The Attorney General is facing fresh scrutiny for blocking Britain from sharing intelligence with the US in a major terrorism case.
As a human rights barrister, Lord Hermer represented Maha Elgizouli, the mother of one of the so-called “Islamic State Beatles” who conspired to murder British and American citizens.
In 2020, Lord Hermer won a Supreme Court appeal preventing the Government from sharing intelligence on El Shafee El-Sheikh, Ms Elgizouli’s son, with the US without assurances that he would not face the death penalty.
The ruling overturned a 2018 secret deal between Sir Sajid Javid, the then home secretary, and US Attorney General Jeff Sessions to share intelligence on the terror cell.
The Prime Minister’s chief legal adviser is facing mounting calls to recuse himself from advising ministers on issues concerning clients he previously represented.
El-Sheikh was part of the jihadist group dubbed the “Beatles” owing to its members’ British accents. The group was behind the beheadings of journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, British aid workers David Haines and Alan Henning, and humanitarian worker Peter Kassig.
In January 2018, El-Sheikh and a fellow cell member, Alexanda Kotey, were captured by US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
Six months later, The Telegraph revealed a deal between Sir Sajid and Donald Trump’s administration, in which the UK agreed to share intelligence to prosecute the pair in US courts.
‘Assurances’ against the death penalty
A leaked letter from Sir Sajid to Mr Sessions revealed that the then-home secretary consented to transfer evidence of the jihadi terrorists’ crimes without securing “assurances” against the death penalty if the pair were convicted in America.
Sir Sajid wrote: “I am of the view that there are strong reasons for not requiring a death penalty assurance in this specific case, so no such assurances will be sought.”
The Metropolitan Police and FBI had been investigating the men’s activities in Syria since 2014. Sir Sajid said there was “intelligence” implicating them in the “kidnap and murder” of two British citizens and three Americans.
A briefing document also leaked to The Telegraph said senior members of Mr Trump’s first administration had “expressed frustration” about the UK Government trying to “dictate terms” for the alleged terrorists’ possible trial in America.
The emergence of the deal prompted Mrs Elgizouli to appeal against sharing information about her son with the US. Lord Hermer represented her during the case.
Her first appeal was dismissed by the High Court, but then in a landmark decision in March 2020 the Supreme Court ruled that sharing such intelligence without the assurance he would not be executed violated the Data Protection Act 2018 and prioritised political considerations.
The ruling forced the UK to alter its position and seek assurances that El-Sheikh would not be executed before it could share the intelligence with the US.
Eight life sentences
El-Sheikh was eventually convicted of conspiracy to commit hostage-taking leading to death, providing support to a terrorist group and four charges of the kidnap and detention of US citizens, leading to their deaths. He is now held at ADX Florence, a supermax prison in Colorado.
On Saturday, Richard Tice, the deputy leader of Reform UK and its MP for Boston and Skegness, said: “I suspect president-elect Trump would weep at yet another sign of the UK Labour Government having taken leave of its senses.”
Lord Hermer has come under fire over potential conflicts of interest concerning cases he took on as a human rights barrister.
The Telegraph revealed that asylum seekers previously represented by Lord Hermer were granted a “one-off” deal to come to Britain from the Chagos Islands months after his appointment as the UK’s chief law officer by Sir Keir Starmer.
In 2023, while a practising lawyer, Lord Hermer unsuccessfully challenged the Government in court on behalf of Sri Lankan asylum seekers stranded on Diego Garcia.
After his appointment, the Government reversed its stance, allowing all 61 migrants to resettle in Britain. Weeks before, ministers had announced a deal to cede the islands to Mauritius.
The Attorney General has refused to confirm if he has recused himself from advising ministers on issues involving former clients.
Other potential conflicts of interest relate to clients including Gerry Adams, the former president of Sinn Fein, who is set to benefit from a Government decision to repeal Troubles legislation.
Number 10 said last Friday that it was Hilary Benn, the Northern Ireland Secretary, who decided to seek to repeal the law barring Mr Adams from claiming compensation over his internment in the 1970s.
Lord Hermer has faced calls to recuse himself from an ongoing inquiry into alleged war crimes in Afghanistan because he previously represented Afghan families who accused British special forces of murdering their relatives.
Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, said there was “a clear pattern” of behaviour by the Government “making contentious decisions against the national interest that benefit the Attorney General’s former clients”.
He added: “The public will be asking where his loyalties lie.”
“It is unacceptable for the Government to hide behind convention and decline to confirm whether our chief legal adviser was involved in a decision about asylum seekers he had recently represented in court against His Majesty’s Government.
“The Attorney General cannot lecture about the rule of law while dodging fundamental questions about conflicts of interest. He must now urgently come clean, and explain to the British public whether he was involved in these decisions in Government, or his position is untenable.”
‘Horrifying track record’
Nile Gardiner, the director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, a think-tank, said: “I think the new Trump administration will be horrified with the track record of Starmer’s Attorney General and the individuals he has represented in the past, a whole wave of dangerous terrorists. His track record of working against UK intelligence sharing is deeply concerning.
“Starmer’s government is doing immense damage to Britain’s image in the United States and across the world. This latest revelation about the Attorney General’s past representations will further harm Britain’s standing.
“It’s challenging for the United States to collaborate closely with a British government on critically important issues when you have an Attorney General who has a track record of making such cooperation difficult.”
On Wednesday, Lord Hermer told the justice select committee that, by convention, law officers do not confirm whether they have advised ministers on any given issue.
Sources close to his office said that, as has been the case under successive governments, decisions on policy are taken by the relevant Secretary of State and departments.
A spokesman for the Attorney General’s office said: “Law Officers, by their experience and very professional nature will 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 Law Officers.
“There is the established process of ministerial declarations, with previous employment and interests having been published for the public record.”
