Thread by @JolyonMaugham

Two things about this crowdfunding (theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/j…) for a potential judicial review into delays in criminal investigations into Leave wrongdoing.

First, there is a real issue. The extracts below suggest an alarming linkage between political concerns and criminal law.

However, second, I think we should be concerned about the use of crowdfunding to cover the professional costs of scoping exercises into whether judicial review proceedings can be brought. I don't see how there can possibly be proper accountability for the decisions to crowdfund.

Snips from this piece published by @openDemocracy. opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-…

It's absolutely right that I should point out that three days after the referendum I crowdfunded a scoping exercise into the case that became the Miller case (crowdjustice.com/case/should-pa…). However, I've come to believe that was the wrong thing to do...

If a lawyer acts in the public interest they can perform the scoping exercise for free. If he wants to generate fee income, isn't there a conflict between his interests and those of would be funders? Who reconciles that conflict? Who tells the public 'this is worth funding'?

After the scoping exercise, the promoter can say to the public 'I have taken advice and there is a legal issue we can properly pursue if you fund it.' So there is accountability for the public against the promoter and for the promoter against the lawyers. But beforehand???