'Angry' Anwar cleared of contempt

Mr Anwar was cleared of contempt at the High Court in Edinburgh

Judges have cleared lawyer Aamer Anwar of contempt of court - but criticised his "angry and petulant" conduct.

It follows statements made by Mr Anwar after the trial of a man from Clackmannanshire who had been found guilty of terrorism offences.

The trial judge considered the comments to be contempt of court and referred them to three senior colleagues.

At the High Court in Edinburgh, they cleared Mr Anwar of contempt but said they "expected better" of solicitors.

Lord Osborne said the statements from the lawyer "embody angry and petulant criticism of the outcome of the trial process and a range of political comments concerning the position of Muslims in our society".

However, he said: "No contempt of court has been committed."

An independent defence able to speak without fear of recrimination by the state is an essential for freedom and justice Aamer Anwar

But the judge, who heard the case with Lord Kingarth and Lord Wheatley, said Mr Anwar had failed to meet the standards expected from officers of the court.

He said: "They have a duty to ensure that their public utterances, whether critical or not, are based upon an accurate appreciation of the facts of those proceedings, and that their comments are not misleading.

"Regrettably, we do not think that those standards were met in this case and the court is entitled to expect better of those who practice before it."

Mr Anwar, who was at the High Court in Edinburgh to hear the decision, was greeted outside the building by a crowd of supporters, including former Solidarity MSP Tommy Sheridan.

Reading from a statement which welcomed the finding, the lawyer said: "As our government criminalises communities and creates 'thought crime', lawyers still have a responsibility to be the guardians of our liberties and to campaign against injustice.

"Everyone likes to talk of the independence of the judiciary and prosecution but an independent defence able to speak without fear of recrimination by the state is an essential for freedom and justice."

Advertisement

Mr Anwar said the verdict was a victory for freedom of speech

The case centred on comments made by Mr Anwar outside the High Court in Glasgow in September, following the trial of Mohammed Atif Siddique.

Moments after the jury delivered its verdict, he said it was "a tragedy for justice and for freedom of speech".

He claimed the computing student's case was heard in an "atmosphere of hostility" in the aftermath of the attack on Glasgow Airport, and alleged the prosecution was "driven by the state".

Lord Carloway, who heard the 19-day trial, accused the solicitor of making "disparaging remarks" about him, the jury and the prosecution.

He passed the decision on whether contempt of court had been committed to the High Court.

Glasgow lawyer Joe Beltrami said the judges made the correct decision in clearing Mr Anwar.

"He was unwise perhaps in saying what he said but the point I'm making is there was nothing clandestine about this. There was nothing secretive about this," he said.

"He made this statement in the presence of umpteen members of the public. It was very public - as we lawyers would say 'coram publico'. Nothing hidden about it."

The Law Society of Scotland, the governing body for Scottish solicitors, said it had noted the court's finding and would examine the opinion in detail before taking "whatever action is appropriate."

Siddique, from Alva, in Clackmannanshire, was found guilty after trial of providing material on bomb-making and weapons training, and threatening to become a suicide bomber.

He was jailed for eight years in October.