Green councillors demand reinstatement of Cllr Puech keffiyeh photo
Five Green party councillors have launched a petition and published an open letter demanding that Hackney Council reinstate an official photograph of Cllr Brenda Puech wearing a keffiyeh.
As the Citizen reported, the portrait of Cllr Puech, a newly elected Green, was taken down from the council website after a complaint from UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI). The image showed her wearing the black-and-white scarf, widely regarded as a symbol of support for Palestinians, around her neck.
In a letter to the council dated 3 June, UKLFI argued that the image was “causing distress to at least one Jewish resident of the borough”. It was subsequently removed.
‘Natural justice’
On Tuesday (16 June), Cllrs Tyrone Scott, Ülgen Semerci, George Sheldon Grün, Dr Cathy Troupp and Jas Crowe published their open letter calling for the photograph to be restored “without delay”, and launched an accompanying petition.
They wrote that Cllr Puech “did not consent to its removal and was not consulted on the decision”, adding that Mayor Zoë Garbett and her cabinet “were not consulted, do not agree with the decision”, and that the mayor’s subsequent requests for reinstatement had not been accepted by council officers. “We call for the immediate reinstatement of the photograph,” they said.
The letter set out four main objections. Chief among them was that neither Cllr Puech nor any other Green party councillor had been consulted, while UKLFI’s views had been considered — a process the group said “contravenes the principle of natural justice”.
Symbol dispute
The councillors also rejected UKLFI’s characterisation of the keffiyeh as a “divisive political symbol” linked to “hostility towards Israel and, in some cases, with terrorist organisations and antisemitism”. They described the claim as “unfounded, designed to intimidate and an attack on freedom of expression” under the European Convention on Human Rights.
The group said it believed the “conflation of Jewishness with support for the actions and policies of the State of Israel is an antisemitic position”, one it would “always reject”. Reinstating the photograph, the letter concluded, was “the right thing to do – both legally and morally”.
At the time of writing the petition had 235 signatures, 196 of them verified, including councillors from the Green Party and other parties as well as residents from Hackney and beyond.
Mayor’s response
A spokesperson for Mayor Garbett said: “The mayor welcomes this open letter. As the letter notes, Mayor Zoë Garbett and her cabinet were not consulted, do not agree with the decision, and subsequent requests the mayor has made for the photograph to be reinstated have not been accepted by Hackney Council officers.
“The mayor continues to explore next steps as to how to proceed on this matter. As she works on this, she welcomes the input of community members in raising concerns alongside her.”
Earlier, a spokesperson for Hackney Labour party told the Local Democracy Reporting Service that the council’s website should remain “impartial in matters of religion and belief”.
“Care should be taken to avoid any appearance of community pressure, coercion, or preferential treatment that could lead residents to feel that one faith is being elevated above others,” they said. “An inclusive and neutral approach helps ensure that all members of the community feel equally represented and respected.”
Cross-party support
Writing in the comments beneath the Citizen’s earlier report, former Hackney Conservative councillor Isaac Leibowitz voiced support for Cllr Puech.
“As a Charedi Jew, I am worried that a councillor is being denied to have her portrait on the council’s website for wearing something of her choice,” he wrote, asking what might be refused next.
Leibowitz said it “would not be fair” for a councillor to wear something that “commands political action such as Free Palestine or boycott goods” on a publicly funded site, but felt that in Cllr Puech’s case “the choice of dress should not be denied even for a councillor whilst performing civic duties”.
Responding on Monday, Cllr Puech wrote on X: “A blank space on @HackneyCouncil website where my mugshot used to be! Fortunately I can still publicise my surgery times, though photo below is too offensive to publish. You now need refer to UKLFI media to see what I look like as they are quite happy to show the offensive image.” The post is pinned to the top of her account.
She has also reposted a comment describing UKLFI as “a threat to democracy and our way of life” and calling for the group to be proscribed.
Abhorrent response from Labour about “belief” and “religion”. The keffiyeh has nothing to do with religion and shocking that Labour in Hackney can be this ignorant or wilfully divisive.
UKFLI influence on Hackney politics must be curbed.
Whilst I appreciate many are concerned about the implications of political bias, what this really is about is the legacy of a council that has been monopolised by Labour for far too long.
During that time it has become common that effectively Council officers are running the Council, rather than carrying out the jobs they are paid to do in line with the policies that Councillors have taken decisions on.
Too many Labour Councillors have been only too happy to delegate, including direct enquiries from local residents, to officers. Which effectively makes Councillors irrelevant, and worse, when they should be able to stand back from their working relationship with officers, not take the easy route of rubber stamping whatever was put in front of them as being the “correct” response but query whether the resident is in the right.
And with a complaints system that is a joke and apparently run by work experience students, means it is no wonder council employees felt able to take a decision without double checking what the official position of the council was.
First of all a letter from a group that are political activists is not one that the Council has to take as being anything other than a political tactic. Added to which the letter claimed one Hackney resident had been upset. And whilst saying the complaints system is a joke, the officers (who appear to have confidence in the complaint system they manage) should have replied please let the resident concerned know they should use the official complaint system so that it can be dealt with within the existing work practices of Hackney Council.
In responding as they have done Council Officers could now find themselves deluged with letters from any number of political activists groups saying this is wrong in terms of our beliefs you must respond now. My neighbour is upset by ….
And even if as a precautionary step the picture was removed, obviously officers should have immediately contacted the Councillor concerned (and the Mayor) to say this has happened and what next steps should now be taken.
Instead Hackney residents are being put through bloated statements about political positions, rather than who is running Hackney Council.
Councillors are not under the same obligation as council employees to not indicate political positions. So it is not clear why the photo was not allowed. In a community as diverse as Hackney, and assuming Councillors reflect that, what if we were all to stir up tensions and unnecessary point scoring by niggling about an article of dress. Or claiming as the observer of what ever it is, that you know what the intent is of the wearer even though they have no evidence that is the intent of the wearer.
I would suggest before we get any more letters, petitions of political posturing etc., that Officers have the decency to say they acted in haste. And if there is no existing Council policy (ie one agreed by Councillors not cobbled together by Officers) there is a grown up conversation, and an attempt to reach an agreement for the future and what ever it is is then made public.
But in the meant time let this be a warning to the Greens.
If you want to make change you are going to have to change the existing work practices that Labour has allowed to creep in, that reduces Councillors functions as little more than adornments to announcements of decisions taken by officers.
And whoever allowed themselves to be used by a group of activists should use the complaints procedure.