header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 February 2016 / Dr Jon Robins
Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus , Profession
printer mail-detail

Under attack

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

The fallout from the Al-Sweady inquiry represents another strike against justice, says Jon Robins

The relentless onslaught against the groundbreaking but controversial work of Leigh Day and Public Interest Lawyers on behalf of Iraqi civilians went into overdrive last month when David Cameron joined the fray and “ordered ministers”, as it was reported, to prevent lawyers pursuing claims against veterans.

Unpleasant undercurrent

According to Number 10, the prime minister was “deeply concerned at the large number of spurious claims being made against members of our armed forces”. The prime minister’s intervention is not “harassment” and yet there is a deeply unpleasant undercurrent to the constant attacks on the lawyers in these difficult cases.

The Tory MP Stewart Jackson used the protection of Parliamentary privilege to berate the new shadow defence minister Emily Thornberry for taking a donation from “the immoral, thieving and ambulance chasing lawyers” Leigh Day which, along with Public Interest Lawyers, were “hounding our brave service personnel in Iraq on spurious claims”.

Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers has been celebrated by

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll