Human rights lawyer Phil Shiner has admitted that he paid middle men thousands of pounds to find cases in Iraq to be brought against British soldiers by the now defunct Public Interest Lawyers. In a letter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority, Mr Shiner admitted to acting without integrity in the way his firm pursued war crime allegations against British troops, and said the ‘he accepts’ that he now faces being struck off as a result of his actions. However, the lawyer who achieved notoriety in the Ministry of Defence denied that any of his actions, or the claims brought by PIL, were dishonest.
Eight admitted, nine partially admitted and six denied
Mr Shiner’s letter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority, which was read before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, finally revealed the details of the allegations against him after a longstanding anonymity order was lifted. Mr Shiner admitted to eight different counts of acting without integrity, including approving unsolicited direct approaches to potential clients arising out of the 2004 ‘Battle of Danny Boy’. Mr Shiner reportedly paid a tout, named only as Z, to refer Iraqi civilians to PIL. The letter also admits to entering into an agreement in June 2015 which offered Z financial compensation for changing his evidence to the Al-Sweady inquiry. Nine other offences were partially admitted by Mr Shiner, while six were denied – including that he failed to comply with his duty of full and frank disclosure to the £23m Al-Sweady inquiry into allegations of mistreatment by British soldiers in Iraq.
Likely to be struck off
Bringing the case against Mr Shiner for the SRA, 39 Essex Chambers barrister Andrew Tabachnik commented: ‘Even on the basis of his own admissions, Professor Shiner accepts that this tribunal must strike him off at the end of this case.’ Public Interest Lawyers was shuttered in August this year after being stripped of its Legal Aid Agency funding as a result of the ongoing investigation into the firm’s conduct. Mr Shiner has previously accused the Government of the Ministry of Justice of pursuing a personal vendetta against him in revenge of the reputational damage he had inflicted on the British military.
Sources: The Guardian; Law Gazette; The Telegraph
Email your news and story ideas to: [email protected]
