![Confused About Signals with a Girl [closed]](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/interpersonal/Img/apple-touch-icon@2.png?v=17e836faa592)
Venomous attacks on the attorney general are undermining the rule of law | Letter
A letter from Stephen Hockman KC and Sam Townend KC, former chairs of the Bar Council, and Christina Blacklaws and I Stephanie Boyce, former presidents of the Law SocietyRecent press comment about the role of the attorney general, Richard Hermer, referred to in your article (‘Deeply unfair’: how attorney general became lightning rod for criticism of Starmer, 13 February), overlooks the principle that those representing parties in contentious litigation have the right, and indeed the duty, to put forward the case for their clients without fear or favour, so that, as and when appropriate, the court or tribunal can itself independently decide whether such a case is or is not valid.As the great British advocate and judge Norman Birkett once pointed out in a radio talk about the art of advocacy, it is essential that a lawyer’s presentation of the case for a client is not perceived as an expression of the lawyer’s personal opinions. Not only would this be incorrect as a matter of fact, but it would also undermine our system of justice, under which the case for each side is fully and objectively presented before a decision is made by an impartial and independent tribunal. Continue reading...
A letter from Stephen Hockman KC and Sam Townend KC, former chairs of the Bar Council, and Christina Blacklaws and I Stephanie Boyce, former presidents of the Law Society
Recent press comment about the role of the attorney general, Richard Hermer, referred to in your article (‘Deeply unfair’: how attorney general became lightning rod for criticism of Starmer, 13 February), overlooks the principle that those representing parties in contentious litigation have the right, and indeed the duty, to put forward the case for their clients without fear or favour, so that, as and when appropriate, the court or tribunal can itself independently decide whether such a case is or is not valid.
As the great British advocate and judge Norman Birkett once pointed out in a radio talk about the art of advocacy, it is essential that a lawyer’s presentation of the case for a client is not perceived as an expression of the lawyer’s personal opinions. Not only would this be incorrect as a matter of fact, but it would also undermine our system of justice, under which the case for each side is fully and objectively presented before a decision is made by an impartial and independent tribunal. Continue reading...
