Nicola James@NAJ562
Jeremy acted out of duty.
I’ve just listened to a clip of Jackie Walker on Crispin Flintoff’s show last night, criticising Jeremy Corbyn’s letter for saying he’d taken legal advice. Jackie said: “it worries me, the culture of people who are jumping to go to court… this is a political issue that is going on… why even raise it?”
Crispin then chipped in: “I know it wasn’t Jeremy that wrote that. It was someone who is in his team… Zarah Sultana put out an email that Jeremy’s team didn’t authorise. Now that’s annoying but to go out and say that was unauthorised is just so in your face and public… I mean just kind of say to them look that wasn’t the right thing to do - do it quietly but to kind of blow it up.”
That is not only factually wrong - Jeremy was legally required to issue both a corrective email to supporters whose data had been used unlawfully, and a public statement, once Zarah’s unauthorised email had circulated widely and she had confirmed its authenticity on social media. To suggest otherwise is insulting to Jeremy, implying he lacks agency or control over his own decisions, and smearing his team. Jackie then reinforced this by saying: “but he has control of his team and they’ve now sent out two emails like that - and we need it to stop.”
This completely misrepresents the seriousness of Jeremy’s legal responsibilities as both a company director and the named leader on the Electoral Commission application. Jeremy’s letter was legally required to:
- Protect Peace & Justice Project Ltd as the legal entity and data controller responsible for the supporter database.
- Protect Your Party’s registration with the Electoral Commission, which is still at the application stage - meaning no-one can legally sign up members or collect membership fees yet.
- Protect himself personally from liability under both data law and party law.
Had Jeremy stayed silent, regulators could have treated the unauthorised email, portal, and solicitation of membership money as official - exposing him, Peace & Justice Project, and Your Party’s application to serious sanctions.
It’s Crispin’s show, and he is free to run it as he wishes. But giving space to commentary that so badly misrepresents the facts - without appropriate challenge, correction, or balance - risks misleading supporters at a crucial moment. How does that serve the left movement at all?
👉 Jeremy had legal duties.
👉 Zarah’s actions were unlawful.
👉 Jackie and Crispin misrepresented the legal reality at the very moment we need clarity.
