Papers turn human rights fire on judges

The run-up to the Human Rights Act's implementation in October is being marked with an ever-greater welter of stories; last week, they focused in particular on the judges who will be enforcing it.The reports came on the back of the government's 65 million cash boost ahead of the 2 October start date (13 July).

The government took the opportunity to quell fears that the Act would open the proverbial floodgates of litigation in The Times and the Independent.The Daily Telegraph slated the government's approach to civil liberties, which 'becomes more contradictory almost by the week' (13 July).

It contrasted Jack Straw's signature of the commencement order to bring into effect the new Act with his publication of a revised version of the Bill he is trying to ram through parliament giving police offers the power to stop suspected football hooligans travelling abroad.

A leader asked 'Who do they think they are kidding?', pointing out the 'obvious danger' that Parliament's role and standing will be diminished when the judiciary advances through enforcing the Act.

The paper demanded that if judges are to make political decisions, 'the question of their accountability will have to be addressed'.The issue of judicial appointments resurfaced in an Independent leader (12 July), also citing its growing importance as a result of the Human Rights Act.

Backing the view of Lord Steyn last week, the most senior member of the judiciary to call for an independent judicial appointments commission, the paper said: 'How, it was asked, could we trust such great powers to a narrow-based group of Oxbridge-educated judges? The answer would be to take the power out of the hands of that like-minded, all-male preserve and pass it to an impartial panel that included non-lawyers among its members.'The Mail on Sunday put the judiciary under a 'Tony's cronies' spotlight, reporting how the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, has appointed to the Court of Appeal his brother-in-law, Sir Andrew Longmore, and Sir David Keene, 'who sits at the hub of the Blairs' circle of friends'.

The Legal Services Ombudsman's critical report on the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (see [2000] Gazette, 13 July 1) received the most mid-week column inches, getting coverage in The Times, the Financial Times and the Guardian (12 July).

The FT said the Law Society is 'struggling' to meet targets, while the Guardian reported: 'Law Society blamed for crisis in profession.'Elsewhere, the latest in a line of recruitment consultants' surveys on City solicitors' salaries confirmed the trend that junior solicitors' salaries have risen by a record amount this year.

Lloyd's List reported that shipping and insurance law firms have not been immune to recent salary hikes in corporate sectors (13 July).

A survey by recruiters Spinnaker Consulting showed that newly qualified solicitors are paid 50% more than five years ago.

'One's heart bleeds,' the article concluded.Meanwhile, the solicitor who admitted assaulting two fellow guests at a Young Solicitors Group Valentine's ball (see [2000] Gazette, 13 July, 10) was given a six-month suspended sentence and told to pay compensation of 4,000 to his victims (London Evening Standard, 14 July).The Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine's novel fund-raising scheme to sell souvenirs at the Royal Courts of Justice provoked a letter writing flurry to The Times (11 July).

Judge John Weeks QC asked how long it would be before he sold pardons and indulgences, while John Meeson of Broadfields, East Sussex, suggested that the 'miscarriage clock' would be a bestseller.

Anne Mizzi