The controversy surrounding the Attorney General has deepened after he successfully lobbied the Speaker of the Commons to block a debate on a potential conflict of interest.

The debate was called for by Robert Jenrick, the Conservative Party’s justice spokesman, who sought clarification regarding Lord Hermer’s involvement in several government decisions that have sparked concern.

Request for Clarity on Government Decisions

Jenrick’s request to Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle came in response to Lord Hermer’s involvement in controversial decisions, including a legal change that would allow Gerry Adams, the former leader of Sinn Féin, to receive taxpayer-funded compensation.

Lord Hermer had previously represented Adams before taking on the role of Keir Starmer’s top legal adviser.

However, Lord Hermer has not publicly clarified whether he provided legal advice supporting the law change that would benefit his former client.

Commons Rejection and Growing Concerns

In an effort to get answers, Jenrick tabled an Urgent Question (UQ) in the Commons, which is a tool used by the Opposition to hold government ministers accountable.

Unfortunately, the question was rejected by Sir Lindsay after pressure from Lord Hermer’s department.

Jenrick expressed his frustration, calling it unacceptable for the Attorney General to avoid answering important questions related to conflicts of interest, especially given his role in upholding the rule of law.

Jenrick emphasized that the Attorney General must address whether he had been involved in these decisions or whether his position was becoming untenable.

The UQ posed by Jenrick asked for clarification on whether Lord Hermer’s past legal work for Gerry Adams posed a conflict of interest and whether the Attorney General should recuse himself from advising the Prime Minister on related matters.

Continued Push for Accountability

Jenrick and the Conservative Party plan to try again tomorrow to force a debate on the matter.

The controversy centers around the government’s decision to repeal legislation that currently prevents Gerry Adams from suing ministers for his detention in the 1970s, a time of rising violence when Adams was suspected of being part of the IRA, though he has always denied it.

Legal Opinions and Lack of Transparency

Lord Hermer, who had represented Adams in a separate case involving compensation claims for IRA bomb attacks, has not disclosed whether he recused himself from the law change that would benefit his former client.

He cites the Law Officers’ Convention, which prevents Attorney Generals from disclosing the legal advice they provide to the government.

However, prominent lawyers, including former Lord Chancellor Sir Robert Buckland, have criticized Lord Hermer for using this convention as a “shield” to avoid answering questions.

Buckland and other legal experts have stressed that Lord Hermer should be transparent about whether he recused himself from decisions involving potential conflicts of interest.

Further Allegations and Previous Legal Cases

It has also been revealed that Lord Hermer previously represented a group of asylum seekers from the Chagos Islands and acted for human rights group Liberty in 2020 in the case of jihadi bride Shamima Begum.

Furthermore, he represented Afghan civilians in 2023 during the Independent Inquiry into the actions of British Special Forces.

In light of these developments, a government spokesperson has reiterated that there are long-standing rules and protocols in place to prevent conflicts of interest and to ensure law officers are not consulted on matters that may pose a conflict.

Despite these assurances, the controversy continues to grow, leaving many questioning whether Lord Hermer’s involvement in government decisions can be justified.

This article was published on TDPel Media. Thanks for reading!

Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn