The Law Show

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood’s Restoring Order and Control policy is underway. It's based - in part - on measures carried out in Denmark which cut asylum claims there to a 40 year low. From now on in the UK, people granted asylum - refugees - will face a review every two and a half years. If their country of origin is regarded as safe, they may be encouraged, or even forced, to go back. There are lots of other changes. If someone is refused asylum, they’ll only be allowed a single appeal. If an asylum seeker breaks the law, works illegally or can financially support themselves, they’ll lose their benefits or accommodation. Alongside the asylum reforms, there are also major changes to settlement in the UK, affecting both refugees and people on work and study visas. From now on, they will have to wait at least 10 years before they can obtain indefinite leave to remain, which means they can settle in the UK without restrictions. You may be forgiven for thinking -"these are pretty big changes, I don’t recall there being a big debate in parliament or any votes?" And you’d be correct. This was all done through secondary legislation, meaning that it’s a change to existing rules. But what are the possible legal battles for the government as it tries to introduce some of the toughest asylum laws in Europe? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Contributors: Dr Peter Walsh, Senior Researcher and lead on asylum at the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Law at the University of Cambridge Baroness Levitt, Family Justice Minister

Under international law, when can a country declare war on another?Was it legal for Israel and the United States to have carried out "pre-emptive" airstrikes across most of Iran’s provinces, which started the war? The USA says the attacks were justfied, because of an imminent threat from Iran's nuclear programme, and Israel claims it acted in self-defence. The Israeli President went further - telling the BBC that focusing on the legality of the war instead of regional security is "mind-boggling" to him. And what of Iran's response? Was it reasonable under international law? In the last few weeks, practically all its Gulf-state neighbours have been targeted, as well as its drones or missiles landing in Syria, Cyprus, Turkey and Azerbajan. So does the Iranian retalliation justify the American and Israeli attacks under international law? And if any country breaks international laws - are there any real consequences? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Susan Breau, Professor of International law at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London Christian Henderson, Professor of International Law, University of Sussex Éamon Chawke, intellectual property, data protection and commercial law solicitor, Briffa Legal

The Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood says she makes “no apology” for announcing the roll-out of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) to all the police services in England and Wales. Under a government white paper on policing, the number of Live Facial Recognition vans will increase from 10 to 50. Police say it’s groundbreaking technology in the fight against crime, but civil liberties groups say it’s authoritarian and a step towards a "surveillance state".Facial recognition cameras are already used in shops; the difference with LFR is that the software used by police tracks faces against a watchlist - a specific database of faces - from a live video feed. But the legal framework regulating the use of the technology is a patchwork of common law, human rights legislation and police guidelines, which has been challenged in the High Court. There is also concern about a lack of oversight over how police watchlists are compiled, and why the number of people on the list now stretches into the thousands. So is LFR legal? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Sonja Jessup, BBC London’s home affairs correspondent Professor Karen Yeung, Interdisciplinary Professorial Fellow in Law, Ethics and Informatics, Birmingham Law School Dr Asress Gikay, Senior Lecturer in AI, Disruptive Innovation and Law, Brunel, University of London Richard Ryan a barrister from Blakiston’s, specialising in drone and unmanned aviation law

The courts system in England and Wales is in an unprecedented crisis. The backlog has reached 80,000 cases, and some defendants are being told they won't be able to have a criminal trial until 2030. The government has introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which contains a raft of measures to tackle delays and bring down the backlog; but the Justice Secretary David Lammy has admitted that things are going to get even worse before they get better. The most controversial change is a plan to restrict the number of jury trials. The right to judgement by your peers has existed for more than 800 years, but for some offences, that's going to end. Defendants will lose the right to choose between a jury trial or a magistrate's hearing in so-called "either-way" offences. Magistrates will get increased sentencing powers - up from 12 months to 18 months. More serious criminal cases, with likely sentences of up to three years will now be heard by a single judge - and no jury. And only the most serious "indictable" offences, like murder, manslaughter and rape and any other offence with a sentence of longer than three years will be heard by a jury.But will the reforms make a difference? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Sarah Sackman KC, courts and legal services minister Chris Kinch, KC, who until 2024 was a senior judge at Woolwich Crown Court in south London David Ford, national chair of the Magistrates Association

The former US ambassador Peter Mandelson is on bail after being arrested on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office. Police have been investigating claims that when he was Business secretary, he shared market-sensitive government information with the financier Jeffrey Epstein. His arrest comes a few days after police arrested Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, also on suspicion of Misconduct in Public Office, when he was a trade envoy. He is suspected of sharing confidential government documents with Epstein. The arrests come after the release of a large number of files by the US Department of Justice. These relate to the activities of Jeffrey Epstein, who was a convicted sex offender. He died in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of the sex-trafficking of underage girls. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor was friends with Epstein. So was Lord Mandelson. The BBC has approached Andrew Mountbatten Windsor for a response to these claims. He has always rejected any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein and denied any personal gain from his role as trade envoy. Lord Mandelson has not publicly commented in recent weeks on the Epstein files, but the BBC understands his position is he has not acted in any way criminally and that he was not motivated by financial gain.But what exactly is Misconduct in Public Office? It's a common law offence, with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but the Law Commission of England and Wales describes it as "ill-defined ". So how did it evolve, who does it apply to, how does it work in practice? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Senior Producer: Ravi Naik Producer: Charlotte RowlesContributors: Gareth Roberts, Barrister, Exchange chambers Kate Bex KC, Red Lion chambers Jeremy Horder, Professor of Criminal Law, the London School of Economics Dr Hayleigh Bosher, a Reader in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel, University of London.

Politically motivated attacks on the legal profession in the UK have led to barristers, solicitors, advocates and judges being subjected to violence, death threats and rape threats. Some have faced threats to their family members. This is according to the The Bar Council of England and Wales, the Law Society of England and Wales, the Law Society of Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates, the Bar of Northern Ireland and the Law Society of Northern Ireland. These organisations represent a quarter of a million lawyers across the UK, and they have come together to warn about an increasing climate of hostility against legal professionals. They say that law firms have been targeted by protesters, and they point out that lawyers are not their clients. So how bad has the situation become, and is it threatening justice or even democracy?Also on the programme: The Scottish Parliament has passed the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill after 3 days of debates and almost 400 amendments lodged - so why is the bill so controversial? And using a dodgy "jailbroken-Firestick" to watch illegally-streamed TV may seem like a victimless crime - but is it? Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte Rowles Editor: Tom BigwoodContributors: Charlie Sherrard KC, criminal barrister with 2BR Chambers Mark Evans, President of the Law Society James Cook, BBC Scotland Editor Éamon Chawke, a solicitor who specialises in intellectual property law at Briffa legal

Claire Waxman, the Victims Commissioner-designate, discusses the profound emotional impact of court delays on victims, highlighting challenges in support services. Riel Karmy-Jones KC shares insights on the strain faced by the criminal bar due to increasing backlogs and potential solutions like limiting jury trials. Professor Geoff Pearson examines the unique legal challenges football fans face, arguing for a rethinking of regulations as crowd behavior improves. Together, they tackle pressing issues in the justice system and the need for reform.

Immigration has dominated headlines for months, but what UK laws cover this most emotive of issues? When someone arrives here, what are the legal routes they have to take if they want to stay in the UK? What's the legal difference between an asylum seeker and a refugee? What does "indefinite leave to remain" mean? And what's the difference between being deported, being removed and being extradited? How do immigration hearings work? Are our immigration laws fit for purpose, and do they enable us to remove people when required? Also on the programme: How will the government's digital ID plans help curb illegal immigration? and wigs in court; as the bar council updates dress advice for its members, we ask two barristers if wigs have had their day. Presenter: Dr Joelle Grogan Editor: Tom Bigwood Producers: Ravi Naik and Charlotte RowlesContributors Madeleine Sumption, Director of the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford Paul Gulbenkian, solicitor at OTS solicitors and former immigration Judge Morgan Wild, Chief Policy Adviser, Labour Together Jennifer Devans-Tamakloe, barrister at 23 Essex Street chambers Benet Brandreth KC, barrister at 11 South Square chambers

Deborah Coles, director of Inquest, and Alexander Learmonth, a King's Counsel, delve into the stark realities of state-related deaths. They discuss the lack of accountability in implementing coroner recommendations and the urgent need for a national oversight mechanism, citing tragic instances like Grenfell. The conversation also touches on recent legal reforms around wills and a landmark divorce case that reshapes asset distribution. Together, they uncover the complexities of law and humanity in the fight for safety and justice.

Claire Waxman, Victim's Commissioner for London, and Charlie Sherrard KC, a criminal justice barrister, dive into the newly proposed Victims and Courts Bill. They discuss how it mandates criminals to attend their sentencing hearings, emphasizing the emotional impact on victims' families. Waxman highlights stories from families who endured the absence of offenders at their loved ones’ sentencing. Plus, they explore the rise of AI in legal services and the emerging concept of 'pet-nups' for couples to consider in case of separation.