Photograph: X
In mid-September 2024, heavily pregnant Marieha Hussain was acquitted on a racially aggravated public order offence for her placard at a pro-Palestine protest on 11th November 2023, which depicted then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Home Secretary Suella Braverman as coconuts. The investigating team for the prosecution were not able to find expert opinions to support their argument that the term 'coconut' was indeed a racial slur, and instead, were met with “quite a lengthy response” by Kehinde Andrews stating that the term could not constitute racism[1]. Despite this, the case still went to trial, raising questions on issues surrounding the policing of black/brown political thought, the convolution of the application of anti-discrimination law to silence free speech, and the lack of protections for pregnant women in legal settings.
"The origins of these terms grew from the trauma inflicted by white supremacy – the way in which racism divides us to promote competition, disharmony and greed."
“Coconut” is an intra-community term used by black and brown people to critique someone who is ‘brown on the outside, white on the inside’. The term is similar to the phrase “Uncle Tom” which refers to a black/brown person who identifies more with the needs and concerns of the elite as opposed to that of the masses, betraying those of their own race to suffice themselves. Thus, “coconuts” and “Uncle Toms” “identif(y) with the master more than the master identifies with himself” internalising dominant white culture to find acceptance with their oppressors[2]. This is not a new phenomenon. Frantz Fanon wrote about the psychological impact of colonialism on the West Indian man who yearns to assimilate through speaking French/English and measure himself against the standards of white society to find value in his existence and prove his humanity. In doing so, he loses his authentic self and alienates himself from his community[3].
"...brown politicians prop up white supremacy to allow their white colleagues to evade racial critique, and silence other voices."
The origins of these terms grew from the trauma inflicted by white supremacy – the way in which racism divides us to promote competition, disharmony and greed. These terms encapsulate the proximity to whiteness some People of Colour (PoC) capitalise on to shut the door behind them and reap the benefits for themselves. Priti Patel’s support for anti-immigration policies which, had it been implemented at the time of her parents’ immigration would have barred them from the country, are a prime example of this. Moreover, Suella Braverman’s denigration of the Pro-Palestine marches as ‘hate marches’ that ‘valorise terrorism’[4] and her support for the Rwanda scheme further exemplify the way in which brown politicians prop up white supremacy to allow their white colleagues to evade racial critique, and silence other voices.
"...terms critiquing white supremacy should not be equated with terms that reinforce white supremacy..."
Race is not merely the colour of one’s skin, but also the value, history and identity ascribed to it by society which is something that the prosecutors in this case neglected to consider. Acknowledging the way one leverages their own race is thus not racism but a valid critique – context matters. This is particularly pertinent as we take language into account; these words are formed by communities for communities. “It’s really not their term, it’s not their language,” Marieha said. She continues to outline the way in which the prosecution arbitrarily assigned meaning to the term:
They didn’t use it, know it, hear it, understand it growing up and so as an adult they actually don’t have any understanding of what this word really means and they’ve taken it [and] kind of hijacked it and decided what they think it means and are prosecuting it.[5]
Intra-community language is an important factor in this case. Words are manifestations of expressions of identity and terms like ‘coconut’ and ‘Uncle Tom’ are merely critiques borne from the experiences of minorities which, one can imagine, the British court system would not understand. However, it is these understandings that are crucial in contextualising this case. Thus, terms critiquing white supremacy should not be equated with terms that reinforce white supremacy - contextuality matters.
"...he hurled racial abuse at me, shouting “annihilate them”, “obliterate them”, “scumbags”, “kill them all”."
On the same day Marieha attended the march with the placard, I also attended and was attacked on my way home, a member of the EDL screwed up my sign as he walked past me on the train. He then proceeded to exit at my stop and, as I waited by the barrier for him to pass to avoid an altercation on my way home, he hurled racial abuse at me, shouting “annihilate them”, “obliterate them”, “scumbags”, “kill them all”. I felt like he was going to charge at me but was deterred by the group of people who had to form a barricade around me to prevent him from trying. Luckily, I had filmed the altercation and posted it online, my story was in the Daily Mail and British Transport Police will be trying him in December[6]. One thing I cannot fathom, however, is that he was charged with a racially aggravated public order offence – the same as Marieha Hussain was. This epitomises the baseless claims of the prosecution for the Coconut Trial and the way in which the application of laws devoid of their original context can become convoluted to empower oppressors rather than restrain them.
"She was 9 months pregnant when her trial took place which calls into question the lack of provisions for pregnant women facing charges."
Not only did Marieha lose her job as a teacher over this, but her family were also harassed by the far right leading to their relocation for safety; there was a vitriolic smear campaign led by the right-wing media who were camped outside of her house, and this all took place in the duration of her pregnancy[7]. She was 9 months pregnant when her trial took place which calls into question the lack of provisions for pregnant women facing charges. The National Institute for Child Health and Human Development in the US has stated:
“Too much stress can cause you to have trouble sleeping, headaches, loss of appetite, or a tendency to overeat—all of which can be harmful to you and your developing baby.
High levels of stress can also cause high blood pressure, which increases your chance of having preterm labor or a low-birth-weight infant.”[8]
Regardless of whether the defendant had committed a crime or not, it is a cruel punishment to force pregnant women to appear in court so close to their due date, especially during a high-profile case such as this. While everyone is equal before the law, such equality should not be blind to our differences or it will perpetuate the exact oppression that our legal system apparently seeks to protect us against. Provisions must be made to incorporate intersectionality and embrace meaningful equality.
"As the law is crafted out of existing societal problems, the way in which it is applied should reflect the political reality and social context from which it occurred."
Ajele and McGill advocate for a “substantive model of equality” to be integrated into the Canadian legal system[9]. While the magnitude of this task cannot be understated, they argue:
Structural intersectionality can deepen our understanding of social identities, recasting them not as immutable descriptors of the inherent characteristics of individual people, but as the results of interlocking systems of power. Structural intersectionality thus moves intersectional arguments away from a focus on abstract identity categories for their own sake and toward analyses that focus on the underlying systems and relationships of power that create those categories and make them vectors for oppression and discrimination. The shift to structural intersectionality has clearest implications for the conceptualization of the grounds of discrimination that are central to antidiscrimination law.[10]
As the law is crafted out of existing societal problems, the way in which it is applied should reflect the political reality and social context from which it occurred. The Race Relations Act 1965 was passed in response to the racism faced by commonwealth immigrants. The Act therefore recognised a blatant problem and sought to protect minorities against racial discrimination. Thus, for as long as the power dynamics inherent in society, and the history of race relations which shape it, continue, context must be considered before invoking anti-discrimination law. This is substantive equality. As Sherene Razack notes:
Without history and social context, each encounter between unequal groups becomes a fresh one, where the participants start from zero, as one human being to another, each innocent of the subordination of others ... Without an understanding of how responses to subordinate groups are socially organized to sustain existing power arrangements, we cannot hope either to communicate across social hierarchies or to work to eliminate them.[11]
It therefore does not make sense to apply laws based on a 'snapshot' political reality against a blank canvas, without context in the way the prosecution attempted to with Marieha Hussain’s case. While this is by no means a comprehensive outline on how to apply a substantive equality/intersectional approach to anti-discrimination law and the legal system in general, a multifaceted perspective reflective of the experiences of disadvantaged communities must be integrated into our legal framework in order to effectively address societal inequality. Without this vital contextualisation, we run the risk of further policing minorities through laws which were intended to protect them, potentially further perpetuating a nonsensical cycle of ‘Coconut Trials’.
NOTES
[1] BBC (2024). “How woman with coconut placard was tracked down, taken to court - and acquitted”. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgwew5v4qyo
[2] Malcolm X (1963). “Malcolm tells the parable of "house Negro””. King Solomon Baptist Church, Detroit.
[3] Frantz Fanon (1952). “Black Skin, White Masks”.
[4] The Telegraph (2023). “Braverman says pro-Palestinian marches ‘can’t go on’ as tougher protest laws considered”.
[5] Marieha Hussain in The Guardian (2024). “Pro-Palestinian protester acquitted over ‘coconut’ placard has ‘no regrets’”. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/18/pro-palestinian-protester-acquitted-over-coconut-placard-has-no-regrets#:~:text=“They%20didn't%20use%20it,means%20and%20are%20prosecuting%20it.
[6] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12753629/amp/Police-hunt-man-launched-racist-tirade-pro-Palestinian-protester-way-home-London-demo.html
[7] Geo News (2024). “Marieha Hussain says 'coconut' trial highlights UK's institutional racism reality”. https://www.geo.tv/latest/565254-marieha-hussain-says-coconut-trial-highlights-uks-institutional-racism-reality
[8] National Institute for Child Health and Human Development. “Will stress during pregnancy affect my baby?”. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/preconceptioncare/conditioninfo/stress#:~:text=Too%20much%20stress%20can%20cause,low%2Dbirth%2Dweight%20infant.
[9] Grace Ajele and Jena McGill (2020). “Intersectionality in Law and Legal Contexts”. Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF).
[10] Ibid, p.50.
[11] Sherene Razack (1998). Looking White People in the Eye. University of Toronto Press. Quoted from Ajele and McGill (2020), p. 52.
Bibliography
Ajele, G. and McGill, J. (2020) INTERSECTIONALITY IN LAW AND LEGAL CONTEXTS. Available at: https://www.leaf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Full-Report-Intersectionality-in-Law-and-Legal-Contexts.pdf
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2023). Will stress during pregnancy affect my baby? Available at: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/preconceptioncare/conditioninfo/stress
Fanon, F. (1952). “Black Skin, White Masks”.
Hussain, M. (2024) in The Guardian. Pro-Palestinian protester acquitted over ‘coconut’ placard has ‘no regrets’. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/18/pro-palestinian-protester-acquitted-over-coconut-placard-has-no-regrets#:~:text=“They%20didn't%20use%20it,means%20and%20are%20prosecuting%20it.
Razack , S. (1998) Looking White People in the Eye, University of Toronto Press.
Shah, M.A. (2024) Marieha Hussain says ‘coconut’ trial highlights UK’s institutional racism reality, Geo News. Available at: https://www.geo.tv/latest/565254-marieha-hussain-says-coconut-trial-highlights-uks-institutional-racism-reality
X, M. (1963). “Malcolm tells the parable of "house Negro””. King Solomon Baptist Church, Detroit.
Comentarios