Concerning lawyer jokes, hidden messages and unsung heroes

 

Most of the time they are harmless and sometimes even funny.

I remember the first time that I heard a good lawyer insult. I was newly qualified and out on the town with other members of the Liverpool Young Solicitors Group Committee. Yes, there was a distant time when I was eligible! The conversation moved on to public perception of lawyers and someone commented that he had heard someone say that solicitors were like bananas –

‘Yellow, bent and hang round in bunches.’

As a young enthusiastic new boy I was shocked! After all those years of study this was what it had come to! I have been telling that story for 40 years! Being a lawyer and being the but of lawyers jokes go hand in hand –

‘What’s the difference between a lawyer and a jellyfish? One is a spineless, poisonous blob. The other is a form of sea life.’

Most of the time they are harmless and sometimes even funny.

Jonathan Goldsmith has just written in the Law Society’s Gazette about the Prime Minister’s recent comments about Sir Keir Starmer QC –

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/commentary-and-opinion/on-being-mocked-by-the-prime-minister/5105113.article

‘Repetitions of similar mockery at the highest level in parliament for a prolonged period may have a further impact on how we are seen and trusted nationwide.’

Lawyers can become the dehumanised face of anything that the media or politicians dislike

This is where the jokes hide something more sinister. To undermine the professionalism and independence of lawyers goes beyond a joke – so to speak. Lawyers can become the dehumanised face of anything that the media or politicians dislike. So we hear about ‘ambulance chasers’ and ‘no win no fee lawyers.’ A former PM once said that the country was sick of these ‘left wing, activist, human rights lawyers.’ I have the T Shirt!

April 13^th 2021 is International Be Kind to Lawyers Day.

This is very nice but it also suggests that there are 364 days when it’s ok to be unkind to lawyers!

We do need to change the narrative and begin to celebrate more often, unsung work of lawyers. This includes the hundreds, particularly young barristers, who do legally aided criminal defence work at shockingly low rates of pay. Or what about the staggering amount of free work done across all levels of the profession? For some reason the words ‘pro bono’ don’t tell the full story –

https://thestevecornforthblog.blogspot.com/2020/05/what-have-lawyers-done-for-us-2-pro-bono.html

Then there are those that provide free advice and help through Law Centres – a movement that reached its 50^th birthday this month!

And of course, there are 000s of lawyers across the country who simply go to work – or work from home! – to achieve the best outcome for their clients.

Another memory from my early days was advice from a senior barrister, later a High Court Judge, that fighting for justice was just as much a ‘calling’ as any of the so-called caring professions. That has never left me.

Shemima Begum - a question of fairness and justice

I still remember the sense of horror in 2015 as I followed the news reports of three young, and very vulnerable looking, schoolgirls heading to Syria to join ISIS. I wasn’t the only one who hoped and prayed that something would happen to stop them. It was only ever going to end very badly. Five years on; one is certainly dead, one is missing presumed dead and one has become the most hated person in the country, according to some.

None of this can justify what Shemima Begum did or has since done. She should face justice in this country so that we can discover the truth. There are many politicians and media moguls who are determined to deprive her of justice at all costs.

Last year there was an outcry that she might have the benefit of legal aid, as if popularity was some precondition to fair treatment –

https://thestevecornforthblog.blogspot.com/2019/04/shamina-begum-legal-aid-and-meaning-of.html

This week, we have seen a similar outcry. She wishes to fight the decision to deprive her of UK citizenship. That is a matter to decided by the courts. The Court of Appeal has decided that this can only be dealt with fairly if she is permitted to come to this country –

“I have reached the firm conclusion that given that the only way in which she can have a fair and effective appeal is to be permitted to come into the United Kingdom to pursue her appeal, fairness and justice must, on the facts of this case, outweigh the national security concerns” Flaux LJ

SHAMIMA BEGUM v SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION  [2020] EWCA Civ 918

Whatever you think about her and what she has done, this is a justice issue. We have an independent judiciary whose role is to ensure ‘fairness and justice.’ We are told, rightly in many cases, that terrorists are out to attack our values and our ‘way of life’. These are qualities of that life that we treasure and will defend at all costs. Included among these qualities are ‘fairness and justice’. Why do those precious values become irrelevant when applied to someone who is disliked by the press?

The only thing that is ‘political’ about it, is that politicians don’t like it.

The thought that she might get a fair hearing has produced a chilling reaction. The Telegraph has led calls for judges to excluded from ‘political’ decisions.

This is not a political decision. It is a decision about how courts can deal fairly with a difficult issue. The only thing that is ‘political’ about it, is that politicians don’t like it. It is certainly not the first time that this government has tried voiced an intention to control the judiciary –

https://thestevecornforthblog.blogspot.com/2020/02/introducing-our-new-attorney-general.html

The whole point of justice is to do what is right and fair. This is one of our critical values. It is why we have independent judges. It is why the Lord Chancellor swears to – “respect the rule of law, defend the independence of the judiciary and discharge my duty to ensure the provision of resources for the efficient and effective support of the courts”

We are in a dangerous place if justice is left in the hands of the media or politicians.

 

 

 

 

Windrush victims - the further scandal of proof

I am currently reading The Windrush Betrayal: Exposing the Hostile Environment by Amelia Gentleman. You don’t need me to tell you that this was one of the greatest scandals of the last 50 years. Ordinary working people who had been in the UK for 40 – 50 years suddenly and inexplicably found themselves in the middle of a nightmare. They were caretakers, ambulance drivers, cleaners, teachers, care workers, nurses. They were parents, grandparents and friends who had lived normal lives like the rest of us. Suddenly their very right to be in this country was denied.

The closest that I have read is Kafka’s The Trial. It starts out as what looks like obvious error of bureaucracy which develops into a terrifying horror story.  The most disturbing common factor across all of the cases is the disbelief. Victims were explaining that they had been here since childhood and were now pensioners, but they were not believed –

“What was particularly upsetting was the unflinching refusal of immigration staff to believe her consistent account that she had been in the UK for a lifetime”

“The word ‘claims’ seems to be an official shorthand indicating: ‘this is what the suspect is saying but we’re not in the least inclined to believe him’.. *

This was a shocking injustice driven by a political obsession with driving down immigration figures.

The extent of the scandal began to come out towards the end of 2017. We all watched in shock as the truth came out. It would be easy to believe that it is all sorted, that the victims have been vindicated and will be properly compensated for all that they have been through.

Sadly, this is not the case. Few victims have received anything. One reason for this is the unreasonable hoops through which they must jump in order to show entitlement. There is 89-page guidance for case workers who assess claims. Any lawyer will tell you that means that is not a simple and user friendly scheme. You can read it here if you want –

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/886371/Windrush-compensation-case-work-guidance-v.4.0ext.pdf

The document hides another scandal of disbelief. Claimants have to prove some of their losses ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. That is the standard of proof required in criminal cases. These are civil claims for damages. In UK law the standard of proof is balance of probabilities i.e what is more likely than not. To prove something ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ is much more of challenge. Page 80 of the guidance mentions the need for a balance of probabilities but goes on –

“This applies across the compensation scheme except for the following claims:

• loss of access to employment: Actual earnings award

• loss of access to health: Reimbursement of private medical fees incurred outside the United Kingdom

• loss of access to health: Reimbursement of private medical fees incurred within the United Kingdom

• loss of access to education: Reimbursement of international student fees

• loss of access to banking:

Reimbursement of direct financial losses In these cases, the claimant must provide clear evidence and you must be satisfied so as to be sure that they meet the requirements for these awards. This means that you must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt before making an award in these cases.”

This covers the most fundamental impacts of the scandal on the lives of victims.

It aggravates the issue of disbelief. The government is saying to victims – ‘we did not believe your right to be here despite many years of residence, work, paying of tax and national insurance’. When it comes to compensating them for the injustice they are told – 'we still don’t believe you'. You must persuade us 'beyond reasonable doubt'. This is compared with a wealthy business which is claiming millions in a commercial dispute which has to prove its losses on a balance of probabilities.

Immigration expert Colin Yeo has rightly called this ‘cruel and absurd’. 

This scandal cannot be allowed to continue. The government must now show some integrity and ensure that these people are now properly compensated.

I don’t usually promote petitions on here but this deserves action –

https://www.change.org/p/uk-govt-fix-the-windrush-compensation-scheme-now

*Amelia Gentleman, The Windrush Betrayal: Exposing the Hostile Environment – Guardian Faber Publishing (17 Sept 2019)