In a very rare decision, the UK the Court of Appeal has granted us permission to appeal the ban on Robert Spencer and me. The Court of Appeal did not buy the scurrilous smokescreen of the Secretary of State, Theresa May. It is an unexpected early victory in what will be a long legal battle. We believe that we will triumph, and this bolsters that belief.
AFDI’s official statement:
In an important victory for the freedom of speech, Lord Justice Moses of the British Court of Appeal has granted permission for an appeal on the papers to be heard in the case of the banning of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer from the United Kingdom. Counsel for Geller and Spencer, Arfan Khan, argued in writing that the unacceptable behaviours policy applied by the Secretary of State to exclude Geller and Spencer was unlawful. Lord Justice Moses held that:
“There are important issues to be determined as to the lawfulness of a policy, which arguably permits the SOS to refuse entry to those whose presence may incite violence but who themselves, arguably, may not intend to do so.”
This demonstrates the strength of Geller’s and Spencer’s case, as the grant of permission to appeal on papers (i.e. in writing) is very rare in British law, and frequently oral hearings are listed for that purpose. In this case, the grant of permission to appeal by the Court of Appeal demonstrates the erroneous decision of the Secretary of State as well as the tribunal below and demonstrates the strength of the both Geller’s and Spencer’s appeal. It shows that the Court of Appeal was not prepared to accept the smoke screen created by the Secretary of State in order to obfuscate the truth, namely that the exclusions were lawful because of the prospects of violence if they were to appear.
The decision also runs contrary to the lies of Leftists and Islamic supremacists, who have insisted that the Geller/Spencer appeal was denied. Commented Geller: “They rewrite history and misrepresent the facts knowing that their media lapdogs will run it verbatim.”
In fact, the tribunal that initially ruled on the case failed completely to address the arguments put forward by Geller and Spencer that the policy under which they were excluded was unlawful. The tribunal misapplied the law and the facts. Geller and Spencer were not expecting justice in this initial instance, as the lower court issued a politically motivated decision in order to appease the government.
Indeed, it is not just arguable, but a complete certainty, that Geller and Spencer did not intend to incite violence, have never done so, and never will do so. Consequently they are confident that, while a long road lies ahead, that this ban will eventually be overturned and some semblance of rationality restored to the British legal system.
Have a tip we should know? Your anonymity is NEVER compromised. Email email@example.com
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.