We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

Court of opinion

Sir, David Cameron and Michael Gove are right to draw a line between continuing to trade, to Britain’s considerable advantage, with a country whose human rights we find totally distasteful, and providing men and training skills to that country for the direct purpose of improving the efficiency of their human rights abuses.

Perhaps more to the point of Stanley Brodie’s letter (Oct 14), but contrary to his opinion, it is judges who must not take sides: lawyers can and should. There can be no reason why lawyers, who might contribute knowledge and experience to human rights issues, should not express their views in such a letter, as long as they are not sitting judges who would thereby be compromising judicial independence. Perhaps even former judges might be wise to refrain from involvement, lest their judgments, having been recorded, might encourage the suspicion that they were not always objective.

Sir Ivan Lawrence, QC

Temple, London EC4