Radhika Sainath
Role at the time: Litigation director, Palestine Legal
Statement summary
Radhika Sainath, litigation director at Palestine Legal, told Al Jazeera she found it highly unlikely that the stadium owner had a late power to veto tour openers who expressed support for Palestinian human rights. She said Sheeran would have kept the moral high ground, and likely had a strong case for damages, had he fought back instead of giving in.
“I haven’t seen the terms of his contract, but I find it highly unlikely that the stadium owner retained an eleventh-hour power to veto tour openers expressing support for Palestinian human rights. If Sheeran had fought back instead of giving in to censorship and bullying, not only would he have retained the moral high ground with his millions of fans – and been on the right side of history – he would likely have a strong case for hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages for whatever losses he incurred over Kraft’s threatened cancellation”
Why we used this label
The case looks at Macklemore's Free Palestine speech and his removal from the tour. Sainath doubts that a stadium owner could veto an opener for expressing support for Palestinian human rights and describes Sheeran's response as giving in to censorship and bullying. That sides with Macklemore against the removal, so we labeled it Defended or excused, the same label we gave other statements that back Macklemore.