By Anita Rice


The independent reviewer of counter-terrorism legislation sparked a barrage of criticism from lawyers this week after suggesting that having a solicitor present could deter suspected terrorists from co-operating in police intelligence interviews.



Speaking at an Association of Chief Police Officers conference last week, Lord Carlile of Berriew QC said he believed neutral, vetted judges or special advocates could oversee interviews and protect suspects' interests instead of defence solicitors.



Carlile said inviting solicitors - who may represent more than one member of a group of suspects or convicted terrorists - could be an obstacle to gathering information, as individuals might fear others could find out they had talked to the police.



'A jihadist might well be well-disposed to giving intelligence interviews as long as they are separated from their groups... the person concerned will think the group is still involved if you invite their solicitor,' he told delegates.



Carlile's comments have been angrily criticised by leading criminal defence lawyers. Louise Christian, senior partner at London firm Christian Khan, said suspects could feel pressured into making false confessions.



She said the police routinely refuse to allow solicitors to act for more than one suspect in terror cases and lawyers would decline instructions if in conflict of interest anyway.



Suggestions that solicitors would be 'a conduit of information' to others were, she said, a 'slur on the profession', adding: 'This is an imaginary situation created to justify taking away people's rights.'



Greg Foxsmith, solicitor at London firm Shearman Bowen & Co, said 'terror suspects are more likely to assist the police with their solicitor - the only person on their side - present.'



Frances Webber, a human rights barrister at Garden Court Chambers, added that not having solicitors present would give the police and security services 'a huge opportunity to abuse people... it is only the presence of solicitors that protects people from that abuse.'



Carlile said he was not suggesting solicitors would 'let it get back that anyone gave an interview', but that using neutral judges or special advocates would not only reassure individuals the fact they had helped the police would remain confidential, but safeguard their interests too.