Council Member’s Report

REPORT

Council Member’s Report

By Alastair Logan OBE

The Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the sanctions that followed it, have caused many changes and challenges.

Some are to punish the aggressor and some to compensate for the fact that we are limited in what support we can provide to the Ukrainians. Some will reduce the wealth of oligarchs and others will have an impact on our cost of living.

Our laws are changing. Measures that should have been in place years ago to prevent the laundering of dirty money in our country are only now being introduced. With these changes comes the blame game. Politicians and others anxious to burnish their credentials in the aftermath of the invasion have chosen to accuse our profession of behaviour that they describe as frustrating the sanctions or aiding and abetting the oligarchy that have established themselves and/or their money in our country. Politicians have been happy to accept Russian money and the benefits that wealth brings with it and to allow the laundering of dirty money in our financial system and properties for years – long after the truth was there for all to see. It is galling to have to remind them that lawyers act within the law and that providing services for clients does not mean that they share their causes.

Our profession faces the conflict between Articles 14 and 18 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers. Art 14 states: “Lawyers, in protecting the rights of their clients and in promoting the cause of justice, shall seek to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms recognised by national and international law and shall at all times act freely and diligently in accordance with the law and recognised standards and ethics of the legal profession.” And Art 18 states: “Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients' causes as a result of discharging their functions.” Rights for some may be achieved by the loss of rights for others. We cannot look solely to professional ethics for a solution, as legislation and court decisions will inevitably change the situation. The moral outrage at the enablers of Russian oligarchs and entities cannot be met by defensive statements which only serve to convince those outraged that lawyers are complicit in illegal activity. They are not. But some activity we have undertaken (for example in SLAPPs) leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

The Law Society has been proactive. It immediately condemned the invasion and offered our support to the people of Ukraine. It has defended the reputation of the profession against professional enablement and Strategic Litigation lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and those who would scapegoat our profession. These are legal actions that are taken, not necessarily with the goal of winning in court, but intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defence until they abandon their criticism or opposition. The government has reversed its stance on openness to Russian wealth over the weeks which have elapsed since the Russian Invasion of Ukraine having done nothing in the last 20 years save for the weak and ineffective Unexplained Wealth Orders legislation. The Law Society has provided guidance and help on the terms of the Economic Crime Act 2022 many of which were adopted. It has responded to the Sanctions Regime and other government actions in a positive and constructive way. It continues to lobby for improvements in the legislation and has also provided expert advice and insight into the development of the sanctions regime and emerging government thinking on SLAPPs. It has signposted members to pro bono support for Ukrainians and other philanthropic initiatives. It has supported lawyers at risk in the conflict reaching out to the Ukrainian legal profession. It has also been supporting Members and firms withdrawing from work with Russian clients, cutting ties with colleagues abroad and closing their Russian offices.

The Law Society has offered to assist in bringing together the expertise that could formulate a sanctions regime that was not vulnerable to challenge. In doing so It had to remind those who were attacking lawyers for being enablers that the right to legal representation was not to be compromised and was a pillar of the Rule of Law. An example of the work that is being done is the provision of an advice centre with 430 volunteer lawyers by the city firm DLA Piper to Ukrainians seeking refuge in the UK set up 4 days after the invasion. We should also remember that The Law Society and our members have been in the forefront of providing help, support, and sanctuary for those citizens of Afghanistan who faced discrimination and death with a government immigration climate which was far less comfortable than the one that now obtains for Ukrainians – a change brought about but public demand. ■

Alastair Logan OBE

Alastair Logan OBE