Full Breakdown
Court of Appeal Halts Contempt Case Against Barrister Rajiv Menon
5/13/2026, 10:24:31 PM
Appeal Decision
On 12 May 2026 the Court of Appeal dismissed contempt proceedings against defence barrister Rajiv Menon KC, referred by Woolwich Crown Court judge Mr Justice Johnson for remarks in a closing speech during the 2024 trial of six Palestine Action activists. The judges held the trial judge lacked authority to refer the matter directly to the High Court and that the High Court could not act without a referral from Attorney General Lord Hermer. The case has been returned to the trial judge.
Background & Key Figures
Six activists were charged with criminal damage after breaking into the Filton site of Elbit Systems UK, an Israeli defence firm, in January 2024. The first trial ended in acquittals. Judge Johnson barred any reference to “jury equity”. Defence barrister Rajiv Menon, known for Stephen Lawrence and Grenfell Tower inquiries, cited a 1670 Bushell’s case plaque affirming jury independence. He was represented by solicitor Jenny Wiltshire of Hickman & Rose.
Trial Outcomes
First tried in February 2024, the six activists were acquitted; a May 2026 retrial convicted four of criminal damage, two were cleared, with sentencing set for 12 June 2026. The offences involved damage to an Elbit Systems UK facility, a key supplier to the Israeli defence industry.
Official Statements & Responses
The Court of Appeal said that “the overwhelming weight of authority indicates that no such direct route exists” for a Crown Court judge to refer contempt matters to the High Court and that any referral must go through the Attorney General. The judges noted that the trial judge’s direction to the barrister had been deemed a breach of fair-trial rules.
Criticism & Opposition
Defend Our Juries warned the case “should deeply concern everyone who cares about the rule of law.” Garden Court Chambers called the proceedings “wholly novel and without historical precedent” and warned of an “extreme concern about the chilling effect on the Bar.”
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Middle East Eye reported that the four convicted activists will be sentenced under terrorism legislation, a detail not mentioned in other outlets that only refer to criminal-damage sentencing, highlighting a gap in publicly disclosed sentencing parameters.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Rajiv is delighted that the Court of Appeal has found in his favour.” — Jenny Wiltshire, Hickman & Rose
- “The overwhelming weight of authority indicates that no such direct route exists” — Lord Justice Edis, Court of Appeal
- “A spokesperson for campaign group Defend Our Juries said: “For over 350 years, the right of a jury to follow their conscience has been a cornerstone of British justice, and the last safeguard ordinary people have against the abuse of state power.” — Defend Our Juries spokesperson
- “‘We are extremely concerned about the chilling effect on the Bar of the state seeking to criminalise barristers for their representation of their clients’, Garden Court Chambers stated before the ruling.” — Garden Court Chambers
Next Steps
The trial judge may refer the contempt issue to Attorney General Lord Hermer. The four convicted activists await sentencing on 12 June 2026.
