Employment tribunal accused of conflict of interest in racism row

Colleagues at Acas dubbed Sean Corby racist – it now emerges one was a close associate of a member of the panel which ruled on his case

An employment tribunal stands accused of a conflict of interest after a racism row that has split the conciliation service Acas.
Mohammed Taj was one of two lay members of the tribunal which ruled that Acas (the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, set up to provide impartial advice on workplace relations) had not discriminated against Sean Corby, its former employee.
It has now emerged that Mr Taj is a close political associate of one of the Acas staff whose initial complaints of racism against Mr Corby eventually led him to appeal to the tribunal. Mr Corby believes this was a conflict of interest.
Mr Corby, a former senior conciliator at Acas, had told the tribunal he was harassed and discriminated against when his employer ordered him to remove posts on the contentious subject of critical race theory (CRT) that he had published on its internal bulletin.
Zita Holbourne and a number of her colleagues had accused Mr Corby of racism after he posted on the Acas intranet outlining his opposition to CRT.
Mr Corby, who has a black Jamaican wife and mixed heritage children, had written that he believed CRT – which argues that racism is embedded in society and entrenched in legal systems – divides victims of racism and oppression.
The civil servant said that he preferred to follow the exhortation of the Reverend Martin Luther King, the US civil rights leader, to “judge a man by the content of his character rather than the colour of his skin”.
Mr Corby approvingly quoted Howard Thurman, the civil rights leader who influenced Martin Luther King, and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, the Nigerian writer who critiqued cancel culture and said “young people [are] terrified to tweet anything”.
Acas disciplined Mr Corby and ordered him to permanently remove what he maintained were “objectively inoffensive” statements from the workplace intranet. He was subsequently dismissed from the organisation for discussing his case in the media.
Ms Holbourne and her colleagues had complained that Mr Corby’s comments demonstrated “a deep-rooted hatred towards black and minority ethnic people who challenge racism, organise in black structures and safe spaces and mobilise against racism” and promoted “racist ideas”.
They added that they would not feel “safe to be in contact with him in person” and questioned his right to be employed by Acas.
Mr Corby took the conciliation service to the tribunal, accusing Acas of discriminating against him by ordering him to remove eight of the posts from its Diversity and Inclusion Forum.
The panel, composed of Employment Judge Kirsty Ayer, Ms B R Hodgkinson and Mr Taj, ruled in September last year that Mr Corby’s opposition to CTR was a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act.
However, it concluded eight months later that Acas had not treated Mr Corby unlawfully by demanding he remove his posts because it had “a duty of care” to take action where others had taken offence.
The tribunal found that this was lawful because Mr Corby’s belief “genuinely upsets a group of employees”.
Mr Corby’s barrister later discovered that Mr Taj was a veteran trade unionist who collaborated over many years with Ms Holbourne, a former vice-president of the Public and Commercial Services Union, as well as an artist and human rights activist.
The pair – both supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement – jointly sat on the TUC’s race relations committee for several years, during which time they attended numerous political campaigns together. 
These included the launch of a charter for racial justice in the House of Commons with Diane Abbot MP in 2014. That same year Mr Taj was photographed giving a clenched-fist salute alongside Ms Holbourne at a Roots, Culture, Identity art exhibition at the TUC’s Congress House.
The following year the pair shared a platform at a Refugees Welcome Here TUC fringe meeting and they have jointly signed numerous open letters, including one in May 2020 arguing against a “premature end” to the Covid lockdown.
Mr Corby argues that Mr Taj should have recused himself as having a conflict of interest in the case, or been recused by the judge.
Mr Corby told The Telegraph: “To learn that Mohamed Taj has worked closely with Zita Holbourne, a prolific political activist, on numerous political events and campaigns relating to the very issues my case concerns is absolutely unacceptable and has given me no faith that I received a fair hearing in April.”
Mr Taj, who has been an Employment Tribunal panel member for more than 30 years, previously stood down from a tribunal case involving the Christian beliefs of an employee named Felix Ngole, because he had long supported LGBTQI+ rights in his capacity as TUC President.
It was only when Mr Corby heard about the Ngole case in late June that he discovered who Mr Taj was.
Mr Corby said his posts were drawn from his experience living in an interracial family and socialising in black communities.
He is now appealing against the tribunal’s ruling on his discrimination claims, arguing it amounts to a “heckler’s veto” effectively depriving people of the legal right to free speech.
“Given that there was no conceivable objectively offensive content to my posts, which were unmistakably anti-racist in nature, the decision to rule in Acas’s favour and therefore sanction the behaviour of Zita and her fellow complainants is in my view gravely mistaken,” said Mr Corby. 
“The implications of such a ruling are very worrying for our democratic right to freedom of speech.”
Mr Corby is also awaiting the result of an unfair dismissal claim against Acas.
Both Mr Taj and Ms Holbourne were approached for comment.
A spokesman for Ms Ayer said: “Judicial office holders cannot comment on individual cases beyond what is written in judgments.”