Exclusive: Lawyers urge Lammy - and the Law Society - to defend solicitor who brought Hamas case

A group of more than 100 lawyers has called on the government and Law Society to publicly defend a solicitor who is acting to challenge the proscription of terror group Hamas.

In an open letter, the solicitors, barristers and legal academics say that Fahad Ansari has been subjected to ‘unacceptable attacks’ as a result of being identified with his clients. The letter calls on lord chancellor David Lammy, attorney-general Lord Hermer KC and Law Society president Mark Evans to ‘publicly defend the role of lawyers generally and [Ansari] in particular’.

Ansari, now a consultant at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, was previously director and principal solicitor at Riverway Law, which acted for Hamas pro bono in order not to breach sanctions. 

After the Hamas application was submitted, shadow home secretary Robert Jenrick and Campaign Against Antisemitism reported him to the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Jenrick described Riverway’s role as ‘sickening’, adding that it was ‘no surprise the firm specialises in immigration cases’. Ansari's X feed is headed: Stop the Gaza Genocide - Lawyer, Writer, Activist, Tea Lover - From the River to the Sea'. 

Today’s letter, drafted by barrister Daniel Grütters of One Pump Court, is signed by six KCs and several law firm founders and directors. They include Imran Khan KC, Lord John Hendy KC of Old Square, Liz Davies KC of Garden Court, Michael Mansfield KC and Rajiv Menon KC.

Sinn Fein MP John Finucane, a solicitor whose lawyer father Pat was murdered by loyalist paramilitaries, is also among the signatories.

‘Advising and assisting clients with exercising their legal rights and following legal procedures is an inherent part of the role of lawyers, and an indispensable component of the rule of law,’ the letter says. ‘If people are unable to understand and exercise their rights – because lawyers are unable or unwilling to advise and assist them to do so – they become meaningless paper propositions.

‘In the case of Part II of the Terrorism Act 2000, any exercise of the right to apply for deproscription – and appeal any refusal of such an application – will inherently involve groups who, at least according to the secretary of state, were “concerned in terrorism”. The rule of law requires that all such groups are able to understand and exercise their rights under said legislation. It follows that the rule of law requires legal professionals, such as Mr Ansari, to be able to provide that advice and assistance unimpeded and without suffering any adverse consequences.’

The letter points that the UK is a signatory to the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer. Its provisions ‘crucially’ require parties to ensure lawyers do not suffer adverse consequences as a result of being identified with their clients or their clients’ cause, the letter adds.

‘Neither the lord chancellor, nor the attorney general, nor the Law Society, have at any point approached Mr Ansari to enquire about his safety and wellbeing, nor spoken out in defence of his work as a lawyer,’ the lawyers conclude. ‘We consider this failure a shocking and shameful dereliction of the duty of the lord chancellor, the attorney general and the Law Society to defend the rule of law, and to defend lawyers in their role of upholding the rule of law.’