The legal case against the BNP, initiated by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, will be heard at Central London County Court today. The action centres upon the exclusionary membership policy of the party, which stipulates that joiners must be ‘indigenous Caucasian’ in obvious contravention of the 1979 Race Relations Act. But is there any real point to this court case? The best-case scenario, whereby the BNP concedes to broaden its membership criteria, might also be the worst. By agreeing to comply with the EHRC’s demands the party would compound the aura of legitimacy that it gleaned from the European elections without actually becoming more diverse - it hardly seems likely that large numbers of people from ethnic minority groups will rush out for applications forms.

Or perhaps they would. Maybe an inclusive, multicultural, dynamic organisation where nobody is shouted down and Nick Griffin appears less smug will be born. It might even be hoped that with a new influx of potential fundraisers and event organisers the BNP’s annual festival (a gloomy and problematic affair by most accounts: http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/news/Mock-grave-attractions-BNP-family-festival/article-1255696-detail/article.html could be made a bit more like the Notting Hill Carnival that went down a storm at the weekend.

UPDATE - the case has been adjourned until October 15, with Judge Paul Collins asserting that the BNP can retain its membership policy in the interim.