It is true that a leading party member was accused of rape. However, far from "convening its own court, comprised chiefly of the alleged attacker's friends, to decide whether rape had occurred", the party engaged a committee, elected by its annual conference, to deal with the issue.So funny is she, that you wish you could hear more from her.
Well, the good news is that Julie, as an SWP member, will almost certainly be given her own series on Radio 4 before the year is out.
Wouldn't crack too wise about this. The Lib Dems are also fond of pretending their internal process has all the authority of a legal system.
ReplyDeleteLook at what's happening post-Rennard allegations: except for the headline grabbing Rennard allegations, absolutely no commitment to look at *victims* of past process failures. Just to recommend ways to improve the system in future. The classic "mistakes were made" approach.
Anyone that was actually hurt will just have to console themselves that the committee which decided not to investigate properly, and the disciplinary hearing rigged to protect the people at the top, were at least comprised of democratically elected party members.
Because as the SWP proves, that approach works well. I mean, sure, the *victim* gets shafted. But the *party* stands together, proud of its democratic values. As long as it's just harassment rather than rape, then chances are that anyone hurt won't be able to get the attention of the press.
Indeed, anyone who supports the party overall won't want the attention of the press. Likewise, any young volunteer who willing shagged the much older party figure. She might feel in retrospect that she was exploited, but we can be pretty sure of what she'd be put through if she tried to tell her story, can't we?
So let's not pretend the SWP are the only party where young women are valued as sexual opportunities, or insiders cover up harassment by acting as if they are legal authorities.