Paul Richards in the JC says:
So it is pretty clear — a civil servant published a political attack on the government he serves, in what seems to be direct contravention of the Civil Service code which forbids “speaking in public on matters of national political controversy; expressing views on such matters in letters to the press, or in books, articles or leaflets”. All civil servants, regardless of rank, are made aware of this code.
I am not going to blame Azad Ali. He thinks his employers helped to build “the terrorist slaughter machine of the Zionist state of Israel”.
So I would guess that he’s unlikely to be a great respecter of Britain’s quaint traditions when it comes to civil service neutrality. And I suppose you can’t blame him for pursuing his political goals, if that is what he believes.
But what about the Permanent Secretary at the Treasury, and the Cabinet Secretary, who is head of the Civil Service?
If they are remotely aware of this case, then what on earth are they thinking in allowing such an outspoken political activist to return to a job in the civil service? Have they any idea how damaging it is to its credibility if it appears that all civil servants must be politically neutral, except for the ones who raise funds for Hamas and remove Israel from the map?
If the mandarins knew, and turned a blind eye for fearing of causing “offence”, it is further proof that there are sections of the British establishment that simply fail to comprehend the true nature and intent of some of the organisations of political Islam.