Indulging on social media may not be good idea for judges. One such judge had to face enquiry by Judicial Conduct Investigation Office in United Kingdom. The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) recently issued a formal warning to Deputy Senior District Judge Tanweer Ikram CBE for misconduct. The warning, which stemmed from Judge Ikram’s “liking” of a controversial social media post.

The case began on 14 February 2024 when an article published by The Times revealed that Judge Ikram had “liked” a LinkedIn post by a barrister that included the following statement: “Free Free Palestine. To the Israeli terrorist both in the United Kingdom, the United States and of course Israel, you can run, you can bomb but you cannot hide – justice will be coming for you.” The post’s inflammatory nature quickly attracted attention, and Judge Ikram’s association with it raised concerns regarding his impartiality.

Following the article’s publication, Judge Ikram took immediate action by referring himself to the JCIO on 15 February 2024, asserting that the “like” was inadvertent. However, the issue continued to gain traction, resulting in the JCIO receiving over 60 complaints, of which 43 were referred for further investigation.

During the investigation, Judge Ikram admitted that his actions had raised valid concerns about his impartiality. He acknowledged that he had not familiarised himself with the most recent social media guidelines for the judiciary, which prohibit judges from identifying themselves as such on publicly accessible platforms. However, he stressed that he did not intend to “like” the post, describing the content as “repulsive.”

In his defense, Judge Ikram provided a technical report that he had commissioned, which supported his claim that the “like” was an accident. The report confirmed that Judge Ikram had no direct connection with the post’s author on social media and explained that a simple double-tap on an iPhone could inadvertently trigger a “like.” Additionally, Judge Ikram noted that he had taken steps to mitigate the situation, including closing his LinkedIn account, which he primarily used for his work as a Diversity and Community Relations judge.

The case was reviewed by a nominated judge, who found that Judge Ikram had breached the Social Media Guidance for the judiciary by identifying himself as a judge on LinkedIn. Although the nominated judge acknowledged that Judge Ikram’s posts mostly related to his diversity work and did not include other inappropriate content, she concluded that the inadvertent “liking” of the post had created a perception of bias.

The nominated judge noted that this perception was further amplified by a link inferred between the issue and a case involving pro-Palestinian protestors that had been heard by Judge Ikram. Despite accepting that the “like” was unintentional, the nominated judge determined that the action amounted to misconduct due to the risk of undermining public confidence in the judiciary.

After reviewing the case, the Lady Chief Justice, in agreement with the Lord Chancellor, decided that a formal warning was the appropriate sanction for Judge Ikram. They considered the significant reputational damage caused by the incident, as evidenced by the large number of complaints received, and emphasized the seriousness of social media misuse by judges. While acknowledging Judge Ikram’s remorse and his contributions to judicial diversity, they underscored the need to maintain public confidence in judicial impartiality.

Judicial Conduct Investigation Committee Report Link