Fightback's Executive Committee politely asks the branches to clear itself of all wrong-doing

A "model resolution" from Fightback leadership

This is a follow up to the ongoing fall-out from IMT Fightback leadership’s mishandling of abuse and subsequent cover up. Jamie and I have written about it previously:

Why I Left Fightback

IMT Fightback doubles down on victim-blaming

The latest update is that, on July 5th, the Executive Committee of Fightback circulated a “model resolution” to all local branches, for them to discuss and vote on (read: rubber-stamp). Despite coming from the EC, the text of the resolution uses third-person point-of-view, to sell the literary conceit of being organically drafted by the branches themselves as a reflection of their true feelings.

I wish I was joking. Well, read for yourself:

Resolution on the letter of an ex-comrade

1. This branch considers the letter of ex-comrade Jamie a political attack with the aim of liquidating our organization.

2. This branch believes that the actions taken by the EC throughout the process related to the three incidents mentioned in ex-member Jamie’s letter were rational and justified given the information available to them at each stage.

3. This branch reiterates its support for the organization’s zero-tolerance policy towards sexual misconduct and all forms of abuse and harassment. Investigations into sexual misconduct and abuse should be dealt with compassionately and appropriate action taken if guilt is established. Due process is a necessary principle in all disciplinary cases.

4. This branch condemns the creation of secret factions, the withholding of dues for political reasons, and the leaking of internal documents as methods entirely alien to the principles of democratic centralism and of Bolshevism. Disagreements should always be expressed through the democratic channels of our organization. This branch also rejects the call for an emergency congress.

5. This branch commits to continue building the IMT in the face of this attack and those that the organization will inevitably face in the future.

If someone talking about their own experience of being the subject of abuse and cover-up, constitutes a "political attack with the aim of liquidating our organization", what does it say about the organization and the core values that it stands for?

I should add that the responsibility for the “leaking of internal documents” lies entirely with me, since I have been the only one doing this, and not any of the rank-and-file oppositionists within the IMT still bravely fighting this. They have remarkably held very firm on external message discipline (for reasons that I completely understand, even if I don’t agree with). One would be hard pressed to see that level of orderly outward-facing unanimity in any other leftist organization that’s recently been rocked with scandals of a similar nature.