Inside: Interview with Mic Jeeves
The Devil’s
Advocate
Issue Number 12 June 2016
Inspired by Law First Talk: “The Changing Legal Landscape”
L A N FI R E M M U S ! E U S S I The Law Society goes to Luxembourg
Student interviews: past and present
g t s o P
te a u e d a r em G he Sch t th lty i w ya Lo
Glenda Gapare, Matthew Quigley and Judith dela Cuesta
Asylum Conference
As an LSBU graduate with a 2:1 or higher, you may be eligible for:
Undercover policing conference Inspired by Law Event: Dame Linda Dobbs on ‘The Changing Legal Landscape’
25%
discount on your postgraduate degree when you progress directly onto an LBSU postgraduate course in September 2016 or January 2017, plus an additional:
5%
early payment discount when you pay your fees in full at enrolment. We're a top 10 London university for postgraduate starting salaries* Become what you want to be
Interview with Mic Jeeves Current Student in Focus: Bright Shine-Sedziafa
Applying is quick and easy from your LSBU email account.
Editoral team
o t s e s t e a r u g o d r a P r
y d u t s
We have enjoyed working as an editorial team this year, although it has been hard work fitting it in with our academic commitments! We would like to thank Claire Bradford for reporting on various events from the University in this issue. During the year, we have made some innovations, such as inviting a student from another School to contribute. Another development is that the production of the magazine has been transferred to Communications and we would like to thank Clare Larsen-Burnett for all her hard work. We wish all graduating students the very best in the future. Good luck as well to those who follow us and take over The Devil’s Advocate.
This Issue
Editor’s letter
Editorial team Glenda Gapare, Matthew Quigley, Judith Dela Cuesta Contributors Aminata Barrie, Max Short, Bright Shine, Judith dela Cuesta, Savannah Otway Consulting editor Kim Silver Printing LSBU Print Services Graphic designer Clare Larsen-Burnett
Law Society officers President Ayorinde Victor Ongungbe Vice presidentHelen Itsagwede Treasurer Simrajit Digpal Secretary Danderstrands Chi Ndikum Welfare officers Joy Johnson – Babatunde, Caroline Marshall Fundraising liaison Janine Cassells – Airley, Musu Nayamba Mary Wright Street Law and events liaison Aminata Barrie Drama and debating liaison Suliat Ayobami Abdullahi
The Law Society goes to Luxembourg: visit to the Court of Justice of the European Union Law Society News Fundrasing To Brexit or not to Brexit: That is the Question
Mooting at LSBU interview with Angelika Majchrowska
Human Rights Update
Law Division News
2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 13 14 16 17
The Devils Advocate | 1
2 | The Devils Advocate
I chose my A level subjects when I was 13 and interested in science. As a result, I went on to study nuclear physics at university. My photo was posted behind the Student Union bar as I was too young to be served. This meant that everyone recognised me but couldn’t recall where they knew me from. By this time, I was losing interest in science and looking for an alternative although, sadly, it was too late to switch to becoming a film star. I left the nuclear physics course and worked in manual jobs in Brighton & London where I fell in with a group of young lawyers squatting in Notting Hill who published a radical law magazine. I also used to drink down the pub with Freddie Mercury sometimes so perhaps I could have been a pop star (apart from the complete lack of musical talent). At this time, friends were experiencing problems with the police, discrimination in work and with housing and immigration problems so I was drawn in the direction of the law and this led me on to an LLB degree which suited me much better. Q. Tell us a bit about your career before you came to LSBU. I draw a veil over the various factories, warehouses and even farms where I have worked.
Q. What prompted you to move into teaching law? eaching was a credible career option in T law and several of my fellow law students moved in that direction, including more than one who became head of a university law department and not forgetting the one who is now the Buddhist Chaplain at a university in Washington D.C. We saw law and law teaching as in need of root and branch reform to break out of the nineteenth century methods then in use – you needed to pass an exam in Latin and it certainly helped to have a parent in the business. Also I first took up teaching because I needed the money and couldn’t afford to go into articles (training contract) until I’d saved a bit. When I did become an articled clerk I was paid £15 per week.
Q. Which legal figure do you admire?
ne of the bright faces in my class who O never fails to smile when I see him is Bright Shine-Sedziafa. In our second year, he informed me that he had an office allocated to him and his budding business at Clarence House explaining that he was one of the recipients of the enterprise initiatives of LSBU students supported by the university with a grant (and an office!). In our final year, he has been the quiet but visible driving force of the student Law Society being the Vice President of the society. He single-handedly organised the visit of Law Society members to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJ) in Luxembourg last February. In his spare time, he does clerking at a law firm near London Bridge.
o many of my former students who S built careers from their own self-belief, hard work, ability and determination. Past students of mine have worked, both home and abroad, in a range of law jobs, including as the Attorney General, whilst others applied the lessons of their education in business. Naturally I claim the credit for all of their success. There was one armed robber but we don’t mention him. Q. Finally, any words of advice? Don’t eat the yellow snow.
right wants to be a judge. Here is his story B so far.
Q. What have you enjoyed most about working here? he Law Division at LSBU is brimming T with energy from the students who are a lovely, lively bunch and I will miss them all when I leave. Working with young minds (of course now everyone is young to me) is invigorating, always challenging, never dull and generally rewarding (even the awkward ones – you know who you are). Q. How have the University and the department changed over the years?
I took my Part 2 Solicitors’ exams (now the LPC) by private study. I borrowed the books from my girlfriend who was at the College of Law (now the University of Law) and I read them after work. There was no need then to spend a fortune on an LPC course. We took the exams (seven 3 hour papers in one week) in the great hall at Ally Pally with pigeons flying up in the roof – in Winter, candidates sat freezing in sleeping bags.
The University has grown – look at the new buildings. The Technopark and library sites were holes in the ground when I started, the library was in the London Road building and there were no computers. The first year I taught on the law degree there were 36 students. Where the Keyworth Centre now stands was a pub next to a benefits office for daily claims catering for homeless and chaotic individuals who often lay, inebriated, in the street outside.
I saw an ad in the legal press, phoned up and started my articles (training contract) the following Monday. It turned out that the partners in the firm I had joined were all veteran members of the Communist Party. There’d be a leaving do one week for a secretary off to a frontline African destination to be smuggled into South Africa to work for the ANC and the next week we’d welcome another who had escaped the other way. Given the firm’s clientele, I reckon I met a good few spies (working for Soviet-bloc trade or cultural delegations or news organisations etc) and I dealt with their unglamorous road traffic offences. At the other end of the scale of responsibility, I ran pro bono appeals in the Privy Council on behalf of prisoners on death row in various Caribbean jurisdictions.
he law team was committed to a T philosophy of inclusivity and change and was pioneering methods of “clinical” law teaching newly arrived from the US and which have now spread widely and been absorbed to an extent almost everywhere. I spent seven years supervising student volunteer legal advisers in a Streatham CAB one evening a week – the current Legal Advice Clinic is a great step forward. Opportunities for our law students are now much broader than they ever were. Q. What do you plan to do in retirement? There will definitely be no planning.
JC: Thank you for finding time to chat with me.
Current Student in Focus: Bright Shine-Sedziafa
Interview with Mic Jeeves
Q. Why did you choose to study law?
BS: No worries. Thank you for finding time to chat with me. JC: Tell me about your journey into law. BS: I served in the British Army with 23rd Pioneer Regiment based in Bicester & 9 Supply Regiment in Chippenham. I was deployed in various places such as Iraq in 2003. My Regiment complemented the security group of then PM Tony Blair on his first visit to Iraq. Then, I went on tour in the NATO headquarters in Germany. I left the Army in 2006 and served as a Reservist to date. In 2006, I worked in the Home Office in Croydon attached to Security and Anti-Corruption Unit (SACU). Then, I took a career break to study law. So here I am. JC: I can see that your life has been in tune with the military, government and politics, can you recall an incident wherein you were able to say that: “Yes, I want to study law!”? BS: Around 2010, the then Liberian President Charles Taylor was being tried in The Hague, Netherlands, for his alleged role in the killing of hundreds of civilian in Liberia. Naomi Campbell was a witness to the blood diamond argument and I was inspired by the barrister who cross examined her. I was so impressed by the way she put her arguments across so eloquently. That was when I wanted to study law. JC: What would you like to do after the LLB? BS: I want to study the LPC or BPTC. JC: Best wishes Bright. BS: Thanks, best wishes to you too. Judith dela Cuesta, final year, LLB (Hons) Law
The Devils Advocate | 3
Merlin is a student from the University of Cergy-Pontoise who has spent this semester at LSBU studying law. The conference was a joint venture between LSBU and Cergy-Pontoise and Merlin had brought in Benjamin Abtan, the President of the European Grassroots Antiracist Movement, (EGAM) from Paris to speak alongside LSBU academics, Gaim Kibreab and John Koo from the School of Law and Social Sciences. After the conference there was an opportunity for speakers and participants to mingle over refreshments. The Devil’s Advocate brings comments from participants and pictures.
Asylum Conference
Merlin
4 | The Devils Advocate
This conference has been a great experience as it allowed me to meet students and professors in another context than my classes. It was also the opportunity for me to work with the European Grassroots Antiracist Movement, a major actor of European civil society. I think that it was the best way to enjoy my stay in London. Moreover, I am happy to have led one of the multiple projects we today need in order to develop our European consciousness. In fact, this event has been the place of a dialogue between students from European countries and experts from the UK and France. I wish other conferences like this to take place in order to create interactions between people. As European Union citizens, we must be able to debate over questions which are directly concerning us, such as the current migration crisis. The EU must not be limited to its institutions and legislation: it is also and mainly millions of persons who would benefit from sharing their ideas and exploring this great cultural diversity! John Koo, Associate Professor of Law When Merlin came to me with the idea of holding a conference on the asylum crisis in Europe I was impressed that he had the initiative and the drive and I was attracted by the idea of contributing to the public debate. And I am sure that is why the other speakers agreed to participate. Merlin asked me to contribute a short presentation. I teach EU law. EU asylum law is a bit of a specialist area and even more complicated perhaps than some of the mainstream EU single market law (which is complicated enough). So I attempted
to present a short (and hopefully clear) explanation of EU law. I explained that some of it does not apply to the UK because of opt outs it has secured from the EU. My main message was that the legal obligations on the states in terms of assessing asylum claims and ensuring decent living conditions for asylum seekers are good. But the application of the law – honouring the obligations, and the current arrangement for sharing the ‘burden’ of refugees is not so good. This is where civil society (you and me), pressure groups (you and me) and politicians need to combine our energies and efforts so that there is a stronger sense of collective responsibility leading to a much better sharing of responsibility (burden) of welcoming and integrating those who need our protection. Claire Bradford, 3rd year LLB student, a member of the audience The issue of asylum rights is a particularly relevant one at present, given the almost daily headlines detailing the treacherous journeys that some individuals have had to make to flee conflicts and imminent danger. I found the conference interesting because I learnt more about the law on asylum rights and how essentially the legal framework is there to protect asylum seekers however political tension and a lack of unity within the EU means that these rights are not being fully recognised in respective Member States. From the conference I Iearnt that the issue can only be addressed by a shared political will and willingness to tackle the issue and that if we do not act together then the problem will continue to grow over the coming years. A response is needed by all Member States in the EU which respects basic human dignity and recognises collective responsibility. Learning that the Court of Justice now has full jurisdiction over enforcement of the law on this area is encouraging since sanctions taken against Member States may encourage them to work together to generate long term solutions. The cost of not doing so is a human one and lives depend upon it.
Undercover policing conference
Erasmus student Merlin Chéneaux organised a conference at LSBU in April on asylum rights, “Is the system of asylum right under threat?”. The conference considered the asylum system in the EU and whether it could withstand current pressures.
Subversion, sabotage and spying were among the themes explored during the two-day conference on ‘political policing and state racism in the UK’, organised by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies and hosted by London South Bank University. My eyes were really opened to the extent of surveillance within the UK and around the world. There is perhaps a general acceptance by society that surveillance is justifiable in order to prevent serious crime. However this conference explored the use of surveillance which had been deployed seemingly not to prevent serious crime, but in some cases where those being monitored had committed no crime at all and were simply innocent people. Individuals, such as Baroness Doreen Lawrence, spoke of concern at being subject to surveillance when they were simply trying to obtain justice. Baroness Lawrence had been spied upon because of the threat of her campaign to the reputation of policing - the aim of the covert operation had been to discredit her campaign. Not only was this a waste of public money but an infringement upon her privacy rights and misuse of police power. Many more individuals had similar stories to tell. Imran Khan QC and Michael Mansfield QC who had represented her were also subject to surveillance. Both individuals eloquently argued that there is no place for such surveillance for political purposes and it would be hard to disagree. Women who had formed long term relationships with undercover officers also spoke at the conference. They were campaigners in environmental groups and had been targeted by covert surveillance in the most intrusive way. Again this would seem like an entirely disproportionate response to such activity. Rob Evans, a journalist for ‘The Guardian’ who has written numerous articles on this area, gave a comprehensive history of undercover
policing which he stated really came into effect in 1968, when the Home Office decided that use of informants alone was not enough and that undercover policing would provide more reliable intelligence. He stated that over 460 political groups have been infiltrated since 1968 and there have been 130 officers over this period infiltrating such groups. Courtenay Griffiths QC suggested that the use of undercover policing was a means of limiting the progress of those speaking out against social injustice, and gave the example of the heavy infiltration of the civil rights movement in America by undercover officers, in an attempt to stop the likes of Martin Luther King. He argued that the use of undercover policing operations is often deeply political and is not used to prevent a particular crime, but rather, as was in America, to gather intelligence to discredit campaigns or collect evidence to prosecute individuals within these groups. The real concern at the conference was the progress of the Pitchford Inquiry, which having been ordered by the Home Secretary Theresa May, is designed to examine whether undercover policing has been properly used. Many who attended the conference expressed their concern about the police trying to prevent the disclosure of the identity of the officers involved, as they said without this there would be an undercover inquiry into undercover policing. This is clearly an emotive issue due to the impact such surveillance has had on many individuals and it is apparent that there is a real need for answers, answers which may not be satisfactory without full disclosure, including the identity of the officers involved. Claire Bradford, LLB Year 3
The Devils Advocate | 5
Inspired by Law Event: Dame Linda Dobbs on ‘The Changing Legal Landscape’ 6 | The Devils Advocate
Dame Linda Dobbs spoke in February in the first Lecture of the Inspired by Law event of the university where she discussed the challenges and opportunities faced by aspiring lawyers today. She presented her discussion citing the latest book of Richard Susskind, Tomorrow’s Lawyers, as the springboard of her argument. She mentioned the three drivers which Susskind predicted as major influences on the law profession and practice reiterating that these drivers will impact on how aspiring lawyers will need to prepare themselves to be hired by law firms, chambers and the judiciary. First, she said that aspiring lawyers will be entering the profession where the mantra is ‘more for less.’ This mantra means more legal service offered to clients at lesser cost. For example, employers would be more inclined to hire lawyers with wider skills such as having background in other fields of work, for example, in accountancy or chemistry, and these are used in their capacity as lawyers. The second driver of the profession- the liberalization of legal services - allows non-lawyers to compete in the legal marketplace by allowing alternative business structures, popularly known as Tesco law. Examples are the entry of accountancy firms offering legal services and the growing presence of US law firms operating UK legal practices. Dame Linda held that lawyers have to adapt to the presence of these challenges in order to thrive. Thirdly, she was also cognisant of the impact of information technology in the profession noticing that in the past the practice has been reliant on old-fashioned face-to-face negotiation of parties and communication in the court room. She emphasised that technology will transform
how lawyers will transact - from using the latest technology in the court room to technologically innovative interaction between clients and lawyers, outsourcing lawyers outside the firm, e-filing court forms and i-tutorial and virtual simulation in law schools among other uses of advances in technology in the legal setting. Dame Linda said these threats will have to be managed by the profession and aspiring lawyers have to innovate their skills to adapt to these challenges. She said whereas, during her BPTC time, the traditional route to law, that is, having a law degree and then working in a law firm or chambers might have given one the job; however, this route is today not the only approach to access a legal career and cited apprenticeship as another route. On another note, Dame Linda Dobbs mentioned that in 2004, she became the first black High Court judge in the UK. She recalled that when she started her career, the profession was not accessible to culturally diverse groups. Minority black ethnic (MBE) law students and lawyers were scarce and women lawyers were pigeonholed as doing family work. A year prior to her High Court bench appointment, she became the chairman of the Criminal Bar Association. She said that the profession has to have role models of MBE lawyers and judges to encourage these groups to join and stay in the profession. She has initiated, chaired and supported various endeavours to raise the profile and prospect of BME lawyers and law students. Judith dela Cuesta, final year, LLB (Hons) Law
The Devils Advocate | 7
We initially planned on visiting the European Court of Human Right (ECHR) in Strasbourg and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJ) in Luxembourg. We then got all the approvals and everything was planned, but we had to cancel the ECHR due to the Paris attacks and the state of emergency in France. It took a lot of hard work in researchin, sending emails as well as phone calls to both the CJ and the ECHR as well as the hostel we are to stay. On the 3rd of February, the journey started when we all met up separately at London Heathrow airport to go to the ‘city of justice’ as I put it. We have time to know each other better as the trip consisted of year one, year two and year three students and some of us have not met each other before. We boarded the British Airways flight to Luxembourg.On arriving at the airport in Luxembourg, it was snowing and so everywhere was beautiful. Luckily enough we had a student who can speak French as part of the team and she was really helpful with interpretation. The city is one with a lot of valleys and hills to climb but just like London, they have public buses to take people around and we really liked this. We boarded a bus and this took us to the hostel where we stay for the night. The hostel canteen food was nice and they helped by giving us a menu written in English. We were all tired and it was a late arrival so we were unable to explore the city as we might have wanted but we stayed together and had drinks and later we all went to our rooms. I was told by a student that most of them couldn’t sleep properly as they couldn’t wait for the next day for the visit
to the highest court in Europe the next morning. The next morning, they were all excited for the visit and to represent London South Bank University and Great Britain as a whole. We all had our breakfast and we made our way to the court. Finally, we entered a court room for a court hearing. It was massive and so beautiful inside, painted in a gold colour. There were 25 interpreters’ booths in the court room, because the court official language is French, so interpreters were provided for every language of the member states. Headphones were attached to each seat in the court and there you can decide in which language you want to hear the case. The best thing that happened to us in the court is that we had the best court guide to show us around and tell us some history relating to some statues in the court, why the court was located in the city of Luxembourg, and the history behind a particular staircase. We attended a hearing between Bayer CropScience SA-NV, Stichting De Bijenstichting v College voor de toelating, a company in Netherlands. The case was about pesticides and whether releasing the information about the chemicals would release the company trade secrets and as such hinder the business. It was represented by the Dutch and Swedish government who were party to it and the company lawyers, case number C-442/14. It was in reference to a provisions of Article 14 of Directive 91/414/EEC and Article 63 respectively, read in conjunction with Article 59 of the Plant Protection Product Regulation.
The court was made up of nine Judges and an Attorney- General and the barristers representing the interest of their clients (an organisation and the Netherlands) and there was a neutral barrister on behalf of the commission. However, we were unable to hear the decision as the attorney-general decision was adjourned to June. After the court hearing we were able to meet two judges that work in the court. Andy Unger, the head of the law division, also arranged for us to meet a Croatian judge there. He told us his experience and advised us that all we need is hard work and commitment to justice then we can stand in any court in the world. After this we took a couple of photographs and made our way back to the hostel to get our bags and make our way back to the airport and London. To most of the students even though they couldn’t have much time to explore the city, it felt as if they were in the city for a week. This was a short trip but it was worth it. I hope such a trip would be organised by the incoming executive again next year and this time their journey will include a trip to the European Court of Human s (ECHR) in Strasbourg.
Law Society F undraising
The Law Society goes to Luxembourg: visit to the Court of Justice of the European Union 8 | The Devils Advocate
As a student that has studied European law, all you can ever think of is going to the highest courts in Europe.
The British Red Cross receive a cheque for £311.88 for Syria from members of the Law Society.
I found it to be very eye opening, educative and informative for the students who attended. I am most happy to have been the first vice president and our executive to have led such team from the London South Bank University law society to the Court of Justice. Overall, the experience was most definitely both valuable and so rare as one seldom has the opportunity to attend a hearing in the Court of Justice. Bright Shine, 3rd year LLB student
The Devils Advocate | 9
The EU Referendum Shall we stay or shall we go? 10 | The Devils Advocate
This semester the School of Law and Social Sciences has hosted a series of lectures leading up to one of the most important decisions of modern times – whether the UK should remain in or leave the European Union. Contributions to the series are summarised below. The History of European Integration Dr Lisa Pine, LSBU This paper presented an introduction to the series, by providing the historical context to the current European Brexit debate. It examined the key and defining moments in the history of European integration after 1945 and the development of the EU, as well as Britain’s relationship with and role in Europe. The European idea existed long before 1945, but it was really only after the Second World War that the process of European integration began. The process was the result of a particular set of historical circumstances in post1945 Europe. First, there was the need for economic reconstruction in Europe after the Second World War. Second, there was a desire to preserve peace in Europe, especially between France and Germany. Third, there was the need to allow Germany, at the centre of Europe, to reconstruct, but without being a menace again and therefore integrating her into a wider Europe and keeping France’s fears abated. Fourth, there was the desire to safeguard Europe from Soviet expansionism. Fifth, there was the desire of the USA to establish a prosperous and united Europe, both as a market for its goods and as a bulwark against the spread of communism and Soviet expansion. The paper looked at the development of the European idea, from the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), which was established to distribute Marshall Aid, through the foundation of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), Treaty of Rome, which established the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Community (Euratom). The paper traced the history of the development of the EEC, EC and EU to date. It also analysed the history of Britain’s relationship with and role in Europe, from the two vetoes to British entry by Charles
de Gaulle, through to successful entry by Heath in Britain’s third attempt and beyond. It discussed Britain as ‘the awkward partner’ in Europe and explained some of the historical reasons for Britain’s ambivalent position in regard to the EU. Brexit: an Irish perspective, Michael Meehan Lecturer London Metropolitan University, 17 May Ireland and the UK have a close and special relationship. There is a commonality. They share a language and are both island nations with a Common Travel Area which allows passport free and queue free travel at border control (though travel companies might still ask to see a passport). Both countries are in the EU (for now) but both are outside the Schengen area. Trade between the two is substantial – the UK exports more to Ireland that it does to Indian and China combined. Ireland may not always agree with UK positions on EU matters and EU law but it usually understands them (and better so than other member states). Ireland has in the past intervened and supported the UK in some of the more difficult periods in its relationship with the EU (e.g. 1975 EU referendum; 1984 Milan summit initially rejecting proposals for a single market; 1991 Maastricht negotiations). The Irish government is clear that it wants the UK to remain in the EU. This is in Ireland’s interest and in its view the shared interests of both the UK and Ireland. For the Irish government the risks of BREXIT are clear both politically and economically. Changes to its relationship by the UK outside the EU could hit the Irish economy. This could feed into political instability especially in relation to border matters relating to Northern Ireland. EU law: people and free movement, John Koo, Lecturer LSBU, 16 May Free movement can be seen from a number of angles.Firstly there are the rights of free movement in the single market for persons, services, goods and capital. These free movement rights are considered fundamental: they have been part of Treaty law since the beginning and are, according to those campaigning to stay in, a core benefit of the EU membership.
There is also the notion of EU citizenship – a national of a member state is automatically an EU citizen. This provides a shared identity across 28 states. But there are limits in what it provides in terms of hard rights and a sense of shared identity. Medium to longer term free movement is dependent upon establishing an economic right. After 5 years of lawful residence in another member state an EU citizen is entitled to permanent residency in that state, (not to be confused with naturalisation). The Schengen area is another dimension. It is a agreement to rid of internal border control between member states. Surprisingly perhaps Schengen free border control has developed separately to single market law as not all states agree with Schengen principles. The UK and Ireland are in the single market but outside the Schengen rules so can maintain border controls between with other EU states. Nationals of non EU states have free movement rights if they come within recognised family categories so EU citizens can go and work in another state and bring some of their family with them whatever their nationality. There are common EU asylum rules on the assessment of asylum claims and the conditions of reception. There are also rules about which state deals with an asylum claim under what is known as the Dublin transfer system. This favours the UK as the dominant transfer rule is that the state of first entry is the state that is responsible for an asylum claim and the subsequent welfare of the refugee. In the last few years there has been increasing debate about the numbers of migrants to the UK. It is clear there has been a significant increase in immigration into the UK including immigration of EU citizens especially from 2004, when the EU expanded to include ten new states. The actual numbers are contested as official data on immigration which is based upon passenger surveys and their stated intentions relating to length of residence – are considered by some to be inaccurate. Recent analysis of figures relating to numbers of national insurance numbers issued to EU citizens, (for those who are working or claiming benefits), are
The Devils Advocate | 11
Edwin Shaw, Legitimacy of the EU: democracy, 12 May “The EU was designed for and exemplifies risk management, not democracy. Change in any direction is not possible until that is recognized.” This talk considered the notion of legitimacy and democracy from a perspective of globalisation. It considered that there are at all levels political levels fault lines from a democracy perspective in governance. Including in the EU. It suggested that democracy while cherished does always protect all groups in society nor does it always permit efficient running of administration and governments. It was suggested that the world was more and more complex and democracy was finding it harder to fit well. Perhaps we live more and more in a world based upon calculation of risks (or doing or not doing something) rather a world working to a democratic order. Cherry James EU and Higher Education 10 May This talk traced the development of the involvement of the EU in higher education. At its foundation, the EEC did not have any competence in education, the Member States being reluctant to cede control over such a culturally sensitive area. Inroads into this position were made gradually over the years, initially by the Court of Justice and latterly by primary and secondary legislation, owing to the relevance of education to free movement of economically active persons. The equal treatment principle was utilised to develop students’ rights to access, reside, study at and to some extent to finance at universities in other EU countries. The Erasmus Programme was developed to promote short term student mobility,
12 | The Devils Advocate
initially as one aspect of a project to develop a European identity and latterly on account of its potential to enhance linguistic and employability skills. Finally, the intergovernmental Bologna Process was outlined, formally outside the EU but with an increasingly blurred distinction from EU higher education policy and effecting ‘harmonisation by stealth’ of higher education, something which the EU is prohibited from doing itself. Political economy of the EU: a left case for exit, Adrian Budd, 5 May This talk challenged the dominant discourse on BREXIT which focuses on issues such as national power, migration and sovereignty. It presented instead a socialist perspective on the EU, arguing that postwar West European integration promoted the interests of the largest European firms and the more powerful states that defend them. The Greek example demonstrates that this perspective retains its relevance.
Mooting at LSBU
much higher than immigration figures. The reasons for this are contested; but they might indicate that the immigration is actually higher than the passenger survey data suggests. But, there is no actual hard data on actual migration and the numbers are a contested (and politicised) area of debate.
Charles Tannock, MEP, some thoughts from a London MEP Charles Tannock surveyed a range of areas in which the EU has passed laws and sought to influence for the better the lives of people. He discussed the challenges of being a MEP in a large city like London and some of the reasons why MEPs are not as visible as one might expect. Lord Liddle Risks of Brexit, 26 April This talk considered that the UK’s relationship with the EU was, from the beginning, a history of missed opportunities to influence the direction and operations of the EU. The case was made that the EU has always been a political project as part of the post war settlement. The idea that integration makes wars between the member states, if not impossible, very unlikely. The argument was made that membership of the EU is an important factor in the prosperity of the UK and that in the EU the UK has strength and influence on the world stage. Photo Credit Zoltan Meszaros
Earlier this year I became the Mooting Coordinator (although I think I prefer the alternative and suitably more pompous ‘Master of Moots’!) I immediately began reflecting on mooting at LSBU and what I can do to improve the standard as well as the entire mooting experience. In particular, I note that we did not progress through the early rounds of many competitions and this issomething that I am keen to address next year.
I am now armed with the best ideas and suggestions following those discussions. As part of my plans for next year, I will try to rework the competition format so that competitors get more chances to moot. Further, the mooting workshops need to achieve more. I want to get more hands on and teach those who want to learn how to approach a moot problem, how to write a skeleton argument and how to present the argument to the judge.
At the start of the academic year, I won the internal mooting competition with the final held at the Inner London Crown Court. For those of you who have seen the BBC series ‘Silk’, the final was in one of the courtrooms used for filming which rather added to the awe and thrill of the whole experience.
Accompanying the revised workshops will be a mooting handbook which I am currently in the process of writing. This will explore the areas we cover in the workshops in greater detail and equip students with an invaluable tool when it comes to preparing for the Internal Competition.
A few months ago, I travelled with two others to Manchester where we took part in the National Speed Mooting Competition. This involved receiving a pre-prepared bundle which included skeleton arguments for both sides as well as all the cases that we needed to rely upon. The experience was akin to how I imagine life would be as a trial barrister, receiving papers last minute and having to prepare for trial the following morning. It was tough but a very good experience. During my review of the internal competition process, I spoke to competitors who had either took part last year or were in the competition this time around. I wanted to understand what their experience was like and how this might help me in my quest to raise the overall mooting experience.
I have also started to discuss many other ideas with the powers-that-be to coincide with my determination to improve advocacy at LSBU. These ideas include a proper moot court, a collaboration between the Student Law Society and the Drama department to put on a mock trial, providing a framework so that law students can arrange friendly moots between themselves and even establishing an annual ‘staff v student’ friendly moot. Max Short, LLB 2nd year part time student, Master of Moots.
The Devils Advocate | 13
Interview with Angelika Majchrowska
Q. You are involved in a very exciting project. What is it and how did it come about?
Q. What have you gained from your involvement with the project?
Q. Why did you choose to study law?
I n Maastricht University I was a member of a students’ association called ELSA (European Law Students’ Association) and I found out that among other opportunities (such as traineeship or moot court competitions) they are also involved in a legal research group with an aim of producing a report for publication. From seeing their previous reports, I was interested in getting involved, as all of them were of a high standard and in collaboration with reputable organisations. When I applied, they were looking for candidates for a project on protection of journalistic sources, and I had previously written a paper about it for my Master’s degree, so I really wanted to be involved in this meaningful project. Luckily, I was accepted and obviously over the moon!
F irstly, being a contributor to an international publication that is in cooperation with the Council of Europe has definitely broadened my career prospects. However, most importantly, I am thrilled that I was able to be part of a project that aims to raise awareness on a very important subject in the area of human rights. Besides, all participants will receive a certificate of participation issued by the Council of Europe and ELSA, and we are all invited to the concluding conference as speakers.
I just felt that this is something that I would be good at. When I was younger, I wanted to be a veterinarian. However, when I realised that one day I might be asked to put an animal to sleep, it really upset me, so I gave up on this idea. My grandfather went to a law school in his mid-50s, and as a kid, I really admired him for pursuing his dreams despite his age. I remember that I used to sneak into his office to read all the law books and the codes of law that absolutely made no sense to me, as the language was not something an 8 year old is used to. Because it was some sort of a secret code for me, I wanted to learn how to ‘read’ law and since then, I knew that I wanted to study law. Q. What were the highlights of your time at LSBU? I recall my time at the LSBU as a very pleasant journey. Journey is exactly the word that I would describe my time at the LSBU as you really spend this time finding yourself, and LSBU was a great place for this! However, when I think about the highlights at the LSBU, the first thing that comes to my mind is when I was honoured with a gold award for my achievement as a course representative of law year 3. I could not be more proud of my involvement with the students. Also, during my last year I had an opportunity to go abroad to Hungary as part of the Citizenship and Combating Crime in the EU module [now called EU Criminal and Migration Law], and it was one of the best choices I made! We met a lot of different people from around the globe and with some I still keep in touch. It was a really great experience that was offered by the LSBU to me. Q. You have continued your education since leaving LSBU – where are you studying? I am studying at the Maastricht University in the Netherlands, and actually my tutor Cherry James recommended this university to me. It was a good decision as I fell in love with the little town from the first sight, it was completely the opposite experience to that of London. The university itself puts a lot of weight on independent learning, so at the beginning it was hard to adjust, but you learn quickly. I first enrolled for a Master’s Degree in Corporate and Commercial Law, however I soon realised that I was also very much interested in the European Law so after Christmas I enrolled into a second Master’s in European Public Law and Governance. At the moment, I am finishing my Master’s thesis in the United Kingdom.
he project itself is in collaboration with T the Council of Europe, and the structure of the report aims to answer whether national legislation complies with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as there have been a large number of cases in which public authorities in Europe have forced, or attempted to force, journalists to disclose their sources. The European Court of Human Rights has reiterated that Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights safeguards not only the substance and contents of information and ideas, but also the means of transmitting it. The press has been accorded the broadest scope of protection in the Court’s case law, including confidentiality of journalistic sources. The Council of Europe has found that violations are more frequent in member states without clear legislation. Moreover, in cases of investigative journalism, the protection of sources is of even greater importance. To shed light on this issue, ELSA has partnered with the Media and Internet Division of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law in the Council of Europe to understand how journalistic sources are being protected in each Member-State. Q. What is your role on the project? I n this project, as a member of the National Legal Research Group for the UK, I am responsible for the legal research. I had to identify and research areas relevant to the protection of journalistic sources, and to investigate the national legislation in order to produce a cohesive international final report that answers whether the national legislation and the case law of the United Kingdom complies with the European Convention on Human Rights. he final international report along with the T research outcomes will be published by the Council of Europe in July 2016.
Q. How have you managed your time so that you could work on the project and on your Master’s? L uckily, when I had to work on the project, I had already finished with all my exams at the Maastricht University, so I was only left with writing my thesis and working on the project at the same time, so it was not so hard. Q. Which legal figure do you admire? his is a tricky question as I do not have a T legal figure that I admire. I know that there a number of people that do amazing work as lawyers and I am grateful for their work. However, I never really looked at anyone and thought, ‘I want to be like her one day’, as I am a strong believer in myself and my abilities, and I know that I can accomplish anything if I put my mind to it.
s pu am -C On
14 | The Devils Advocate
ngelika Majchrowska graduated with an A LLB from LSBU in 2014.
Printing Service for Students! Official LSBU dissertation printing and binding
Q. Finally, any words of advice for our current students? ell firstly, go out and enjoy yourself! W What I have learnt throughout my years at LSBU is that time flies by so quickly, so make sure you get the most of it. The same goes for your degree, so do not forget to study! At the end of the day, you went to the university to get the necessary knowledge and finish with a degree that you are proud of. Above all, good luck!
Professional results, quick turnaround >Dissertation > Binding and Printing >General > Printing
>Competitive > prices >Pay > online via card
>Poster > Printing
Order online at www.lsbu.ac.uk/studentprint The Devils Advocate | 15
Claire Bradford, final year, LLB (Hons) Law Imran Khan QC engagingly discussed diplomatic immunity in the case of the ex-Prime Minister of Qatar turned ministercounsellor of the Qatari embassy in London who invoked diplomatic immunity against prosecution by a UK national, Fawaz alAttiya. The case concerns a property dispute between the ex PM Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani – HBJ and Attiya and an alleged torture of Attiya while imprisoned in Qatar under the instruction of the Sheikh. Under the 1961 Vienna Convention diplomats enjoy diplomatic immunity in the UK and the civil and criminal case against Sheikh HBJ is brought under this international law. However, Imran Khan argued that if it can be shown that the Sheikh was acting as a private individual, and not as a state official, during the sale of the property in Doha which allegedly made Attiya out of pocket, then the case could progress. Acting on his private capacity, the former PM could be charged as he would no longer be in the cloak of his diplomatic immunity. Professor Craig Barker, present during the event, Dean of the School of Law and the Social Sciences and an expert on diplomacy and state and diplomatic immunity, argued that there is a compelling reason for diplomats to be immune from prosecution.
An annual highlight of the Law Division year is the London Legal Walk. This year over 30 students, staff, alumni and supporters walked 10km in the company of 10,500 lawyers, advice workers, supporters and senior figures in the legal profession, including the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, the President of the Supreme Court, the Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions, and the President of the Law Society. The walk is to raise funds for legal advice services. In our case we walked (and Cherry James ran) to raise money for our Legal Advice Clinic. Thank you to all who helped us to raise over £1000. You can see pictures of the walk on this page and we would love your company next year!
He took the view that, historically, foreign nationals working for their government are protected in the host country to foster international relation of these countries. And he gave as an example the case of the Yvonne Fletcher, where the gunman firing from the Libyan embassy who, therefore, had diplomatic immunity, was allowed to leave the country without being prosecuted for the murder. Incidentally, late last year, the alleged murderer was arrested in connection with the murder whilst in London on a private capacity. Professor Barker, argued, on the other hand, that a judicial review might be a way to question the decision of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office which accepted the credentials of al Thani as a diplomat since in the same Convention, the law states that a diplomat cannot hold business dealings in the host country. HBJ is alleged to hold assets of £7.8 billion in the UK alone. The judge in the present case felt that it was not the place of the court to question the certificate of diplomatic status granted by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and an appeal has been lodged by Imran Khan. The question of diplomatic immunity and state immunity is a very interesting one and wait to hear more of the developments of this case.
The Legal Advice Clinic was in the news again when the Clinic, its satellite Helpdesk at Lambeth County Court and the Street Law project were highly commended in the LawWorks & Attorney General’s Student Awards 2016. Staff and students enjoyed the Law Society end of year party at Doggett’s Coat and
Badge. As well as celebrating the end of the exams, the party marked the retirement of Mic Jeeves from full time employment with LSBU. You will have read the retirement interview with Mic earlier in the magazine. Mic has been a stalwart member of the Law Division for longer than he, and we, care to remember. In his time at LSBU he has made a difference to the lives and careers of countless students and been a great support to his colleagues. Mic has been responsible for many developments in our teaching and learning, most particularly his work on e-learning. All of us will miss you and wish you very well in your retirement, Mic. So goodbye to those students who are graduating this summer. We wish you every success. We look forward to welcoming back returning students in September. Don’t forget to follow @LSBU_Law on Twitter during the break to keep informed and up to date. Have a great summer! The Law Division
Judith dela Cuesta, final year, LLB (Hons) Law
Law Division News
Human Rights Update Lecture 16 | The Devils Advocate
Sir Geoffrey Bindman QC was the first speaker of the evening and gave an interesting talk on the future of the Human Rights Act. He reminded us that we face very uncertain times and that the ‘British Bill of Rights’ is threatening to remove the protection afforded by the HRA 1998. David Cameron has said that he does not want to remove our ties with the European Convention on Human Rights which leaves one to wonder what exactly this British Bill of Rights would look like. Sir Geoffrey highlighted the cause for this political move to repeal the HRA as being fuell ed by misunderstanding and newspaper headlines based on inaccuracies and exaggeration. The reality is that the public is unaware of the importance of the HRA 1998 to our everyday lives and have been misled by the media labelling of the Act solely as a means of allowing terrorists to resist deportation or for lawyers to make vast sums on money, when the reality could not be further from this. The Act has enabled many ordinary people to protect their basic human rights and enabled people to protect their Convention rights in UK courts. Sir Geoffrey expressed his support for the Human Rights Act and his hope that the Government would realize the mistake they were making. However he acknowledged that this was unlikely and urged all students to campaign for keeping the HRA 1998 which has enabled so many people access to justice and protection of fundamental rights.
Photo credit Andy Unger/ Savannah Otway
The Devils Advocate | 17
Look, Book, Learn Skills for Learning
Workshops: Academic Skills / English / Maths
Skills for Learning Drop-ins and one-to-ones ins: Academic Skills and English: Monday – Friday: 11.00–13.00 (LRC 203) Maths Support: Monday – Friday: 11.00–13.00 (LRC 202) 14.00–16.00 (LRC 203) One-to-one sessions One-to-ones are for you (or a small group) to discuss particular aspects of your own learning/development. To book a 30 minute appointment, email studyskills@ lsbu.ac.uk, telephone 020 7815 6454 or visit the Student Life Centre.