header-logo header-logo

The NLJ Column

22 November 2007
Issue: 7298 / Categories: Opinion , Profession
printer mail-detail

The legal profession has a duty to stand up to executive intimidation

When Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, declared emergency rule in his country, he told the nation that the measure was necessary to control growing Islamist extremism in Pakistan.

A significant feature of General Musharraf’s crack-down was the arrest and detention of judges and lawyers who he perceived as crippling his government.

EARLIER PRECEDENT

Musharraf is not the first leader to attack the judiciary in this way. An earlier precedent can be found in Egypt where over 1,000 judges threatened to boycott presidential and Parliamentary elections in 2005 unless the government took steps to control corruption, and even earlier in 1968 the judiciary was so outspoken about Nasser’s war policy that he dismissed them in what became known as the “massacre of the judiciary”.

More surprisingly, executive belligerence towards the judges and a determination to emaciate them of their powers has been demonstrated both in the US and the UK, the former by attempting to put detainees beyond the reach of the judges in Guantanamo Bay

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll