Just who does legal aid really aid?

Now is it just me or does anyone else think that the Human Rights Act is the new name for Equitable Life, you know, the old lawyer's pension fund that went into freefall.

Your future's safe with the Human Rights Act, guaranteed pay outs with Government backing. Lawyers must be the only people on earth who think that legal aid is some form of tax credit to boost the earnings of solicitors and barristers

We have these two lads who are accused of murdering British soldiers who were captured and being held as prisoners of war at the start of the somewhat ill-considered Iraq War in 2003.

Now the alleged offences were committed by Iraqis in Iraq and the Iraq government wants to try them which all seems fairly simple and straightforward, all that is needed is for the British authorities who are holding them, in Iraq, to hand them over to the appropriate authorities who are, like everything else in this case, in Iraq. Done and dusted you might think except of course it means that those bastions of graft, the great British legal profession, who can make a fraud case into a career and a Government Bloody Sunday inquiry into a dynasty, would not be able to stick their ample snouts in to the trough.

So it is reported that Public Immunity Lawyers, which seems to be another name for Birmingham's very own Public Interest Lawyers, have squeezed a few grand from the taxpayers, me and you, for a judicial review claiming that the Iraqis who are accused of committing a crime in Iraq might not get a fair trial, in Iraq, because the court where the men will be tried has been "politicised". Get real lads.

Whether these Iraqis are innocent or guilty or indeed whether the court where they will be tried is run by Solomon or kangaroos matters not one jot. What does matter though is where in a world that has not lost its marbles do we have any sort of responsibility to ensure nationals of another supposedly sovereign state receive a fair trail in their own country for offences committed in that country?

How on earth can Iraqis who are accused of committing a crime under one régime in Iraq and now are wanted by the current legal and recognised Government in Iraq for trial for those crimes even be considered for legal aid in British courts? Where on earth can we possibly have any jurisdiction? It might be different if we wanted them out of Iraq for trial here but it is Iraq which wants to try them. They are not British, don't live here and their lawyers should be arguing their case in Baghdad not the Strand. But I suppose that little argument is the one that ensures our hard working lawyers are ensured merry Christmas bonus . . . possibly for years to come.

I am sure that the lawyers are not working for minimum wage so it has already cost us a fair bob or two and no doubt if they lose they will already by planning appeal after appeal, all on legal aid. Meanwhile the accused will avoid standing trial.

If the lawyers win and the men are tried in this country and found guilty then no doubt we will be picking up the expensive bill for their defence as well as the cost of their incarceration. If, on the other hand, they lose and are tried in Baghdad, where I suspect there is no bottomless pit of legal aid, then I will bet a pound to a penny that they will be on their own, no matter how unfair the trial is supposed to be.

And while we are at it, who in the lawyer's benevolent fund that is legal aid, approved this meritless payment and on what grounds?