PM’s closest authorized adviser Lord Hermer reported to barristers’ watchdog after being accused of pursuing ‘witch-hunt’ towards British Iraq War veterans
The Prime Minister’s closest legal adviser has been reported to the barristers’ watchdog for alleged serious misconduct, accused of pursuing a ‘witch–hunt’ against British Iraq War veterans.
A formal complaint against Lord Hermer was made to the Bar Standards Board (BSB) by Tory shadow minister Nick Timothy, claiming the peer ignored evidence that accusations against troops were false.
Lord Hermer, now Attorney General, was a senior lawyer in 2008 when British soldiers were hounded with false allegations of murdering Iraqis in 2004 after the Battle of Danny Boy.
In an exchange with human–rights lawyer Martyn Day during the build–up to the lawsuits, emails reveal that Lord Hermer advised any publicity must leave ‘some wriggle room if the killings did not in fact happen’.
The claims against the British Army were ruled to be untrue at the Al–Sweady Inquiry in 2014 and the claimants were branded liars.
Lord Hermer is now accused of disregarding evidence available at the time which showed that his clients were not innocent civilians but actually members of the Madhi Army, an Iranian–backed militia.
It is further alleged that the group were lodging claims to make money from the British state, and that Lord Hermer was also accused by the Ministry of Defence of seeking ‘excessive’ legal fees.
Lord Hermer denies all wrongdoing and says he always acted with the ‘highest professional standards’, adding that he categorically denied acting for individuals when he knew their claims were false.
Lord Hermer, now Attorney General, was a senior lawyer in 2008 when British soldiers were hounded with false allegations of murdering Iraqis in 2004 after the Battle of Danny Boy
Sir Keir Starmer’s closest legal adviser has been reported to the barristers’ watchdog for alleged serious misconduct
But Mr Timothy, the Tory justice spokesman, referred the peer’s actions to the BSB on Thursday, saying: ‘He went after British soldiers despite warnings murder allegations were false.’ He posted his letter to the BSB on X, accusing the barrister of ‘serious professional misconduct’.
He urged the BSB to consider whether Lord Hermer ‘drafted or approved documents alleging grave criminal conduct by British soldiers without reasonably credible material and continued to press for taxpayer–funded settlements after being told his clients were lying’.
The BSB is the regulatory body that establishes barristers’ rules.
The emails between Lord Hermer and those who he worked with at the time, seen by The Daily Telegraph, will put fresh pressure on Sir Keir Starmer, who appointed him to his role after the general election in July 2024. The Prime Minister already faces serious questions about his judgment following the Peter Mandelson scandal.
Gavin Williamson, former Conservative defence secretary, also called for the BSB to investigate Lord Hermer ‘without delay’. He added that the concerns raised in the emails would justify an inquiry and would appear to leave the peer in ‘stark and uncomfortable tension’ with this professional duty to act with ‘honesty and integrity’.
Lord Hermer was a barrister in private practice before joining the Government. Other clients included Shamima Begum, who was stripped of British citizenship for joining Islamic State in 2015.
His spokesman said: ‘Over a 30–year legal career, the Attorney General represented many clients, including British military personnel, such as a British soldier killed by IRA terrorists, and injured servicemen in the Iraq War. The Attorney always acted with the highest professional standards.’
The spokesman insisted that the suggestion that Lord Hermer acted for individuals with the knowledge that their claims were false ‘is categorically untrue’, adding: ‘The Attorney General had minimal involvement in the Al–Sweady claims, limited to a small number of hours between 2008 and 2013.’
The BSB refused to say whether the complaint had been received, adding: ‘These procedures are usually conducted confidentially unless they result in a listing for a disciplinary tribunal hearing.’
