Advocacy

Description

Lord Pannick celebrates advocacy: that controversial legal issues are decided in court after reasoned argument in which the participants refrain (usually) from shouting, personal insults or threats, and the points on each side of the debate are tested for their relevance, their accuracy, and their strength. The book seeks to identify the central characteristics of good and bad advocacy with the aid of examples from courtrooms in the UK and abroad. Lord Pannick also examines the morality of advocacy - that the advocate sets out views to which he does not necessarily subscribe, on behalf of clients for whom she may feel admiration, indifference, or contempt. Lord Pannick seeks to answer the question he is often asked - more by friends than by judges - 'How can you act for such terrible people?'. Finally, he addresses the future of advocacy, arguing it should and will survive pressures for efficiency and technological developments.

Lord David Pannick KC has been a practising barrister since 1980. His most famous case was arguing for Gina Miller in persuading the Supreme Court that it was unlawful for Prime Minister Boris Johnson to advise the Queen to suspend parliament in 2019 because of his wish to 'get Brexit done'. Lord Pannick has appeared in more than 125 cases in the Supreme Court and its predecessor the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords. He is also a crossbench member of the House of Lords and a Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford.