Labour says ‘unanswered questions’ over Tory frontbencher acting for Abramovich
Justice minister Jake Richards told LBC's Shelagh Fogarty that Lord Wolfson’s position as one of the barristers representing the Russian oligarch in an ongoing legal case is "completely contradictory".
Labour has demanded that the Tories address “unanswered questions” about the shadow attorney general acting as a lawyer for Roman Abramovich.
Listen to this article
Justice minister Jake Richards told LBC's Shelagh Fogarty that Lord Wolfson’s position as one of the barristers representing the Russian oligarch in an ongoing legal case is "completely contradictory".
In a letter to shadow Cabinet Office minister Alex Burghart, Mr Richards said the public would “draw its own conclusions” from “your and Kemi Badenoch’s decision to evade” questions about the frontbencher’s role.
He insisted the Tory leader would publicly support Lord Wolfson if she were sure there was no conflict of interest and noted that shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick also “remains silent on the matter”, which Mr Richards said “speaks volumes”.
Mr Abramovich is caught up in a legal battle with the Jersey government after it launched an investigation into the source of more than £5.3 billion in assets linked to him, which have been held since he was sanctioned.
Read more: Chelsea charged with 74 alleged agent regulation breaches dating back to Abramovich era
Mr Richards told Shelagh: “Lord Wolfson has a decision to make. He serves as the Shadow Attorney General. He's in the Shadow Cabinet. He is part of the Conservative Party's policymaking process. And he's also trying to act for Roman Abramovich as a lawyer.
"In my view, that is completely contradictory.
"He is unable to complete both those tasks appropriately because there is a direct conflict of interest. The key point here is the UK government, along with international partners, are trying to recover assets from Putin's Russia to help with the war effort.
"Now, that is a policy that this government has. It's a policy that lots of governments have. We're not sure what the Conservative Party's policy is, but it surely cannot be right that the Shadow Attorney General, a key and senior figure in the top Tory team, is also working for Roman Abramovich, as well as advising Kemi Badenoch on these issues.
"She must take action.
"This is a matter of her leadership and ensure that he is no longer in this position or he should stand down from his role advising Roman Abramovich.”
The justice minister has claimed the case is delaying the release of funds from the Russian oligarch’s sale of Chelsea FC, which the UK Government wants to see used to help rebuild Ukraine after the war ends.
In a letter on Tuesday, Mr Burghart told the minister that the Jersey proceedings had “nothing to do with the donation of the Chelsea sale proceeds, and does not involve the UK Government”.
“To suggest otherwise is wrong, and you should correct the record,” he said.
The Tory frontbencher said the Conservatives want the Chelsea proceeds released quickly and should “reach their intended recipients lawfully and without delay”.
“I am confident that at all times Lord Wolfson has acted in accordance with his professional obligations and with integrity.”
A spokesperson for the Conservative Party told LBC: “Lord Wolfson is instructed in on-going legal proceedings in Jersey. He is not instructed on the Chelsea FC matter.
“Jake Richards’ comments are pure politics, and they show Labour still does not understand how the Bar works. Barristers act for clients, not causes.
“And it’s a bit rich from this Government. Labour should stop throwing mud. Their own Attorney General has acted for Gerry Adams and involved himself in the Shamima Begum case. This is rank hypocrisy.
“The Conservative Party led the way on supporting Ukraine and we remain committed to their cause. To suggest anything else is just Labour sinking to new depths.”
In a response to the Conservatives, Mr Richards said: “It’s a complete red herring, because what we're not saying, we're not criticising Lord Wolson for advising clients, all clients of whatever character, whether they're murderers, whether they are oligarchs who have benefited from Putin's Russia have the right to legal representation, every right to legal representation.
"I am not for one minute criticising Lord Wilson, who I know and respect as a lawyer, for taking on that case. We all as barristers, act in certain cases like that. The issue is that you cannot do it whilst being a frontline politician forming government policy that I presume the Conservatives would want to enact if they were ever to win a general election again.
"Those two positions are wholly contradictory, inconsistent and not viable going forward. And I actually think that David Wolfson, Lord Wolfson, someone who, again, I respect and admire as a lawyer, knows that himself, and I hope that he can clarify the position in the next few days.”
British financier and political activist Sir Bill Browder said it represents an obvious conflict of interest, branding the situation outrageous.
He told LBC's Simon Marks: "Of course it’s a conflict of interest. It’s outrageous. It’s unbelievable. And I say this in a nonpartisan way. I’m not a member of the Labour Party or the Conservative Party or the Reform Party. I’m just looking at this objectively. And you cannot have a lawmaker, a shadow cabinet person, acting on behalf of a Russian oligarch when this is one of the biggest cases facing the government right now.
“It’s completely ridiculous. And it kind of surprises me why we’re even talking about this a day and a half into this. Lord Wolfson should have been told in very clear terms by the leader of his party: either resign from the case or resign from the shadow cabinet. But you can’t do both.
“I mean, frankly, it surprises me that members of the House of Lords, which is a lawmaking body, the upper chamber of Parliament, should be even moonlighting, doing any of this kind of stuff for Russians. And he’s not the only one doing it.”