Human rights lawyer Phil Shiner struck off after 'dishonestly' bringing charges against British soldiers
Solicitor faces disciplinary panel over 2008 claims UK troops unlawfully killed, tortured and mistreated civilians in Iraq War
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A controversial human rights lawyer has been struck off after being found to have acted dishonestly in bringing murder and torture claims against British Iraq War veterans.
Phil Shiner, a solicitor who worked for the now-defunct Public Interest Lawyers (PIL), had 12 charges of misconduct found proved against him by a panel of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
In five charges he was found to have acted dishonestly, including agreeing to pay “sweeteners” to a fixer, understood to be Abu Jamal, to persuade him to change his evidence to the £31m Al-Sweady Inquiry.
Mr Shiner previously admitted nine allegations of acting without integrity, including that he made “unsolicited direct approaches” to potential clients.
He did not attend the hearing, having written to the tribunal to say he was unwell and could not afford to pay for a defence lawyer.
Mr Shiner was struck off the roll of solicitors.
The tribunal heard in December the lawyer accepted he would be struck off as a result of the case, thought to be one of the most expensive ever brought by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).
Nicola Lucking, chairwoman of the panel, said: “We have come to the conclusion the appropriate sanction is a strike off.”
The hearing finished earlier than expected as a result of Mr Shiner’s absence and Andrew Tabachnik, representing the SRA, accused him of being “in a state of avoidance” to prevent proceedings from going ahead in full.
The tribunal heard the effects of his involvement on British military personnel in “cold-calling” the family members of alleged Iraqi victims.
Army Colonel James Coote, who was a major stationed in Basra, said the false claims made against British troops at the Battle of Danny Boy in 2004 had been “extremely stressful and demoralising”.
Mr Shiner had admitted acting recklessly by claiming at a press conference in February 2008 that the British Army had unlawfully killed, tortured and mistreated Iraqi civilians during the Iraq War battle.
Mr Shiner agreed to pay Jamal, named only as “Z” in SRA papers, thousands of pounds for referrals, which is prohibited.
As a team leader at PIL, Mr Shiner authorised and procured payments and fee-sharing agreements with the agent between 2007 and 2010.
One of those payments was for £25,000 on 30 March 2009, which he admitted but had denied related to a publicly funded case as the SRA alleged.
PA
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments