination. Victory to the intifada.”

Get The Jewish News Daily Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up

Mr Braun said: “Under the Terrorism Act, it is a criminal offence to support or glorify a terrorist organisation. Not only did the police not prosecute, which is beyond perverse, but we were refused [the opportunity] to allow a private prosecution [against the barrister] to be brought before a judge”.

The IDB ruling says that “all the available information was considered” and that “the decision was made to dismiss the matter… as the IDB decided that there was insufficient evidence of a breach of the BSB handbook as alleged”.

Mr Braun was told that ”the IDB determined that there was insufficient evidence to show that the Twitter/X reposts, and the use of the photograph, indicated support for Hamas. The IDB also determined that there was insufficient evidence to show that a reasonable person could perceive that Mr Magennis’s actions on Twitter/X indicated support of Hamas”.

There is no mechanism for an appeal against the ruling, the Bar Standards Board says, unless new evidence comes to light leading it to reconsider its decision.

The Bar Standards Board’s ruling comes after a UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) application to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), to bring a private prosecution against Mr Magennis, under the Terrorism Act, was rejected earlier this year. For certain offences, DPP consent is required before an application can be made.

At the time, UKLFI were told that “criminal liability for this offence requires sufficient evidence to establish that the suspect was responsible for publishing the statement. Having considered the evidence submitted it was assessed that there was insufficient evidence of attribution to enable a prosecutor to assert that the Twitter account belonged to the suspect.

“The sole basis of attribution was the Twitter profile name, the use of the word ‘barrister’ on the profile and then a search of the Bar Standards Board website to link to the suspect’s details. It was noted that there had been no attempt to obtain an account from the suspect to ascertain if he accepted responsibility for the questioned post. There was no other evidence provided to support the contention that the suspect must have been responsible for the Twitter account in question”.

The Crown Prosecution Service added: “In the absence of any evidence as to the contextual and literal meaning of the phrase ‘victory to the intifada’ the CPS considered that the contention by the Private Prosecutor that the statement glorified an existing and current terrorist act could not be established”.

Mr Braun asked: “If there can be a conviction, which there was, simply of a woman doing no more than having a picture of a paraglider on her back — a conviction under the Terrorism Act, how on earth can one not even be allowed to put before a judge a picture of the terrorists breaking through the fence into Israel, with the words ‘Victory to the intifada’?”

He said the Bar Standards ruling was “beyond woeful and totally irrational.” Noting that barristers were not supposed to act in a way which brought the profession into disrepute, Mr Braun said that “even if you concluded [Mr Magennis’s actions] were not in breach of the Terrorism Act, at the very least anybody reasonable would say they were offensive and likely to undermine confidence in the legal profession”.

Given that the Bar Standards ruling said it could not find sufficient evidence to demonstrate Franck Magennis’s support for Hamas, a proscribed organisation in the UK, Jewish News has asked him if he does or does not support the group. To date there has been no response.