getty imagesThe Labour Party has criticised Conservative Shadow Attorney General Lord Wolfson for acting as a lawyer for sanctioned Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich.
Justice Minister Jack Richards said it was “inexcusable” for him to retain his position on the Tory frontbench while representing Mr Abramovich, arguing it risked a conflict of interest.
The Conservatives said the comments were “pure politics” and a “baseless smear”, adding that “barristers work for clients, not for causes”.
Lord Wolfson is part of the legal team representing the former owner of Chelsea Football Club in his court battle with the Jersey government.
The UK government banned Mr Abramovich in March 2022, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The accusation against the oligarch, who made his fortune in oil and gas, is that he has strong ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, a claim he denies.
More than £5.3 billion worth of assets linked to Mr Abramovich have been banned by the Jersey courts since their approval.
The Government of Jersey initiated an investigation in April 2022 to ascertain the origin of the funds, leading to a protracted legal dispute.
The Justice Minister claimed the case was blocking the transfer of funds from the sale of Mr Abramovich’s Chelsea FC, which the government wants to give to victims of the war in Ukraine.
In 2022, Mr. Abramovich said the £2.5 billion raised from the sale should be used for “all victims of the war”—meaning the Russians could also benefit.
In a letter to Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, Richards said, “Mr Abramovich’s position is that the transfer of funds cannot be completed until the end of the court case in Jersey in which Lord Wolfson is representing him.
“As Shadow Attorney General,
Lord Wolfson has a key role in setting Conservative Party policy.
“As a salaried representative of Mr Abramovich, he has a financial interest in the question of whether and when Mr Abramovich’s assets are transferred to benefit the people of Ukraine.”
In his letter, the minister raised a number of questions, including whether Lord Wolfson played a role in formulating the party’s position on transferring funds from the sale of Chelsea FC and whether he had declared an interest in it or recused himself from the process.
Richards said that the “cab rank rule”—the principle that a barrister must take any case within his area of expertise, regardless of the client—”should always be respected, but it cannot remove conflicts of interest or eliminate the responsibility of politicians to avoid such conflicts.”
He added, “Lord Wolfson’s ability to advise you in relation to this matter is clearly compromised by the fact that he is being paid to act on Mr Abramovich’s behalf.
“If he wishes to continue to represent clients whose interests are directly linked to the policies of the Government and HM the Opposition, then that is a matter for him – but he cannot do that while serving in your shadow cabinet.”
A Conservative Party spokesman responded by saying, “We have instructed Lord Wolfson in the ongoing legal proceedings in Jersey.” He has not been instructed on the Chelsea FC matter.
“Jake Richards’ comments are pure politics, and they show Labour still doesn’t understand how the bar works. Barristers work for clients, not causes.”
The spokesman accused Labor of “rank hypocrisy,” pointing out that Attorney General Lord Harmer, the government’s chief legal adviser, represented former Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams before becoming a minister.
He added, “The Conservative Party has led the way in supporting Ukraine and we remain committed to its cause. Suggesting otherwise would represent a new low for the Labour Party.
pa mediaThere has been a delay in releasing the funds received from the sale of Chelsea FC, which are currently deposited in a British bank account, due to a standoff over how they should be used.
Under UK sanctions, Mr Abramovich cannot access the money, but the proceeds from the sale of Chelsea remain legally his.
Earlier this month, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer urged the oligarch to “pay up now” or face court action.
