New Year Round Up and Roll Call of Shame

Dear Diary,

How cosy it is to be back with you again. I am afraid I rather neglected you during the revelry that marked the festive season and the New Year. Although events chez Maiden were domestic they were time consuming. Tucker received his customary presents: a yard of ale, a bolt of keeper’s tweed and a pair of stout size 16 boots. He was, as ever, delighted and, as is customary, invited me to check the quality of the tweed by feeling its handle whilst it was draped around his staff. Dear Diary, it was quite excellent. Then a number of tenants, some quite junior (and therefore robust) helped me to bring the New Year in with a bang.

Others were not quite so lucky. Our old friends Messrs HBJ Gately Wareing seem to have been feeling the pinch since Calum left them under the cloud cast by the Madonna with the Yardwinder. Trainees were asked to chip-in to fund Christmas gifts for support staff. The going rate was 20% of what a Partner was asked to contribute: alas the equivalent percentage regarding salary is closer to 3%. Still, no doubt the firm’s employment deparment will fight any rude comments about Scotsmen and their generosity on the grounds of discrimnation.

Meanwhile, Potter LJ’s decision to give a character reference for spruce Bruce has led to a complaint by the man who so nearly went to prison. I shall watch this one with care but will be astonished if it leads to any form of rebuke - I have previously expressed the view that His Lordship was perhaps unwise, but it would be a sad day if being a Judge meant one could not assist a friend fallen on hard times.

Further North, Mr Aamer Anwar’s judgement regarding his client Atif Siddique (“This verdict is a tragedy for justice and freedom of speech and undermines the values that separates us from the terrorists. Atif Siddique states that he is not a terrorist and is innocent of the charges and it is not a crime to be a young Muslim angry at global injustice. In the end Atif Siddique did not receive a fair trial and we will be considering an appeal”) has been spectacularly vindicated by Siddique’s letter from prison. Mr Siddique felt it important that the world heard his views on the Glasgow Airport attack. He wrote: “I don’t disagree with killing civilians but no one can really say what the true intentions were. Also, put yourself in their place. Britain and America have invaded Iraq. How would you feel? So I understand where they are coming from. I don’t really care about the baggage handler, he is well overpraised.”  Well done Mr Anwar.

Of course Aamer faces a contempt hearing regarding those comments. It now seems that Donald Findlay QC knew about them in advance and has been asked for a statement about his own input. Aamer has some big name supporters however. Lots of right-on lawyers, Tony Benn and gorgeous George Galloway all feel that the moves against him are unfair. Dear Diary, it is so reassuring when those committed to democracy try to prevent due process. Any lawyer signing a letter which includes the phrase, “If the judiciary is successful in silencing Aamer Anwar” should be ashamed.

This particular sentiment is so repellant that it demands closer examination. British Judges are frequently wrong (especially when rejecting my submissions), often stuffy, occasionally out of touch and sometimes hasty. The good ones will acknowledge the danger in being part of an establishment, faced with a stranger to that establishment standing in the dock. The bad ones do sometimes fall prey to the belief that it is their job to pot the Defendant. But even the very worst Judges do not act as a group to ’silence’ anyone.

As Benn and Galloway have discovered, being bloody stupid gets into the Press and contributes to the contempt in which politicians are now held. That, in turn, prevents ordinary, decent people becoming politicians. Thus it is that George W Bush is the person who has to respond to the events of September the 11th: a concatenation of events that must have had Satan dancing with joy. For the legal signatories of that letter to so express themselves as to launch such an intemperate and foolish attack on the Judiciary is the height of irresponsibility. It entirely detracts from any merit there may be in the position taken and it threatens public confidence in the one institution that really is reliable.

That politicans write such nonsense and chose such hyperbole is no surprise. But Gareth Pierce and Imran Khan should hang their heads in shame. If their judgment is so shot that they cannot distinguish between a (possible) over-reaction and a judcial conspiracy then perhaps 2008 should be a sabbatical year for both of them.