Matt Hancock’s post about the “anti-Semitic” MP was “expression of opinion”, according to the court

A High Court judge has found that a tweet by Matt Hancock in which he labeled an MP’s “conspiracy theories” about Covid-19 vaccinations as anti-Semitic was “essentially speech”. The claim is denied by a Leicestershire politician who believes he was the subject of the post.

Mr Hancock, the former health secretary, is being sued for defamation by former North West Leicestershire MP Andrew Bridgen over the post on X, formerly Twitter, last January. The post came after Mr Bridgen shared a link to an article “regarding data on deaths and other adverse reactions linked to Covid vaccines”, saying: “As a consultant cardiologist told me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust”.

Hours later, Mr Hancock shared a video of him asking Prime Minister Rishi Sunak a question in the House of Commons, with the caption: “Disgusting and dangerous anti-Semitic, anti-vax, anti-science theories by a sitting MP this morning. they are unacceptable and have absolutely no place in our society.”

READ MORE: Warning Ivanhoe line ‘essential’ funding must be preserved after election or project faces delays

At a hearing earlier this month at the High Court in London, Ms Justice Collins Rice was asked to decide several preliminary issues in the case, including the “natural and ordinary” meaning of Mr Hancock’s post and whether it was a statement of fact or an opinion . Whether or not the post relates to Mr Bridgen is to be decided at a trial to be held at a later date.

In a High Court ruling on Monday (June 24), Mrs Justice Collins Rice said the post did not “definitely condemn the MP as an individual” and that most of the publication was an “expression of opinion”. She added: “A reader of tweets like this knows and expects them to be geared towards robust reactive political commentary and opinion.

“They would readily understand Mr Hancock citing the promulgation of material in another’s comment, what the MP said and how they said it, as being unacceptable from a public health and public discourse standards perspective, rather than outright condemning the MP as individual”.

Ms Justice Collins Rice also found that the “reasonable reader” would not have understood that the Tweet referred to Mr Bridgen. She said: “I am satisfied that they would readily have understood it to be essentially an expression of Mr Hancock’s views and, as regards the epithet ‘anti-Semitic’ along with all other epithets, to be in reference to the MP’s manner of expression, rather than the MP’s character or beliefs’.

Christopher Newman, for Mr Bridgen, previously told the court the “very, very damaging” post claimed he was “an antisemite” and had reduced his status to a “devastating extent”. However, Aidan Eardley KC, representing Mr Hancock, argued the post meant Mr Bridgen held “disseminated views which were anti-Semitic in nature” and did not look at Mr Bridgen’s “general character or belief system”.

In her judgment, Mrs Justice Collins Rice said: “I am satisfied that the reasonable ordinary reader, in the context of the whole tweet, would have no difficulty in understanding that they were being told Mr Hancock’s strong views about character or expression. , about what was said, rather than about any facts, or even opinions, about the beliefs, convictions or intentions of the unnamed MP in this regard.”

Mr Bridgen, who is standing as an independent candidate in the North West Leicestershire constituency next month, previously said he wanted to “clear his name” after the “disgusting” post. Speaking after Monday’s ruling, he said: “I am delighted that the case is going ahead and that the judge has recognized that accusing someone of uttering anti-Semitism is extremely serious and damaging. I finally look forward to Mr Hancock mounting a defence, which he has not done.”

Meanwhile, Mr Hancock, who has resigned as an MP, previously called the case “absurd” and labeled Mr Bridgen’s claims “ridiculous”. According to the PA, he is said to be “delighted” by Monday’s ruling.

Now we bring you the latest updates on WhatsApp first