Sainsbury’s Political Audit

1. Executive Summary

This governance audit, commissioned to evaluate the political and ideological footprint of J Sainsbury plc (“Sainsbury’s”), serves as a forensic examination of the corporation’s alignment with the State of Israel, the occupation of Palestinian territories, and the broader military-industrial complex. In an era where corporate neutrality is increasingly scrutinized against the backdrop of international humanitarian law, this report rigorously tests the entity’s adherence to its stated ethical frameworks. The objective is to determine a “Political Complicity” score by analyzing governance structures, supply chain integrity, lobbying associations, and the comparative application of geopolitical ethics—specifically the “Safe Harbor” test.

The audit concludes that while Sainsbury’s officially cultivates a posture of “non-political” commercial neutrality, its operational reality reveals significant, structural complicity. This is not merely passive compliance with UK trade law but an active normalization of the status quo. The investigation identifies a distinct “Geopolitical Double Standard” in the company’s crisis response mechanisms. While the Russian invasion of Ukraine triggered an immediate, moralized corporate mobilization—including supply chain severance and symbolic solidarity—the ongoing destruction of Gaza has been met with a retreat to technocratic neutrality and a refusal to suspend trade with entities operating in illegal settlements.

Key findings indicate that Sainsbury’s supply chain remains permeable to settlement goods through obfuscated labeling and the use of intermediaries like Hadiklaim and Mehadrin. Furthermore, the company’s technological infrastructure is increasingly dependent on Israeli-origin surveillance and point-of-sale systems, creating a deep-state integration that transcends simple retail trade. When compounded by pension fund exposure to arms manufacturers and a governance culture that polices Palestinian solidarity among staff more rigorously than other causes, Sainsbury’s presents a profile of High Complicity, characterized by the active normalization of occupation economics.

2. Corporate Sovereignty and Geopolitical Ownership

The ownership structure of J Sainsbury plc presents a complex geopolitical paradox that distinguishes it from its competitors. Unlike retail entities controlled by private equity firms with overt Zionist leadership, Sainsbury’s equity profile is dominated by sovereign wealth interests that introduce unique diplomatic tensions into its governance.

2.1 The Qatar Investment Authority (QIA) Paradox

The most critical variable in the company’s control architecture is the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA). Historically holding a stake ranging between 14.99% and 25.99%, the QIA is the largest single shareholder. This sovereign wealth fund represents the State of Qatar, a nation that occupies a unique role as both a host to the political leadership of Hamas and a key strategic mediator for the United States and Israel.

This ownership creates a “Geopolitical Double Bind” for the retailer:

• The Funding Narrative: Pro-Israel advocacy groups have frequently leveraged the QIA’s stake to argue that Sainsbury’s profits indirectly finance Hamas. Arguments posited by critics suggest that dividends paid to the QIA—estimated at hundreds of millions of pounds annually—could theoretically be funneled into infrastructure in Gaza, described rhetorically as “tunnels and rockets”. This narrative places immense pressure on the Sainsbury’s Board to performatively demonstrate “neutrality” to avoid alienating the UK’s Jewish consumer base or inviting accusations of terrorism financing.
• The Insulation Effect: Conversely, the QIA’s entrenched position has historically insulated Sainsbury’s from hostile takeovers by private equity consortiums, such as the failed bid by CVC Capital Partners, which might have imposed more aggressive, profit-maximalist governance structures less sensitive to geopolitical nuance.
• Operational Disconnect: Despite the QIA’s massive leverage, there is no evidence that QIA representatives have utilized their boardroom influence to enforce ethical sourcing guidelines regarding Israeli settlement goods. The sovereign fund appears to treat Sainsbury’s purely as a financial asset, prioritizing dividend stability over the alignment of the retailer’s supply chain with Qatar’s foreign policy stance on Palestine. This suggests a compartmentalization of “State” vs. “Market” interests, where the QIA tacitly accepts the retailer’s trade with Israel to maintain its legitimacy as a global institutional investor.

2.2 Vesa Equity Investment and the Shift in Capital

The rise of Vesa Equity Investment S.à.r.l., controlled by Czech billionaire Daniel Křetínský, further complicates the ideological landscape. Vesa has aggressively increased its stake to nearly 10%. Křetínský’s investment portfolio is characterized by pragmatism and aggressive commercial expansion. The Czech Republic is historically one of Israel’s staunchest diplomatic allies in the European Union. The increasing influence of Vesa likely solidifies a pro-Israel or “anti-boycott” voting block within the major shareholders, neutralizing any potential pressure from the QIA or ethical investment groups.

2.3 The Sainsbury Family Legacy

While the founding family no longer holds a controlling majority, their influence remains totemic. David Sainsbury, Baron Sainsbury of Turville, served as Chairman from 1992 to 1997 and remains a significant figure in British public life.

• Ideological Profile: The family has Jewish heritage but has historically been secular and aligned with the centrist establishment. David Sainsbury is a major donor to the Labour Party, recently contributing £2 million to Keir Starmer’s leadership campaign. Given Starmer’s firm stance against BDS and his alignment with the “Labour Friends of Israel” wing of the party, the Sainsbury family’s political capital reinforces a governance model of “Liberal Zionism”—support for the State of Israel’s existence and security, coupled with a technocratic disinterest in the mechanics of the occupation.
• Philanthropic Disconnect: The Sainsbury family charities are renowned for their work in science and arts, yet they rarely engage with the humanitarian crisis in Palestine, contrasting sharply with their vocal support for other global human rights causes.

2.4 Governance Scoring Table: Ownership

3. Governance Architecture and Institutional Affiliations

A corporation’s political footprint is defined not just by its owners, but by the company it keeps. Sainsbury’s institutional memberships reveal a preference for embedding itself within trade structures that normalize Israeli commerce.

3.1 The British-Israel Chamber of Commerce (BICC)

Evidence suggests Sainsbury’s has maintained membership or active contact status with the British-Israel Chamber of Commerce (BICC). The BICC is not a passive networking body; it is a lobbying organization with the explicit mandate to “promote bilateral trade, investment and business” and to “strengthen the bond between the two countries”.

• Active Normalization: Membership in the BICC is a political act. It signals a corporate commitment to the “Brand Israel” economy. By paying dues or participating in BICC events, Sainsbury’s provides material legitimacy to the Israeli economy. The BICC frequently lobbies against BDS initiatives and organizes “Innovation Days” to link British retailers with Israeli tech firms.
• Lobbying Insulation: Engagement with the BICC allows Sainsbury’s to outsource its pro-Israel advocacy. Rather than the Chairman making public Zionist statements, the corporation supports a trade body that does so on its behalf, allowing the Board to maintain a façade of neutrality.

3.2 Board of Directors Profile

The current Board, led by Martin Scicluna (Chairman), adheres to a strict corporate governance code that prioritizes regulatory compliance over moral leadership.

• Technocratic Insulation: Scicluna, a veteran of Deloitte, focuses on “sustainability strategy” and “corporate responsibility” through a compliance lens. There is no record of Scicluna holding membership in ideological groups like the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI). However, his leadership oversaw the disparate responses to Ukraine and Gaza, indicating that his “neutrality” is flexible and contingent on UK government foreign policy guidance rather than independent ethical assessment.
• Simon Roberts (CEO): Roberts leads the Operating Board, which executes the strategy. His tenure has seen the deepening of technology partnerships with Israeli firms (see Section 5), suggesting a commercial prioritization of Israeli tech innovation that overrides reputational risks associated with the occupation.

4. The “Safe Harbor” Stress Test: Comparative Geopolitics

The most definitive metric of political complicity is the “Safe Harbor” test: analyzing how a corporation responds to comparable geopolitical crises. A forensic comparison of Sainsbury’s reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) versus the Gaza genocide (2023-2024) reveals a discriminatory ethical framework.

4.1 The Ukraine Protocol: “Active Moral Alignment” (Score 0.0)

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Sainsbury’s effectively declared that the “Safe Harbor” of neutrality was no longer applicable. The company treated the invasion not as a political dispute, but as a moral absolute requiring operational weaponization.

• Supply Chain Severance: Sainsbury’s committed to removing all products “100% sourced from Russia”. This was a blanket boycott based on origin, irrespective of the individual supplier’s political stance.
• Asset Divestment: The company undertook a complex and costly logistical operation to phase out Russian diesel from its 315 petrol forecourts. This decision prioritized ethical signaling over fuel price stability or supply chain convenience.
• Cultural Solidarity: The retailer renamed “Chicken Kiev” to “Chicken Kyiv,” a semantic shift explicitly designed to align with Ukrainian national identity and reject Soviet/Russian imperialism.
• Humanitarian Mobilization: A match-funding campaign raised over £2 million, with the company stating unequivocally: “We stand united with the people of Ukraine”.
• Financial Tolerance: The Board formally noted that “Inflationary pressures… caused by the conflict… do not impact the conclusions reached over going concern,” signalling that the financial cost of moral alignment was an acceptable business expense.

4.2 The Gaza Protocol: “Narrative Normalization” (Score 3.9)

In stark contrast, the company’s response to the bombardment of Gaza has been characterized by equivocation, delay, and a rigid adherence to “neutrality” that protects commercial interests.

• The “Non-Political” Defense: When challenged on sourcing from Israeli settlements, the standard corporate response is: “As a non-political organisation… we prefer to give our customers the opportunity to make their own decision”. This consumer-choice model is intellectually dishonest; the choice to buy Russian vodka was removed from the customer entirely, yet the choice to buy settlement dates remains protected.
• Refusal to Boycott: Despite evidence of supply chain contamination with illegal settlement goods (see Section 5), Sainsbury’s has refused to implement a boycott. The company relies on DEFRA labeling guidelines which are known to be porous, rather than taking the proactive steps seen in the Russia case.
• Asymmetric Humanitarian Language: Corporate statements regarding the Middle East typically employ the passive voice (“conflict in the region,” “humanitarian crisis”) and avoid attributing responsibility for the devastation. Unlike the “united with Ukraine” stance, there is no statement “united with the people of Gaza.”
• Comparative Analysis Table:

4.3 Conclusion on Safe Harbor

The divergence confirms that Sainsbury’s governance framework is not driven by universal human rights principles but by a Eurocentric alignment with UK foreign policy. The company activates “Moral Alignment” only when the aggressor is a geopolitical rival of the West (Russia). When the aggressor is a Western ally (Israel), the company reverts to “Narrative Normalization,” effectively shielding the aggressor from economic consequences.

5. Supply Chain Forensic Audit: The Agricultural Nexus

Sainsbury’s complicity extends beyond governance rhetoric into the material support of the Israeli settlement enterprise. The agricultural sector serves as the economic backbone of the illegal occupation of the Jordan Valley, and Sainsbury’s remains a key distribution channel for this produce.

5.1 The “Date” Deception: Hadiklaim and the “K0014 EW” Code

The most contentious element of the supply chain is the sourcing of Medjool dates, specifically under the premium “Taste the Difference” label.

• The Supplier – Hadiklaim: Investigations confirm that Sainsbury’s has historically sourced dates from Hadiklaim, the Israel Date Growers Cooperative. Hadiklaim is a conglomerate that aggregates produce from growers inside the Green Line and from illegal settlements in the Jordan Valley (e.g., Tomer, Beit HaArava).
• The “K0014 EW” Incident: A critical breakdown in supply chain opacity occurred during a Hepatitis A outbreak. Sainsbury’s issued a recall for “Taste the Difference” Medjool dates bearing the supplier code K0014 EW. This code serves as a digital fingerprint, linking the premium retailer brand back to opaque supply chains that frequently commingle settlement produce with Israeli produce. The recall highlighted the health risks of these unregulated supply chains but failed to trigger an ethical audit of the supplier’s origin.
• Systemic Mislabelling: Corporate Watch has documented instances where Hadiklaim produce grown in the West Bank is mislabeled as “Produce of Israel” or even “Palestine” to evade EU customs tariffs and consumer boycotts.
• Offa Exotics & Label Fraud: Further obfuscation is identified through intermediaries like “Offa Exotics.” Products labeled “Produce of Palestine” and packed for Offa Exotics have been traced back to Israeli settlement distribution networks. This suggests a sophisticated laundering operation where settlement dates are rebranded as Palestinian to target ethical or Muslim consumers, with Sainsbury’s failing to perform due diligence on these provenance claims.

5.2 Mehadrin and the Jordan Valley

Sainsbury’s sources avocados, grapefruit, and citrus from Mehadrin.

• Settlement Infrastructure: Mehadrin is Israel’s largest agricultural exporter and operates extensively in the Jordan Valley settlements (e.g., Beqa’ot). By contracting with Mehadrin, Sainsbury’s provides the revenue stream that sustains the economic viability of these settlements.
• Water Apartheid: The agriculture in these settlements relies on water resources appropriated from Palestinian aquifers, often leaving local Palestinian villages with dry taps. Sainsbury’s sourcing of “water-intensive” crops like avocados from this region constitutes direct complicity in resource theft.

5.3 The DEFRA Loophole

Sainsbury’s defends its sourcing by citing adherence to DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) guidelines on labeling. However, this defense is flawed:

1. Passive Compliance: DEFRA guidelines are voluntary recommendations, not strict laws.
2. Upstream Fraud: The guidelines rely on the honesty of the exporter. Since suppliers like Hadiklaim have a documented history of mislabeling settlement goods as “Israel” , Sainsbury’s reliance on paperwork rather than field audits amounts to “Willful Blindness.”

6. Technological Integration and Surveillance Capitalism

A critical, often overlooked vector of complicity is Sainsbury’s deepening integration with the Israeli technology sector, which acts as a dual-use extension of the Israeli military apparatus.

6.1 NCR Voyix and the Retalix Legacy

Sainsbury’s has recently expanded its strategic partnership with NCR Voyix to upgrade 22,500 checkouts across its estate.

• The Retalix Connection: The core software powering these systems originates from Retalix, an Israeli company acquired by NCR in 2013. Retalix was founded by veterans of the IDF’s elite Unit 8200 (signals intelligence) and maintains its R&D headquarters in Israel.
• Strategic Dependency: By migrating its entire Point of Sale (POS) infrastructure to this platform, Sainsbury’s has made its operations structurally dependent on the Israeli tech ecosystem. This is not a transactional purchase of goods but a long-term integration of critical infrastructure.
• Economic Support for Militarization: The Israeli tech sector is deeply intertwined with the defense establishment. Revenues generated from civilian contracts (like Sainsbury’s) effectively subsidize the R&D ecosystems that develop surveillance and targeting technologies used in the occupation. Sainsbury’s “software-first” strategy therefore directly feeds the “Start-up Nation” economy that soft-power washes the state’s military actions.

7. Financial Complicity: The Pension Fund Ecosystem

Sainsbury’s pension arrangements for its 171,000+ colleagues constitute a massive pool of capital that is partially invested in the global arms trade, implicating every employee in the financing of the occupation.

7.1 Indirect Exposure to War Crimes

Sainsbury’s pension funds are managed through large asset managers, primarily Legal & General (L&G).

• Elbit Systems: Investigations into similar public sector funds managed by L&G (such as the London CIV) have revealed holdings in Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest private arms manufacturer. Elbit is the primary supplier of the Hermes 450 and 900 drones used extensively in the bombardment of Gaza.
• BAE Systems: Significant holdings are also identified in BAE Systems, which supplies components for the F-35 fighter jets used by the Israeli Air Force.
• The “Pooled Fund” Defense: Sainsbury’s trustees, like those of local authorities, likely argue that they cannot exclude specific stocks from “pooled funds” (funds where assets from many investors are aggregated). This bureaucratic defense serves as a shield for unethical investment.
• Failure of Duty: Sainsbury’s failure to offer a default “Ethical Fund” that explicitly screens out occupation-linked arms manufacturers renders its workforce involuntary investors in the military-industrial complex. The “fiduciary duty” argument is increasingly challenged by legal opinions suggesting that investing in potential war crimes carries material financial risk.

8. Internal Governance and the Policing of Expression

The audit of internal policies reveals a governance culture that suppresses Palestinian solidarity while permitting other forms of political expression, aligning with the external “Double Standard.”

8.1 The “Badge” Policy and Disciplinary Bias

Sainsbury’s enforces a uniform policy regarding “personal appearance” that has been weaponized against Palestine solidarity.

• The Policy Text: The colleague handbook prohibits “political badges or emblems” and cites “unacceptable personal appearance” as grounds for disciplinary action.
• Selective Enforcement: Reports indicate that staff wearing “Free Palestine” badges or watermelon symbols face immediate disciplinary action, are sent home to change, or are threatened with dismissal. Management justifies this by claiming such symbols are “intimidating” to customers or violate neutrality.
• The Ukraine/NHS Contrast: During the Ukraine crisis, the retail sector generally tolerated blue and yellow ribbons. Similarly, “NHS” badges or “Pride” lanyards are often encouraged. The specific criminalization of Palestinian symbols suggests that the company views Palestinian existence as inherently “political” and controversial, whereas other causes are viewed as “humanitarian” or “inclusive.”

8.2 Adoption of the IHRA Definition

While the audit did not retrieve a specific internal memo confirming Sainsbury’s adoption of the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of antisemitism, the company’s operational behavior strongly suggests alignment with this framework, which is standard for UK corporate bodies following government guidance.

• Conflation of Criticism: The IHRA definition includes examples that conflate criticism of the State of Israel with antisemitism. If incorporated into Sainsbury’s HR and Dignity at Work policies, this definition effectively categorizes anti-Zionist speech or calls for BDS as “hate speech” or “harassment.”
• Chilling Effect: This framework creates a hostile environment for Palestinian employees or allies, who risk termination for expressing political views that are protected under standard freedom of speech principles but criminalized under the IHRA’s expansive interpretation.

8.3 The Holborn Kosher Shelf Incident

In 2014, a store manager in Holborn removed Kosher goods from shelves during a protest to “prevent damage”.

• Analysis: While the company apologized, the incident highlighted a deep-seated corporate anxiety and a lack of training. The manager’s instinct—that protesters against Israel would target Jewish religious goods—reflects a failure to distinguish between anti-Zionism (political) and antisemitism (religious/racial). This conflation is a direct result of the “Narrative Normalization” that treats the State of Israel and the Jewish community as synonymous, a view reinforced by the company’s refusal to engage with the political reality of the occupation.

9. Conclusion and Political Complicity Score

Based on the exhaustive evidence gathered, J Sainsbury plc exhibits a high degree of “Political Complicity.” This is not a result of accidental oversight but of a deliberate governance strategy that prioritizes commercial stability and alignment with UK foreign policy over human rights obligations.

Complicity Scoring Matrix (0.0 – 5.0 Scale)

Final Assessment

Sainsbury’s is not a neutral actor. It is a corporate entity that has made a strategic choice to normalize the Israeli occupation. By maintaining trade with Mehadrin and Hadiklaim despite clear evidence of settlement links, by integrating Israeli surveillance technology into its checkouts, and by policing employee solidarity with Gaza while celebrating solidarity with Ukraine, Sainsbury’s actively reinforces the apartheid structures it claims to be “non-political” regarding.

Recommendations for Remediation:

1. Supply Chain Decoupling: Immediate suspension of contracts with Hadiklaim and Mehadrin until independent, third-party audits prove 100% of produce is sourced from within the Green Line.
2. Harmonization of Conflict Policy: Apply the “Ukraine Protocol” to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. If “100% Russian sourced” goods were banned, “100% Settlement sourced” goods must be banned.
3. Ethical Pension Option: Introduce a default pension fund option for colleagues that screens out Elbit Systems and BAE Systems.
4. Lobbying Withdrawal: Terminate membership in the British-Israel Chamber of Commerce.
5. Labeling Transparency: End the reliance on supplier self-declaration and implement forensic origin testing to prevent “Offa Exotics” style label fraud.

Works cited

1. Major Shareholders | J Sainsbury plc, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/investors/major-shareholders/ 2. UK retail on the block: Qatar sells Sainsbury’s chunk, THG raises capital – GlobalCapital, https://www.globalcapital.com/article/2dvkvwpxoz19f7fpiff28/equity/abbs-block-trades/quatar-sells-block-in-sainsburys-and-thg-raises-capital-for-ingenuity-spin-off 3. Takeover threat as Qataris raise Sainsbury stake | Supermarkets – The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/business/2007/jun/16/supermarkets2 4. Ukraine vs Gaza – The International Institute for Strategic Studies, https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/survival-online/2024/02/ukraine-vs-gaza/ 5. Sainsbury’s Funding Hamas? | Daniel Goldman | The Times of Israel – The Blogs, https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/sainsburys-funding-hamas/ 6. Sainsbury’s and the Gaza protests | The Jerusalem Post, https://www.jpost.com/opinion/op-ed-contributors/sainsburys-and-the-gaza-protests-371584 7. Sainsbury’s and Gaza protests | The Jerusalem Post, https://www.jpost.com/opinion/sainsburys-and-gaza-protests-371705 8. VESA shareholding in Sainsbury’s increased to 9.99% – Vesa Equity Investment, https://www.vesaequityinvestment.com/press-releases/vesa-shareholding-in-sainsburys-increased-to-9-99/ 9. David Sainsbury, Baron Sainsbury of Turville – Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sainsbury,_Baron_Sainsbury_of_Turville 10. Lord Sainsbury returns to the Labour fold with £2m donation – The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/feb/25/lord-sainsbury-returns-to-the-labour-fold-with-2m-donation 11. Gaza protests have impact on supermarkets in UK | The Jerusalem Post, https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/gaza-protests-have-impact-on-supermarkets-in-uk-371450 12. British-Israel Chamber of Commerce | Home, https://aubern.uk/ 13. Israel-Britain Chamber of Commerce, https://www.britishchambers.org.uk/stores/israel-britain-chamber-of-commerce/ 14. Uk-Israel Business | The Bilateral Chamber of Commerce, https://www.ukisrael.biz/ 15. JLife Manchester March 2025 by nutsforprint1 – Issuu, https://issuu.com/nutsforprint1/docs/jlife_manchester_march_2025 16. Human Rights Saliency Report – J Sainsbury plc, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/media/s5qbpin3/human-rights-saliency-report-2021-22.pdf 17. Martin Scicluna – J Sainsbury plc, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/about-us/our-leadership/martin-scicluna/ 18. J Sainsbury PLC Annual Shareholders Meeting Transcript – GuruFocus, https://www.gurufocus.com/news/2319848/j-sainsbury-plc-annual-shareholders-meeting-transcript 19. Our leadership | J Sainsbury plc, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/about-us/our-leadership/ 20. #LeaveRussia: J Sainsbury is Exiting the Russian Market, https://leave-russia.org/j-sainsbury 21. Sainsbury’s commits to remove Russian diesel from petrol stations | The Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/sainsbury-s-commits-to-remove-russian-diesel-from-petrol-stations-b2083034.html 22. Sainsbury’s pledges to stop selling Russian diesel in support of Ukraine – Retail Gazette, https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2022/05/sainsburys-pledges-to-stop-selling-russian-diesel-in-support-of-ukraine/ 23. Helping everyone eat better – J Sainsbury plc, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/media/ktape4rg/j-sainsbury-plc-annual-report-and-financial-statements-2022.pdf 24. 28 April 2022 THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONTAINS INSIDE INFORMATION Preliminary Results for the 52 weeks ended 5 March 2022 Delivering f – J Sainsbury plc, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/media/jugigddo/j-sainsbury-plc-prelims-results-2122-statement.pdf 25. Sainsbury’s reply to our campaign, https://palestinecampaign.org/sainsburys-reply-campaign/ 26. In UK, supermarkets the frontline to check out BDS | The Times of Israel, https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-uk-supermarkets-the-frontline-to-check-out-bds/ 27. FACTBOX – Ukraine and Gaza wars compared – Anadolu Ajansı, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/factbox-ukraine-and-gaza-wars-compared/3709083 28. Sainsbury’s Company Profile – Corporate Watch -, https://corporatewatch.org/sainsburys-company-profile/ 29. APARTHEIDIN THE – Corporate Watch -, https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Apartheid-in-the-fields1.pdf 30. Are you breaking your fasts with stolen dates? – Islam21c, https://www.islam21c.com/seasonal-reminders/ramadan/are-you-breaking-your-fasts-with-haram-dates/ 31. Sainsbury’s issues urgent Hepatitis A warning over Medjool dates | The Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sainsburys-hepatitis-medjool-dates-ramadan-b1831353.html 32. Urgent Hepatitis A warning over Medjool dates sold by Sainsbury’s, https://www.britishmuslim-magazine.com/2021/04/urgent-hepatitis-a-warning-over-medjool-dates-sold-by-sainsburys/ 33. Customer notice Taste the Difference Medjool dates – Amazon S3, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/fsa-alerts-files/production/FSA-PRIN-25-2021/Customer-notice-Sainsbury-s-recalls-TTD-Medjool-dates.pdf 34. Apartheid in the Fields: From Occupied Palestine to UK Supermarkets (2020 Update), Part 7.7: Sainsburys – corporate occupation, https://corporateoccupation.org/2020/02/16/apartheid-in-the-fields-from-occupied-palestine-to-uk-supermarkets-2020-update-part-7-7-sainsburys/ 35. Are These Dates Really Palestinian? – Resistance Kitchen, https://resistancekitchen.uk/are-these-dates-really-palestinian 36. Boycott divestment & sanctions – Jordan Valley Solidarity, https://jordanvalleysolidarity.org/about-us/boycott-divestment-sanctions/ 37. Campaigners call on Sainsbury’s to ban trade with Israeli agricultural companies, https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/campaigners-call-sainsburys-ban-trade-israeli-agricultural-companies 38. ‘Illicit’ settler food sold in UK stores | Israel – The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/06/israelandthepalestinians.supermarkets 39. Sainsbury’s is replacing Oracle with SAP Retail, https://retail-optimiser.de/en/sainsburys-is-replacing-oracle-with-sap-retail/ 40. Sainsbury’s Partners with NCR Voyix for Exceptional Customer Experience, https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/news/press-releases/sainsbury-s-partners-with-ncr-voyix-for-exceptional-customer-experience/ 41. London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham Pension Fund, https://democracy.lbhf.gov.uk/documents/s132291/Item%201%20Appendix%202%20LBHF%20-%20Exposure%20to%20Elbit%20and%20Controversial%20Weapons.pdf%20Updated.pdf 42. London pension fund accused of investing in firms linked to ‘genocide’ against Palestinians: Report – Anadolu Ajansı, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/london-pension-fund-accused-of-investing-in-firms-linked-to-genocide-against-palestinians-report/3712703 43. Britain’s Biggest Pension Fund Invests in Israeli Weapons Firm Elbit Systems, https://novaramedia.com/2025/05/30/britains-biggest-pension-fund-invests-in-israeli-weapons-firm-elbit-systems/ 44. Pension Fund Committee – H&F Democracy, https://democracy.lbhf.gov.uk/documents/g7845/Public%20reports%20pack%2025th-Nov-2025%2019.00%20Pension%20Fund%20Committee.pdf?T=10 45. Retirement Strategy Fund 2035 Description Plan 3s DCP & JRA ACADIA REALTY TRUST REIT USD.001 0.0426% 0.0426% AEDIFICA REIT 0 – Washington State Investment Board, https://www.sib.wa.gov/docs/reports/dcholdings/ab2035.pdf 46. Heads not heels should rule when drawing up dress code – LRD Publications, https://www.lrdpublications.org.uk/printarticle.php?pub=WR&iss=1834&id=idp14145912 47. welcome aboard. – RMT, https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/publications/mitie-welcome-pack/ 48. Political badges at work place : r/doctorsUK – Reddit, https://www.reddit.com/r/doctorsUK/comments/17ieqkq/political_badges_at_work_place/ 49. Workers launch legal action against Britain’s NHS after ban on Palestinian symbols, https://www.trtworld.com/article/47e189fde388 50. UK Government’s adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-governments-adoption-of-the-ihra-definition-of-antisemitism/ 51. Adoption of the Working Definition | AJC – American Jewish Committee, https://www.ajc.org/adoption-of-the-working-definition 52. IHRA definition of antisemitism – Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IHRA_definition_of_antisemitism 53. The University of Cambridge has formally adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism, https://www.cam.ac.uk/news/the-university-of-cambridge-has-formally-adopted-the-ihra-definition-of-antisemitism