Letter to the Bar

Bar Standards Board.
289-293 High Holborn,
London,
WC1V 7HZ.                                                                                                            17th May 2013.


Dear Sir,

Re: BARBARA HEWSON – BARRISTER AT HARDWICKE/LONDON. ARTICLE IN SPIKED MAGAZINE – WED: 8th

On Wednesday 8th  MAY 2013 of May the on-line magazine called Spiked carried an article under the headline Yewtree is Destroying the Rule of Law.  The link to this article is http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13604/. The article was written by a practising Barrister, Barbara Hewson of the firm Harwicke which is based in London. The article attracted the attention of the national news media who reported the views expressed by Ms Hewson. The views of Ms Hardwicke were also reported in some international news media including The Huffington Post. In the opening paragraph of the article Ms Hewson states “I do not support the persecution of old men. The manipulation of the rule of law by the Savile inquisition – otherwise known as Operation Yewtree – and its attendant zealots Poses a far graver threat to society than anything Jimmy Savile ever did.”

Is Ms Hewson implying that crimes should not be prosecuted when the alleged perpetrator of those crimes have managed to escape detection by law enforcement for a number of decades? The logical conclusion would be that Nazi war criminals should not be prosecuted for crimes committed during WW11 purely on the grounds of their advanced years. Ms Hewson refers to “The manipulation of the rule of law by the Savile inquisition….” Does Ms Hewson have reason to believe that the investigative process is being corrupted?  If she has no such evidence is it appropriate for a representative of the court to falsely imply that the police are acting corruptly?

Ms Hewson states that Operation Yewtree “….poses a far greater threat to society than anything Jimmy Savile ever did.”  Is Ms Hewson privy to confidential information contained within the Yewtree investigative team?  The investigation is not anywhere near to a conclusion so how can Ms Hewson make such a claim?  What is in the public domain is the scale of Savile’s sexual abuse of children. It is also in the public domain that Savile sexually assaulted children as young as five and another child who was terminally ill. Does Ms Hewson really seek to argue that this sort of conduct is of no consequence and is not a “threat to society?”

In the second paragraph Ms Hewson refers to the recent arrest of the Deputy Speaker of The House of Commons, Nigel Evans. She states: “Now even to deputy speaker of the House of Commons is accused of male rape.  This is an unfortunate consequence of the present mania for policing all aspects of personal life under the mantra of ‘child protection’”   Here Ms Hewson seems to suggest that there is no substance to the allegations against Mr Evans despite that fact that the police investigations are not yet complete and that the DPP has not made any decision regarding the case. She also seems to imply that any sexual conduct should be beyond the reach of the law even in cases where one party feels they have been subjected to acts which are deemed to be illegal, eg. rape or sexual relations with a minor.
Ms Hewsons article carries on in similar vein throughout and has been widely condemned.  In view of its content I now wish to lodge a formal complaint against Ms Hewson, I do so on the following grounds:-

CODE of CONDUCT - Part III - Fundamental principles

301. A barrister must have regard to paragraph 104 and must not:
a) engage in conduct whether in pursuit of his profession or otherwise which is:
(i) dishonest or otherwise discreditable to a barrister;
(ii) prejudicial to the administration of justice; or
(iii) likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute.

307. A barrister must not:
(a) permit his absolute independence integrity and freedom from external pressures to be compromised;
(b) do anything (for example accept a present) in such circumstances as may lead to any inference that his independence may be compromised:

I look forward to your response in due course.


Yours faithfully,

Michael .H. Murrin.

cc.  Mr Ben Wallace MP.

Original: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByannZ58BCl-Z1BNaENnYU9SY1k/edit