Letter to Sarah Sackman KC – As Solicitor-General You Gave Permission for My Prosecution for ‘Terrorism’ To Proceed Despite You Having Previously Attacked Me in the Jewish News & Sought My Expulsion from the Labour Party

This is a Clear Abuse of Process – I Look Forward to Your Resignation

The Paragraph Above is Part of the Jewish News article in which Sackman attacks me by name as a 'problematic' antisemite - Mike Katz was also Vice Chair then b4 becoming Chair - Katz is a member of the 'left' Zionist Yachad group

1.  It is said that there’s no honour among thieves but this seems equally true for politicians, especially those close to Keir Starmer.

2.  I am charged with ‘inviting support’ for a proscribed organisation, Hamas, under s.12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 despite the fact that I don’t support Hamas politically. What I do support is the right of the Palestinians, as an occupied people, to take up arms against the IDF, Israel’s equivalent of the Schutzstaffel (SS).

3.  I have written plenty of blogs criticising Hamas (e.g. here, here and here), which is not surprising since I am a Jewish atheist and socialist. Hamas is a conservative Islamist group. However they are a resistance group and the Palestinians have a right to resist genocide and ethnic cleansing.

4.  There isn’t a crime that the IDF is not guilty of, from starving people to death to sniping and burning alive children, bombing hospitals and torturing doctors and indeed all prisoners. It is not even as though Israel hides its genocidal intent. That is why the International Court of Justice said that it was ‘plausible’ that a genocide was being perpetrated.

5.  If Israel’s leading Ministers, including Prime Minister Netanyahu, declared their intent to commit genocide in abundance and the evidence of destruction is obvious, then the refusal of Starmer and Lammy to call it a genocide is a political not legal decision.

6.  When the attack on Gaza began, Yoav Gallant, the then Defence Minister, declared on 9 October, that 

7. I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly.

8.  On 10 October, the head of the Israeli Army’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, Maj. Gen. Ghassan Alian, addressed a message directly to Gaza residents: 

Human animals must be treated as such. There will be no electricity and no water, there will only be destruction. You wanted hell, you will get hell.

9.  Benjamin Netanyahu invoked the biblical story of Amalek (“Remember what Amalek did to you”). In the Bible God commanded the total extermination of the Amalek tribe down to the last child. He also vowed to turn the “wicked city” Gaza into “rubble”.

10.  Isaac Herzog, the President stated regarding the October 7 attacks, that “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved”.

11.  Bezalel Smotrich, the Finance Minister stated in August 2024 that it would be “justified and moral” to “starve 2 million people” and in May 2025, he called for the “total annihilation” of areas like Rafah.

12.  Itamar Ben-Gvir, the National Security Minister repeatedly called for the "voluntary migration" i.e. expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza and the blocking of all humanitarian aid. Amihai Eliyahu, the Heritage Minister suggested dropping an atomic bomb on Gaza.

13.  Yoav Kisch, the Education Minister, stated, “Those are animals, they have no right to exist... they need to be exterminated". Nissim Vaturi, Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, called to “burn Gaza now” (Times of Israel 17.11.23) and stated there are “no innocent people there”.

14.  Only Zionist holocaust deniers pretend that there is no genocide in Gaza. The UK’s International Criminal Court Act 2001 makes aiding genocide an offence but the Police refuse to use it. Because the Attorney General’s permission is required for a prosecution it is unlikely that we will see Starmer at the Old Bailey. Attorney General Hermer is a member of the government so it’s unlikely that he will be prosecuting himself!

15.  To be fair to Hermer, when a decision on my prosecution landed on his desk he passed it on to Sarah Sackman, the Solicitor-General, probably because Hermer is on record as having confessed to having ‘dear family members currently serving in the IDF’.

16.  Sarah Sackman had no such qualms despite the Jewish Labour Movement, of which she was Vice-Chair, targeting me for expulsion from the Labour Party. Sackperson even attacked me in print in the Jewish News.

17.  I therefore decided to do what anyone would in the circumstances and write Sarah a personal letter. I trust that those who read this will keep it confidential as I don’t want to cause Sackperson any embarrassment!

Tony Greenstein

See

Attorney General assigns prosecution of Jewish Anti-Zionist activist to pro-Israel minister

Sarah Sackman KC MP,

Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services,

Ministry of Justice,

102 Petty France,

London, SW1H 9AJ

ministerialcorrespondence@justice.gov.uk , sarah.sackman.mp@parliament.uk,

Dear Ms Sackman,

18.  As you are no doubt aware, I am being prosecuted on a trumped up charge of ‘inviting support for a proscribed organisation’ under s.12 of the Terrorism Act 2000. As you will also be aware my barrister Jeremy McNulty has put in an application for a stay in the proceedings because of an Abuse of Process by your good self.

19.  The abuse being the fact that you gave consent to my Prosecution on 22 November 2024. It is a matter of trite law that the Attorney General is required to consent to any prosecution under s.117(2a) where it appears that the alleged offence has been committed ‘for a purpose wholly or partly connected with the affairs of a country other than the United Kingdom.’

20.  That country is of course Israel which has been found to have committed genocide in Gaza by every major human rights organisation in the world, including Israel’s B’tselem. It is a genocide to which this ‘Labour’ government, including yourself, is a party to.

21.  The Attorney General, the Rt. Hon Lord Hermer KC did not feel able to give permission to the CPS to prosecute and therefore handed it to you. Perhaps it was because of his confession to the Jewish Chronicle that ‘I actively support a range of Jewish and Israeli organisations’ and that ‘I have dear family members currently serving in the IDF.’

22.  But whereas Lord Hermer can be said to have acted honourably no such thing can be said of you. Your whole political life has revolved around your support for the State of Israel and Zionism. At a hustings in May 2015, the Times of Israel described how  ‘the issue of Israel is something that is deeply personal and emotional' for you. In other words completely irrational.

23.  In the Jewish News of 23 December 2024 you were reported as saying that “The events of October 7 are the worst in my lifetime as a Jew.’ Given the close connection between my prosecution and those events it is clear that what motivated you was not British national interests.

24.  The details of your apparent bias are listed in paragraphs 11-15 of counsel for the defence’s application of 16^th December 2025.

25.  Not only was your decision apparently biased but it is now clear that you were also motivated by actual bias and malice. The details are contained in my blog of 24 December 2025. I will enumerate them below.

26.  In the Leaked Labour Report of March 2020 on the work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit we learn on p.333 of an email of 17 October 2017 from Laura Murray of Corbyn’s office to John Stolliday, which reads:

27.  could we have an update on the current status of the cases of Ken Livingstone, Jacqui [sic] Walker, Tony Greenstein and Marc Wadsworth and a clear timetable of when they will all be heard by the NCC and when a final decision will be made on them. The Jewish Labour Movement expressed frustration that these cases have taken such a long time to be heard, as they feel that it is difficult to begin the process of rebuilding trust between the Labour Party and the Jewish community whilst we have still not dealt with these cases.

28.  The JLM, of which you were Vice-Chair, was pushing strongly for the expulsion of all those named above. It is inconceivable that you weren’t involved in this campaign, targeting me and others. That alone should have convinced you to withdraw from having anything to do with my prosecution. But of course you had the opposite reaction. You saw it as a golden opportunity to settle scores with someone who is one of Britain’s leading Jewish anti-Zionists. Zionism dictates that there is no group which is more hated than anti-Zionist Jews. We are, in your warped view, traitors to race and nation. ‘Kapos’ or ‘self-haters’ are some of the choice epithets people like you use. 

Daily Telegraph 2 April 2016

29.  But if there was any doubt about your actual bias then it was laid to rest in an article in the Jewish News of March 26, 2016, written by you and Mike Katz, who became Chair of the JLM after Ivor Caplin was retired, where it said, in the context of allegations of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party that:

30.  In the cases of Leaked Labour Report Laura Murray of Corbyn’s office to John Stolliday, Ken Livingstone, Jacqui [sic] Walker, Tony Greenstein and Marc Wadsworth Mike Katz, Kirby and Downing, the Labour Party took swift action against them within 24 hours of problems being reported. A senior Labour peer has been appointed to investigate the activities of the Oxford Labour Club and other problematic figures such as Tony Greenstein have been suspended. These are welcome first steps and a reflection of how seriously party officials take the issue.

Letter of Suspension from the Labour Party 18th March 2016

 

31.  What is curious about this article is not only your personal attack. The JN came out on March 26^th 2016, which means you must have written it at the latest on March 24^th. My letter of suspension was only signed by John Stolliday on March 18^th and it reached me on March 21^st.The first publicity about my suspension was when news of it was leaked to The Times and The Telegraph which both published it on April 2^nd.

32.  So the obvious question is how you knew of my suspension when no one else did? Clearly the information had been leaked to you by the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit. Now why should they do that unless you were involved in the whole process leading to my suspension? Clearly, as an officer of the JLM, you had a deep political and personal involvement in my suspension. This alone should have disqualified you from having any involvement in the decision to give the CPS permission to proceed with my prosecution.

33.  As Counsel for the Prosecution, Kate Temple-Mabe conceded in paragraph 41 of her Response to the Application of my barrister, Jeremy McNulty, on 18^th December 2025:

34.  Clearly this is evidence of actual bias and malicious intent. In essence you were seeking to deal with someone who the JLM has long seen as one of its main targets. As I have already pointed out, there is no more hated target than a Jewish anti-Zionist for the simple reason that we give the lie to the assertion that being Jewish and Zionist is one and the same.

35.  In the circumstance the most honourable thing for you to do is to resign as a Minister. However, since honour is not a quality that Zionists are best known for I suspect you will do your best to cling on to your ministerial car and chauffeur.

36.  I also have a second, unrelated question for you. As Vice-Chair of the JLM how much did you know of the activities of Ivor Caplin who served alongside you as Chair of the JLM from 2018-9.

Some great news today: @GregHadfield acquitted in vexatious “harassment” case brought against him by Zionist fanatics in Brighton.

Meanwhile alleged pedophile Ivor Caplin still hasn’t been charged… https://t.co/ONn2G6kDqO

— Asa Winstanley (@AsaWinstanley) November 17, 2025

 Peter Kyle and his ex-boyfriend Ivor Caplin

37.  As you will be aware Caplin was arrested in January of this year after a sting by anti-paedophile campaigners. He still has not been charged by the CPS and it is clear that he still has powerful friends in the Starmer government including his ex-boyfriend, Business Secretary, Peter Kyle. Instead a local journalist, Greg Hadfield, was arrested by the Police and charged for sending Fiona Sharpe, of Sussex Friends of Israel, a copy of one of Caplin’s posts and asking a few questions about what she knew.

A tender moment in the lives of two genocidaires

38.  Perhaps you might care to explain why, after nearly a year, in what is clearly an open and shut case, the CPS have not charged Caplin and Sussex Police decided to prosecute instead a local journalist Greg Hadfield who had retweeted one of Caplin’s pornographic posts to highlight the cover up of his activities. Given your position in the Justice Department you should be in a good position to know about why the delay.

39.  Caplin’s behaviour was known about for some considerable time. He was protected by the Jewish Labour Movement and people like Fiona Sharpe.

40.  Indeed the prosecution of Greg Hadfield, a former Sunday Times journalist living in Brighton and a victim of the ‘anti-Semitism’ smear campaign, was at the behest of Fiona Sharpe, an activist in Labour Against Anti-Semitism and someone who you are acquainted with. See Hadfield’s article Revealed: Zionism, abuse, pornography, and worse

41.  Sussex Police are inherently corrupt and heavily involved in protecting the local Zionist genocidaires. Perhaps you would like to come clean and tell us what you knew about Caplin since he has been tweeting pornographic posts for some considerable time.

42.  In June 2024 Caplin was arrested by Police for a sexual attack on a homeless man but because of his status was freed without charge and without being named.

43.  In fact it seems that Sussex Police did their best throughout, despite knowing of Caplin’s activities to protect him and Fiona Sharpe and the JLM was at the Centre of this. It would be interesting to know your views about your former Chair given your own close involvement.

44.  I look forward to your resignation.

Yours sincerely,

Tony Greenstein 

My Prosecution for ‘Terrorism’ Required the Permission of Attorney General Richard Hermer

Who Passed the Decision to his Zionist Solicitor-General, Sarah Sackman, Vice-Chair of the  Jewish Labour Movement 2015-2024 - Bias? Perish the Thought

The Labour Files – Episode 1 – The Purge I Al Jazeera Investigations

The law is quite clear in respect of prosecutions under the Terrorism Act 2000. Under s.117(2A), in the event of a prosecution that relates to ‘a purpose wholly or partly connected with the affairs of a country other than the United Kingdom’ the consent of the Attorney General Lord Richard Hermer is required. In the event that he has a conflict of interest then he can hand the decision to the Solicitor General.

The Solicitor-General was Sarah Sackman, who was an officer of the Jewish Labour Movement, an ardently Zionist group, for 9 years. We don’t know for certain why Hermer passed the decision to Sackman but it would seem that it was his confession to the Jewish Chronicle that ‘I actively support a range of Jewish and Israeli organisations’ and that ‘I have dear family members currently serving in the IDF.’

Sackman however had no such scruples as you would expect from someone who is an ardent Zionist activist. Whereas Hermer has a record of being identified with human rights issues and opposed to the occupation of the West Bank, Sackman has never spoke out once against the Occupation, still less the genocide.

Sackman has been far more involved in things to do with Israel and Zionism as Vice Chair of the Jewish Labour Movement from 2015-24. She registered her position as JLM Vice-Chair in August 2014. It is not known exactly when she resigned but it’s possible that when she approved my prosecution she was still an office holder.

It is however clear that Sackman was personally involved in the JLM targeting me in the Labour Party for suspension and then expulsion in 2016. In the Leaked Labour Report that was issued in 2019 it was reported that Laura Murray from Corbyn’s office had emailed the head of the Governance & Legal Unit, John Stolliday, informing him of the JLM’s ‘frustration’ that mine and other cases had not been heard. The JLM had been pushing hard for our expulsion. As Vice-Chair Sackman could hardly have been unaware of this. The conflict of interest is blindingly obvious.

Saying what the British State Doesn't Want to Hear is Now 'Terrorism'

Sackman is supposed to reach a decision on cases like mine on the basis of what is in Britain’s national interest. The reality, as she has readily admitted, is that her allegiance is first and foremost to the Apartheid state.

Sackman served as a law clerk in the Israeli Supreme Court. Her grandfather Solomon Seruya was an Israeli ambassador to the Philipenes (1976-8). By her own admission she visited Israel on a yearly basis.

She has a maternal aunt and three cousins who live in Jerusalem. They will all have served in the IDF and today they are likely to be reservists. My statements supporting October 7 and the right of the Palestinians to self-defence against an occupation that has gone on for over 58 years, are not likely to have endeared me to her. 

Sackman is on record as saying that “The events of October 7 are the worst in my lifetime as a Jew,” To have her making the decision as to whether I or anyone else should be prosecuted is like putting Nick Griffin in charge of race relations or Harold Shipman in charge of the Geriatric Unit of a hospital.

Jewish anti-Zionists are the bête noir of people like Sackman. The JLM, despite pretending to be a progressive Zionist organisation, has not once expressed any reservations about the genocide in Gaza. Quite the contrary. She made it clear that she was opposed to the issuing by the International Criminal Court of warrants for the arrest of Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant as war criminals. 

On May 24, 2024 she told the Jewish Chronicle that:

she had conveyed Jewish community’s concern over the decision by the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor Karim Khan to seek arrest warrants for Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and defence minister Yoav Gallant to shadow foreign secretary David Lammy, who said last week he supported ICC process.

Sackman is fully aware that Israel never prosecutes torturers or abusers - instead it prosecuted the Military Advocate General who leaked the video above

Sackman told the JC: 

I trust the Israeli people to hold their leaders to account, and I think they will in due course. I think the request to issue warrants in the middle of a war was unjustified.

Sackman not only demonstrated her Zionist fanaticism but her ability to lie without flinching. Israel has never held members of the IDF to account because of their war crimes or murder of Palestinians. The idea that under the current far-right Israeli government that could happen is testimony to the fact that there is no difference between Labour and Likud Zionism.

When Israeli soldiers were captured on video anally raping a Palestinian prisoner, who was left paralysed, not only did a mob attack the torture camp where they were held, Sdei Teiman, but 65% of Israelis said that the rapists shouldn’t face criminal prosecution.

Instead the Military Advocate General who leaked the video of the rape to the media, Major General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, was arrested. In Israel the whistle blowers are the ones who get punished not the war criminals but this shows more clearly than anything that Sackman is a genocide apologist.

On their website the JLM lists amongst their aims:

To maintain and promote Labour or Socialist Zionism as the movement for self-determination of the Jewish people within the state of Israel.

Amongst their ‘values’ they exist:

To promote the centrality of Israel in Jewish Life and its development on the basis of freedom, social justice and equality for all its citizens.

This is based on the World Zionist Organization’s Jerusalem Program, to which the JLM is affiliated, which states that

The foundations of Zionism are the unity of the Jewish people, its bond to its historic homeland Eretz Yisrael, and the centrality of the State of Israel and Jerusalem, its capital, in the life of the nation.

One of the cardinal axioms of Zionism is that Jews, wherever they live, are part of one nation. Sarah Sackman is signed up to this nonsense. So the idea that she can make a decision on what is in the British ‘national interest’, whatever that is, when it comes to prosecuting anti-Zionists is patently absurd.

At a hustings in May 2015, the Times of Israel described how 

Sackman was the last person to make a decision as to who to prosecute for their comments on Israel and Gaza. In whose interests was she making the decision? She should not have had any hand in any decisions as to who to prosecute.

Sackman’s comment that the issue of Israel was “something that is deeply personal and emotional,” is precisely why she should not have been anywhere near the decision.

My barrister has therefore submitted an appeal to the Court of Appeal alleging bias. In particular that Sackman’s allegiance to the Israeli state conflicts with her ability to rule on what is in Britain’s interest.

Whereas it is not in Britain’s interest to criminalise supporters of the Palestinians and opponents of genocide as ‘terrorists’ it is very much in the interests of the Israeli state to do so.

And if this was not enough then Sackman, in a joint article with Mike Katz, the former Chair of the JLM, in the Jewish News of March 26, 2016 explicitly attacked me. It beggars belief that she did not disqualify herself from taking a quasi-judicial decision. She wrote, in an article on anti-Semitism in the Labour Party that:

A senior Labour peer has been appointed to investigate the activities of the Oxford Labour Club and other problematic figures such as Tony Greenstein have been suspended. These are welcome first steps and a reflection of how seriously party officials take the issue [of anti-Semitism].

It is clear that her reference to me as ‘problematic’ was a lawyer’s way of saying that I was anti-Semitic. This is what the article, an internal Zionist debate with Jonathan Arkush, the then President of the Board of Deputies, was about.

The fact that Sackman thought it was ok to have anything to do with my prosecution for ‘terrorism’ i.e. freedom of speech on Palestine shows just how corrupt both she and our legal system is and how the fiction that the law officers are separate from the political hurly burly is just that.  A fiction.

Tony Greenstein