header-logo header-logo

Legal bodies decry dangerous climate for lawyers

15 October 2025
Issue: 8135 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , International
printer mail-detail
The Bars, Faculty of Advocates and law societies of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have come together to accuse politicians of putting lawyers at risk through their use of ‘irresponsible and dangerous’ language

In a joint statement issued this week, six professional bodies which collectively represent 250,000 lawyers expressed grave concern about a climate of increasing hostility to lawyers and judges. They warned that ‘legal professionals have been vilified and targeted simply for doing their job… lawyers represent their clients without fear or favour.

‘Politicians have a responsibility to respect the role of judges in upholding the rule of law and interpreting legislation that has been agreed by parliament. Unlike politicians, members of the judiciary are expected to be strictly impartial when considering how the law should be applied. Lawyers must abide by their professional ethics code and ensure that people facing life changing legal problems get a fair hearing.

‘Politically motivated attacks on the legal profession… weaken public trust and confidence in the rule of law and erode the very foundations of justice that underpin fairness and democracy,’ the statement reads.

‘Barristers, solicitors and judges have been subjected to violence, death threats and rape threats. Some have faced threats to their family members. We have repeatedly seen law firms and offices be set upon by protestors. We are deeply disturbed by this rising tide of intimidation targeting those who serve our justice system and uphold democratic principles.’

The statement doesn’t name individuals but takes aim at the tendency of some politicians to identify lawyers with their clients’ causes—a practice that has been used by several politicians. At Conservative Party conference this month, shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick, holding a judge’s wig as a prop, decried judges ‘who’ve spent their careers fighting to keep illegal immigrants in this country’.

In February, the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr expressed concern after both Prime Minister Keir Starmer and leader of the opposition Kemi Badenoch said they disagreed with a judge’s immigration ruling. In the US, meanwhile, President Trump’s administration targeted law firms which worked for his opponents with executive orders and clearance restrictions, later striking a deal to rescind these in return for pro bono work.

Issue: 8135 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , International
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll