Police statement has shattered this case

Imagine that a well-known, active trade unionist was sacked as a result of false and malicious allegations. And add that these allegations were that he had subjected his colleagues to a campaign of criminal intimidation, including threatening phone calls, breaking into their houses and
smashing their windows. You would rightly expect this activist’s union to be up in arms. If the union further discovered that these allegations had never been put to the activist, everyone would regard it as a breach of their fundamental rights. Incredibly this is what appears to have happened to Yunus Bakhsh— only it’s his union, UNISON that has done this to him
Yunus was suspended from his positions as branch secretary and health executive member on Jan 16th 2007. He was told it was because he faced allegations of “bullying and harassment”. He was given only the vaguest outline of what he was supposed to have done and never shown the allegations.
In March 2007 UNISON extended his suspension on the basis that they said he faced additional allegations of financial irregularity and political fund rule breaches. These new allegations arose from two interim reports sent to the NEC by John Cafferty. He had been appointed by general secretary Dave Prentis to investigate the original allegations.
Yunus and his rep wrote to the union appealing against his suspension and asking what the
charges were. They were told there were no charges.
In August Yunus met with Mr Cafferty. At that meeting Mr Cafferty gave the reason why he had apparently trawled through Yunus’s phone records.

Racism
This was because some of the original complainants had said they had recieved anonymous threatening phone calls. Mr Cafferty confirmed he found no evidence to suggest Yunus had made those calls.
At the same meeting Yunus named a number of individuals who he believed had made statements
against him which he perceived to have racially stereotyped him as “a threatening aggressive black man”.
Mr Cafferty rejected his complaint and no action was taken. Eventually Yunus was left with no
choice other than to make a complaint to the Certification Officer, who oversees the conduct of trade unions.
It is the information that has come to light as a result of that complaint that will shock and anger trade unionists everywhere.
UNISON released to Yunus copies of Mr Caffertys two interim reports of February and June 2007.
In February Mr Cafferty wrote, “The scope of the Rule I investigation was to investigate
the allegations of bullying and harassment. However, following on from the intial allegations of
bullying and harassment, several of the complainants reported to the Northern Region that they
were being subject to a campaign of intimidation, in the form of anonymous phone calls at various
times throughout the day and night and break-ins and window breakages to their homes.”
It was agreed by the NEC that these compliants would also be within the scope of the Rule I investigation’ In his June report he says these complaints were received “before the Rule Investigation began”—on Jan 17th 2007.
Naturally Yunus was shocked and outraged that such sick claims had been made against him. Why had UNISON never told him he was under investigation for what are criminal allegations. Having been subject to actual attacks on his house he knew how serious such matters are.
At the Certification Officer hearing in April 2008, the two witnesses called by UNISON were Sue Highton (chair of the NEC Development and Organisation Committee) and Kevan Nelson (Head of Democratic Services).
It was they who suspended Yunus in January 2007. Neither make any mention in their witness staements read out at the hearing, to the complaints of a “campaign of intimidation”. During cross examination Mr Nelson claimed “panic alarms” had been installed in some of the complainants’ houses—though he failed to say who had installed them.
After the hearing Yunus sent a long and detailed letter to Dave Prentis and the NEC. He demanded the union withdraw the slurs and investigate what had gone on. He made it clear he might use legal action to clear his name. He received no reply, nor did his solicitor.
The union proceeded with his disciplinary.
Yunus’s solicitor then spoke to Northumbria Police and wrote to the Information Compliance Unit asking for written confirmation that no allegations of a criminal nature had been made against Yunus over the period January 2006 to June 2008
On Oct 23rd the Police replied: “I can confirm that we hold no information to suggest any allegations have been made against your client, Yunus Bakhsh”.
It is inconcievable that anyone who was being intimidated by threatening calls and having their houses broken into and their windows smashed,would not report this to the police. And if they did they would be asked by the police if they had any idea of who might be doing it. At the very least you would need a crime report to claim insurance. Also if “panic alarms” had been installed as Mr Nelson claimed ,who installed them and who were they connected to? Normally it is the police.
A very disturbing picture is beginning to emerge. Yunus was removed from elected office based on allegations made by individuals, several of whom also claimed that he had committed acts
of criminal intimidation against them. These were reported to the Northern Region where Yunus is
very well-known having twice been elected to the NEC and being an SGE member for nearly ten years. The union knew he had on at least two occasions had his house attacked by neo-Nazis. Yet it appears the union at no time asked the complainants for any proof that these acts of
intimidation had occured. It appears that the Northern Region of UNISON simply handed on the
allegations as if they were true!
Though these allegations must have been known to her, the person who interviewed him prior to his suspension in January 2007 never raised it with Yunus. Nor was he ever informed that he was under investigation for such serious alleged offences. Had he have known he would no doubt have done what he has done now—get confirmation from the police that such allegations are malicious and bogus.

Why did the union accept these claims without any evidence ?
lWhy was Yunus not told about them at the time they were made?
lWhy has the union never allowed Yunus to see these allegations?
lWhy has the union never charged him over these very serious allegations?
lWhy were the police never contacted?
lWhy did Mr Nelson claim “panic alarms” had been installed?
lWhy didn’t the union respond to the letter Yunus or his solicitor sent them?

Yunus has been left with no alternative other than to instruct his solicitor to write to the union saying he intends to take the union to court for defamation unless it apologises, retracts, and makes amends for the slur on his character. Yunus’s suspension was based on allegations which were wholly untrue.
That a trade unionist has to threaten his own union with action for defamation is an issue not just
for UNISON members but all trade unionists.
The next steps
The economic crisis will hit us all. More than ever we need strong and active unions.
We need to recruit and involve more members. How damaging will it be if one
of Britain’s biggest unions is seen to have treated one of its leading activists in this way.
Even before the police confirmation, a broad spread of regional UNISON activists and officers had put their name to a letter calling on the union to launch an enquiry into what has gone on in Yunus’s case.
Now stewards in Yunus’s branch are to write to Claire Wiliams Regional Convenor Northern Region asking what she knew about this. The terrible injustice done to Yunus has to be addressed, the whole investigation into him including his suspension is sullied by the lies told about him. The union must hold an immediate and complete enquiry— if necessary it should be refered to the TUC. Our unions must be, and must be seen to be, free from politcally motivated witchunts.

What you can do:
1) Ask your NEC member what is happening around this case.
2) Send messages of support and donations to Defend Yunus Bakhsh
Campaign c/o 46c Lawe Road, South Shields, Tyne & Wear, NE33 2EN.
Donations payable to Defend Yunus Bakhsh Campaign.
3) Email Yunus at  yunusbakhsh@yahoo.co.uk