Question to the Attorney General:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether it is the policy of the Advocate General for Northern Ireland to recuse himself from discussions of any issue in Northern Ireland which may directly or indirectly involve any of his former clients.

Answered by Lord Hermer - Attorney General

I am the Government’s chief legal adviser but, by long-standing convention, the fact that I, or a fellow Law Officer, may have advised or not advised, and the content of our advice, is not disclosed outside government, as is reflected in the Ministerial Code.

This is a long-standing policy observed by successive governments. It is also an important legal principle, as confirmed by the Bar Council, that “barristers do not choose their clients, nor do they associate themselves with their clients’ opinions or behaviour by virtue of representing them”.

Law Officers, by their experience and professional nature will sometimes have an extensive legal background and may have previously been involved in a wide number of past cases. That is why there is a robust system for considering and managing any conflicts that may arise, in line with the professional obligations of lawyers.

There is the established process on ministerial declarations, with previous employment and interests having been published for the public record. In general, there has always been an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest. This system sits alongside the declaration of interest system overseen by the Prime Minister’s Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards.

If a Law Officer publicly confirmed specific matters where they were recused, this would likely disclose that the other Law Officer was therefore giving advice or infer that legal advice had been requested by the Government on a specific matter, which would risk a breach of the Law Officers’ Convention. In addition, a lawyer cannot breach a client’s confidentiality in relation to advisory work that had previously not been made public so this would limit the ability of a Law Officer to publish in full their previous caseload and conflicts schedule. In that regard, I have been through the same process as previous Law Officers, none of which have gone as far to proactively disclose their specific conflicts of interest for the reasons set out above.

As I set out to the Justice Select Committee (15 January 2025), I confirmed that as a private barrister prior to my appointment as Attorney General, I represented Gerry Adams on an issue unconnected to the Legacy Act.

Question to the Northern Ireland Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Advocate General for Northern Ireland was consulted prior to the decision in July to withdraw the appeal in respect of sections 46 and 47 of the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 following the ruling of the high court in Belfast February 2024.

Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

The standard clearance processes were followed when the Government decided to withdraw the ECHR aspects of the appeal in Dillon & others following the ruling of the Northern Ireland High Court. This included sections 46 and 47 of the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023.

Found: Even Lord Caine, one of the architects of the Legacy Act, accepted in the House of Lords that