Who? David Enright, 40-year-old partner and head of human rights and immigration at London firm Howe & Co.


Why is he in the news? He persuaded the bookshop chain Borders to remove Tintin in the Congo from its children's section, on the grounds that it contained offensive racial stereotyping.



The book contained representations of black African people as superstitious simpletons, with faces like baboons or monkeys, and bowing before a godlike white teenager and his pet dog. Mr Enright, who is married to a black African woman and has two sons of mixed race, considered it unacceptable that his or any other children should be exposed to such material.



He complained and, when it became apparent that he was getting nowhere, wrote to the Commission for Racial Equality and the police. Borders agreed to move the book, which it described as a collectors' item, to the adult graphics section, while standing by its commitment to let customers make the choice. When launching the book in 2005, publisher Egmont said it recognised the controversial content but had decided it was important to complete the Tintin collection, which it described as 'one of the 20th century's great achievements in comic art'.



Background: Mr Enright read law at the University of Central England. He worked at the Refugee Legal Centre in south London while studying part-time for the legal practice course at London Guildhall. He joined Howe & Co in 2000 and became a partner in 2003.



Route to the case: Last month, Mr Enright went for breakfast at a Borders branch and saw a big display promoting Tintin books. 'The first book that caught me eye was Tintin in the Congo. Before passing the book to my wife and two boys [aged two and seven], I opened it and was utterly astonished and aghast to see what it contained.'



Thoughts on the case: 'Horror and disgust. Such cartoon books target children. The book was on a shiny colourful rocket promotional stand in the children's section. The book depicts black people as imbecilic baboon-like creatures incapable of dealing with their own affairs, who worship a child and his dog and are out to "kill the white man". Inquisitive and impressionable children, developing their understanding through books, should not be exposed to such blatant racist material. I am against banning books, but such material should only be available in an appropriate adult historical section.'



Dealing with the media: 'I got the impression that at first the media thought this was just another case of political correctness gone made. But they came around to seeing my point of view - Nick Ferrari on [London radio station] LBC actually said it was the first time he'd ever changed his mind on air. Unfortunately, the publicity has meant we've been receiving hate mail.'



Jonathan Rayner