|
Certification Officer’s decision Defend Yunus Bakhsh Campaign, c/o 46c Lawe Road, South Shields, Tyne and Wear, NE33 2EN Dear Comrade, We are writing to you so that you are fully up to date with recent developments in the case of Yunus Bakhsh. As you may know, Yunus won a ruling from the Certification Officer recently. The full text of the judgment is here, but the crucial parts are: I make the declaration sought by the Claimant that on or around 16 January 2007 UNISON breached rule C7. 4. 1 of the rules of the Union by suspending Mr Bakhsh from office. This landmark decision came on the same day that the Certification Officer also found in the case of Tony Staunton that on or around 28 February 2007 UNISON breached section 47 (1) of the 1992 Act by unreasonably excluding the Claimant from being a candidate in its National Executive Council elections in 2007. However, instead of apologising about what had happened, reinstating Yunus to the positions from which he was suspended, and taking action against those responsible, UNISON officials have reacted by reinstating Yunus - only to immediately re-suspend him on charges, many of which if they were genuine, existed long before any current investigations began. We now have the remarkable situation that UNISON officials have presided over the breaking of the law and breach of the union’s rules – and yet nothing is done! Had any branch official or left wing activist been responsible for the expense, loss of goodwill and damage to the union’s reputation resulting from these verdicts, we have no doubt they would have been hounded from their positions. In this case absolutely nothing has happened. This cannot be allowed to stand. In addition, Yunus now faces another assault from his employers, Northumbria, Tyne and Wear NHS Trust. This is the largest mental health trusts in Europe which must surely have due regard for the health of its workers as well as the wider community. Yet it is pressing ahead with a disciplinary hearing against Yunus on 2 June despite the fact he is signed off sick from work, and has been declared unfit to attend such a hearing by his own GP and by an independent Occupational Health assessment. This is a gross betrayal of Yunus’s interests, of justice, and of the rights of trade union members. We are calling for an avalanche of protest over this issue. Already many trade unionists have offered their support for Yunus over this issue. Yunus will also be at an Employment Tribunal soon against his employer. He will seek to show they have taken action against him because of his trade union activities. Yunus is forced to pay all the costs of the case himself, and we are asking for donations towards this. The recent PCS union conference saw an official collection raise £820 towards this fund. Please send your own donation using the collection sheet attached. So we are asking you to do four things: Send messages TODAY demanding Yunus’s hearing is called off to the acting chief of Northumbria, Tyne and Wear NHS Trust at [email protected] Send a message of support to Yunus at [email protected] Take a collection for Yunus and rush it to his fund. Please read the following letter, which Yunus has sent to UNISON general secretary Dave Prentis. It details very worrying allegations against Yunus which have been put forward, not substantiated, but not withdrawn. Dear Colleagues I am taking the unprecedented step of writing to you directly because I want to bring to your attention a very serious issue – and I am asking for serious action. The background is that I was suspended while on full time release for trade union duties on September 27 2006. I have remained suspended ever since. You will know I was also suspended from union office on January 16 2007 after allegations of bullying and harassment following a shadow branch meeting held in December. In August 2007 I met with Mr J Cafferty, the Rule I investigator. During the course of the interview the issue of calls made by me on a phone supplied to me by the union arose. I queried why a trawl of my calls had been made. I was told this was because some of the complainants following the shadow branch meeting had also complained of receiving anonymous threatening phone calls at all times of the day. Naturally I was outraged that if such calls had occurred that I would be in any way implicated. I was told these calls were made between December 2006 and February 2007. Mr Cafferty confirmed that there were no calls made by me to any of the complainants (The phone supplied by the union had in any case been disconnected in mid January 2007). I believed this would be the end of the matter and the end of these allegations. I took a case to the Certification Officer in April 2008. As part of that case I was given access to the two ‘Interim reports’ sent to the NEC by Mr Cafferty dated February 28 2007 and June 5 2007. It is the information contained in these reports which compel me to write to you In the report of February 28th 2007 it is stated: “The scope of the Rule I investigation was to investigate the allegations of bullying and harassment. However, following on from the initial allegations of bullying and harassment, several of the complainants reported to the Northern Region that they were being subjected to a campaign of intimidation, in the form of anonymous phone calls at various times throughout the day and night and break-ins and window breakages to their homes. It was agreed by the NEC that these complaints would also be within the scope of the Rule I investigation.” In the Report of June 5 it states these complaints were received “before the Rule I investigation formally began”. These are very serious criminal allegations, and I have good reason to be concerned about such matters. Ten years ago, after I received death threats from the Nazi terror group Combat 18. Bricks were thrown through my living room windows while I, my partner, and my two-year old girl were watching TV. It was a terrifying experience and the first thing I did was call the police. A patrol car was stationed outside and a panic alarm was installed. Three years ago, after I had appeared on the Redwatch site, my present house was daubed with Nazi and racist graffiti. Again I called the police who installed security devices in my home Had I known or suspected who did it I would have been obliged to tell the police. It is inconceivable that had several people been subjected to a prolonged period of violent intimidation they would not have called the police. Given the extremely serious nature of these allegations and the fact that had belatedly discovered I was under investigation I took immediate legal advice At the Certification Officers Hearing, Mr Nelson on behalf of UNISON said panic alarms had been installed in some of the homes, though he failed to say if and when the police had been informed or involved. My Solicitor has written to the general secretary seeking an explanation. Also, on my solicitor’s advice, I have spoken to Northumbria Police. They have confirmed that if incidents of break-ins and window breakages did take place there should have been proper investigation. They also confirmed that at no time was my name given as a suspect. If panic alarms had been fitted that would have warranted a serious investigation and again if my name had been given as a suspect I would have been seen by them. I have been advised by the police to have my solicitor write to them directly about this matter As the highest elected body in the union you have a responsibility to uphold the interests and the integrity of our union. I ask: If these allegations were included in documents concerning me (with the implication that they might in some way be connected to my case) why was I never made aware of them? What attempts were made to establish these alleged events happened? When were the police informed –if they were informed? If the police were informed, why was my name not given as a possible suspect if the union believed I might be involved? If the NEC knew of these incidents, as it states in the report of Feb 28, and agreed they should ‘fall within the scope of the Rule I investigation’ why were the police not informed? By whose authority can the NEC decide to investigate criminal matters without involving the police? Who installed the panic alarms and again why, if such serious measures had to be taken, was my name not given to the police as a suspect? If the union accepts that I was not in any way involved or suspected of involvement, why have these matters not been expunged from all documents concerning me? I can only conclude: 1. If these events occurred, the complainants either did not report an alleged two month long campaign of intimidation including break-ins and window breakages to their homes to the police or if they did they willfully withheld information from the police. They seem to have told the union I may have been responsible but did not tell the police 2. The NEC decided to conduct its own investigation into these matters, but did not tell the police about them. Let me restate that I have been falsely and maliciously accused of involvement in events which, if they happened, had nothing to do with me. Yet they have been used to secure my initial suspension from office. Such claims are defamatory and have had a very detrimental impact on me. I believe these claims have come from essentially the same small group of people who have constructed the “anonymous letter” that my management used to suspend me. This is the same group of people who I have complained about as having made statements (some anonymised) to management which I perceive as racist in that they stereotype me as a violent and aggressive black man. I made this complaint to both the Northern Region Secretary and the Rule I investigator I have been a union activist all my working life. I have proudly served this union as steward, branch secretary, NEC and SGE member. I have been victimised before and have suffered racist attacks and violence. But I will not allow myself to be treated in this way by my own union I will not be smeared by what I believe to be baseless accusations. I therefore am calling on the general secretary and the NEC to instigate an immediate investigation into these matters. Should you fail to do so I will do everything in my power including legal action to ensure I am freed of this appalling slur on my character. Thank you for your attention, and please give Yunus your full support. Defend Yunus Bakhsh Campaign, c/o 46c Lawe Road, South Shields, Tyne and Wear, NE33 2EN |