Letters to the Editor

PAYING THE PRICE

We take issue with several of the assertions about money laundering contained in a recent column by Janet Paraskeva (see [2003] Gazette, 30 May, 18).

We are told that 'something clearly ne0eds to be done' in view of evidence about the number of solicitors involved in investment fraud.

Unless fresh evidence has since come to light, presumably the position is as it was when the Law Society's task force responded to the Treasury's consultation paper on proposed revisions to the Money Laundering Regulations 1993 and 2001.

In that response, the Society challenged the proposition that there was growing involvement in money laundering of unregulated professionals.

It observed that the proposition was not borne out by criminal convictions, and invited production of details evidencing such a trend.

To our knowledge no such details have been forthcoming.

Yet the Society seems all too ready to defer to unsubstantiated allegations of solicitors' involvement in money laundering activities.

The chief executive's remarks suggest that she, too, accepts such allegations.

Her column seeks to make the case for the changes to the accounts rules currently being proposed.

She rehearses several of the arguments to support the new rules' introduction that are already contained in the Society's consultation document.

We disagree with those arguments.

We do not accept that rules supposedly addressing underlying behaviour will deter the dishonest practitioner who is already bent on a breach of the criminal law.

We do not wish to be subject to new rules that, apart from duplicating provisions of the criminal law, further curtail commercial and professional freedom of action.

Least of all do we accept, in the absence of clear evidence, that money laundering activity has become rife among members of the profession.

We have a strong sense that the Society wishes to be seen to be 'doing something' about money laundering.

If the price to be paid for such a public relations opportunity is an extension of professional regulations that repeats and then goes beyond the criminal code to which we are all subject, then it is a price that is far too high.

David Williams, Ian Merryweather, Brian Watkis, John Palmer, Richard Williams, Alletsons, Burnham-on-Sea, Somerset

THE COMMON TOUCH

I heard on Radio 4 a most inept defence of the government's plans to abolish the office of Lord Chancellor, offered by the Labour Party Chairman.

In the course of it, he vaguely referred to 'lawyers' supporting this and its far- reaching consequences, so I write to ask whether, through the pages of the Gazette over the next few weeks, we can see whether there is any truth in that assertion.

I suggest that this is part of a wider process to eliminate the English common law in favour of European jurisprudence.

As a student in the 1960s, I was proud when my admission certificate was signed by the late Lord Denning.

He seemed to embody that intriguing mixture of tradition touched by a maverick radical edge, which gave the common law its fluidity.

So what do readers think? Did the common law values run out of steam, or did the judges just get smaller?

Martin Sewell, solicitor, Gravesend, Kent

IDENTITY CRISIS

I prefer to read three or four Gazettes at a time in an attempt to compartmentalise the doom and gloom.

Recently, I read that some are asking that the amount that solicitors may be fined for lack of service be increased to 25,000.

I also read that we may in the future have to give up any interest we earn on client accounts (heaven forbid that solicitors should enjoy any sort of perk).

I live in hope that before too long the gradual increase in the legal work that non-solicitors may carry out will mean that there is simply no point in carrying the burden of the title of solicitor.

RWA Mitchell, RWA Mitchell & Co, Liss, Hampshire

PROMOTING DEMOCRACY

The debate concerning the recognised groups agreement and the Law Society would appear to show a new direction at Chancery Lane (see [2003] Gazette, 5 June.

3).

In response to the Young Solicitors Group, a spokeswoman has said that groups are 'at their most democratic and vibrant when members actively opt in'.

I await a democratic and vibrant Law Society.

Richard Kaye, joint publicity and media officer, Young Solicitors Group