Despite society being awash with controversies, there remains an alarming lack of awareness around an employee’s legal right to express political opinions.
It has been disturbing to see several cases of employees being disciplined or dismissed for publicly expressing views regarding the conflict in Gaza. And it highlights the urgent need for legal clarity, which arises only through cases judged at court.
The first step towards this clarity came in February with the employment tribunal ruling in the case of Miller v University of Bristol, which confirmed for the first time that anti-Zionist comments fall within the scope of a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010.
The panel ruled that Professor David Miller was discriminated against when he was dismissed in 2021 for his views on Zionism. The timely judgment confirmed that his anti-Zionist view was a protected belief, so his dismissal for expressing such opinions was an act of discrimination, just as dismissing him for his sex or race would be.
• Don’t sack Bristol professor accused of antisemitism, academics demand
Advertisement
The careful application of existing law in Miller has gone some way in providing clarity on one of the most pressing questions facing our courts. Courts have been increasingly willing to accommodate political beliefs, including gender-critical beliefs and ethical veganism, though the question of whether a political view qualifies for protection remains difficult to answer with certainty, given that courts inevitably lag behind social developments due to the time it takes for cases to reach them.
Crucially, however — and in no way detracting from the importance of the Miller decision and its meticulous 108-page judgment — as a case before an employment tribunal, it does not create legal precedent. As such, it is likely that we will continue to see such cases until an appeal to a higher court to confirm the law as it applies to emerging political beliefs, such as those relating to Gaza.
In the context of UK legislation, whether an employer can lawfully take disciplinary action against an employee for expressing their political views is case specific. For example, it was central to the judgment in Miller that his anti-Zionist beliefs were not antisemitic.
A senior court must precisely delineate and render binding the boundaries of discrimination law as it applies to beliefs relating to sensitive political beliefs that are gaining increasing importance in public life. Without such certainty, many employers will continue to lean on their implicit biases rather than taking a legally informed approach.
Hina Belitz is a partner at Excello Law
