The Justice Game

by Geoffrey Robertson

Librarian's note: Alternative cover edition of ISBN13: 9780099581918.

As a young Australian barrister, Robertson found himself involved in the Oz trial; a frothingly moralistic judge went to some lengths to jail three editors of an underground magazine, and was duly humiliated on appeal. Success leads to opportunity; Robertson has found himself at the heart of a sequence of crucial freedom of expression trials—the Gay News blasphemy trial, the attempt to bust the National theatre over a play in which male rape took place, the arrest of a painter whose chosen subject was bank notes. His account of his career concentrates on these, and on his own entire brilliance in them; he is not a modest man, nor is there any particular reason why he should be, especially given how sharp and witty his accounts are. Robertson has also been involved in other causes cèlebres—he knows all about the Michael X case, and a variety of other capital cases in the Caribbean, and is fascinating on the Matrix Churchill case and the various libel actions around the "cash for questions" sleaze row. Anyone interested in the issues is going to find this a useful book—but the average intelligent reader is going to find the account of courtroom battles a guilty pleasure in itself. —Roz Kaveney

Genres: Law, Nonfiction, Biography, Legal, Politics, History, Memoir

415 pages, Paperback

First published February 26, 1998

About the author

Geoffrey Ronald Robertson QC (born 30 September 1946) is a human rights barrister, academic, author and broadcaster. He holds dual Australian and British citizenship.

Robertson is a founder and joint head of Doughty Street Chambers. He serves as a Master of the Bench at the Middle Temple, a recorder, and visiting professor at Queen Mary, University of London.

Reviews

[Estelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

THIS HAS BEEN ON MY 'CURRENTLY READING' SHELF FOR FAR TOO LONG. THAT'S IT SCREW YOU HSC ENGLISH ADVANCED, I HAD ENOUGH.

Technically this is a DNF since I only read the prescribed chapters for the English Syllabus.
Since I'm feeling very bored from studying right now, I'll just copy and paste these two paragraphs from my english essay as a 'review' heh.

Robertson’s The Trials of Oz explicates subjective representations as innately influenced by an individual’s morals. Despite establishing himself as an ‘objective’ observer, he takes a liberal stance on issues surrounding freedom of speech and censorship as opposed to the contextually conservative ideologies of the British judicial system. To argue his perspective, Robertson’s discrediting of Judge Argyle is facilitated by characterising his “views” as “signalled to the jury through tone of voice and body language” as opposed to rigorous and impartial reasoning. This highlights Argyle’s impartiality in denoting his actions as founded upon parochial conservatism rather than judicial integrity. Similarly the anecdote that Argyle “sent delinquents who vandalized public telephone boxes to prison for three years” accentuates his antagonistic portrayal in inducing the responder’s disapproval. Such widespread prevalence of unethical behaviour is further affirmed in Robertson’s aside that the solicitors “stage-managed the shows” and “meet to rehearse the cast”. This recurring theatre motif likens the judicial system to a dramatic, orchestrated set-up with the sole purpose of furthering individuals’ egocentric agenda, with the process of justice reduced to a ‘game’ as suggested by the eponymous title of the novel. Furthermore, as Richard Neville rhetorically questions “Will you lend a hand, members of the jury?” the anacoenosis here reflects the construction of a synthetic sense of rapport with the audiences. By utilising the memoir form that selectively emphasises Neville’s innocence, Robertson evinces how potent acts of representation influence meaning by revealing the poignant fallibilities of the British justice system.

It becomes clear that composers fulfil personal agendas through representations when considering the chapter ‘Michael X on Death Row” in Robertson’s memoir, which conveys his compelling stance against capital punishment. The opening anecdote of the cab driver’s assertion that “[he believes] in abolishing the death penalty… as soon as they hang Michael X” immediately reveals the widespread hatred for Michael X, positioning the reader to question the validity of such harsh accusations from an ordinary citizen. Furthermore, the cumulative imagery of the mechanical execution procedures in “breaking… the cervical vertebrae on Thursday morning” to the animalistic imagery of the prisoners as “scratching on the floors of the cage, screeching” provokes a raw emotional response from the reader when confronted with the cruelty surrounding capital punishment. The tortuous, lengthy process from their incarceration to execution is further represented through the use of highly emotive language in depicting their “crazed apprehension” and “collective terror” which appeals to the reader’s pathos to sympathise with his abolitionist perspective. Furthermore, the selective inclusion of specific facts such that the death penalty “originated in 1752” presents the practice as anachronistic and obsolescent. Indeed, the use of religious references in likening it to a “human sacrifice” alludes to the ritualistic sacrifices practiced by primitive religions as a form of deterrence. By emphasising Michael X as a victim of the barbaric sentence, Robertson validates how commanding acts of representation infiltrate the human condition to alter one’s interpretation of the death penalty.

Actual review: This is quite an interesting non-fiction text about human rights lawyer Jeffrey Robertson and his take on various cases from his legal career. The way he represents the British judicial system is quite fascinating and I would highly recommend this book if you like to read anything to do with the law, human rights or justice.

Unfortunately being forced to read this for school was very off-putting to say the least so my enjoyment of this book was heavily impeded. I've been scarred for life now...

[Ernest · Rating 4 out of 5]

Geoffrey Robertson, the dual Australian and British citizen, is a barrister of some renown. In this book, he brings his considerable intellect, laced with (dare one say) moral righteousness, to recounting and prosecuting the case for the rights of the individual against the behemoth of the State. This is done using the framework of several cases he has been involved in, and in doing so, examines the difference between law and justice.

As part of forcefully advocating his case, this book contains much material that infuses the text and cannot help but improve the quality of the work by educating the reader. A non-exhaustive list includes UK history and legal history, the purpose and value of the cab rank rule, and the importance of an independent trial judge not beholden to the State. It may be said that the state of the debate has developed in modern times to include notions of actions by non-state actors against the State and the rights and restrictions when terrorism is involved. Some may (perhaps unfairly) wish for a work that contains, even at the time of writing, modern human rights developments in the UK like the European Convention on Human Rights via the Human Rights Act. However, this would be to ascribe a function of the book that arguably would be more appropriate in a text rather than a work of this nature.

In writing this work, Robertson stridently marks out his position based on his forensic experiences of cases involved in and his own experiences as a barrister. It is not that one must necessarily agree with everything posited (there were times that I did not). It is that in this work suitable for far more than a legal audience, justice is not just an intellectually simple concept but has one that has to be truly grappled with in the context of a living law.

[Rosalie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was epic. It took me a long time to get through mainly due to the fact that I had to digest each chapter and grapple with the fact that one person can achieve so much during their short time on the earth. Each chapter is a new anecdote and a glimpse into the life and times of a truly amazing man. I am in awe of Geoffrey Robertson and the lengths he's gone to to represent those who can't stand up for themselves.

[Nick Davies · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really rather interesting a random punt. Australian barrister Geoffrey Robertson KC here takes us through a number of important and insightfully described trials with which he has been involved during his legal career, focusing particularly on the 'game' - the nuts and bolts of the British legal system, its principles, some important paradigms and the importance of fair representation. Some of the cases were a little drier than others, and as good an author as he is the book did feel long at times, but its focus on cases I'd either never heard of or only vaguely were aware of meant this was a very education and enlightening read.

[Ernest · Rating 4 out of 5]

A young Australian with a law degree gets tangled in the curious dramas of precocious Aussie rebels putting out the Oz magazine. 1960s youth culture collides with absurd British conservatism. Jeffrey Robertson has had an important career with cases involving governments framing innocent people and other scandals. A great read if you are interested in justice, ethical govt., human rights and a silly cartoon bear with an erection. Gasp

[Heather · Rating 5 out of 5]

this guys straight up insane i love him

[Mark Colenutt · Rating 5 out of 5]

There goes the old joke that the smallest book in the world is the book of great Australian writers. Well, that book has grown immensely with the writings of this internationally renowned barrister. Britain is truly blessed to have him and it will be a sad loss if his native land ever retrieves him.

He reached the pinnacle of his fame defending Salman Rushdie and is also involved in the defence of Julian Assange, to name another great Australian. Geoffrey Robertson is the reason why anyone would want to become a lawyer to fight the good fight. His career is one long list of righteous battles against censorship and the abuse of power.

His magnificent book 'The Justice Game', which was the book bargain of my life considering the content and the fact that I paid just a quid for a hardback copy, is a compilation of his most relevant fights for justice in the defence of freedom of speech and expression.

From defending publications and writers to artists and actors, he has fended off the Bank of England, an army of Muslim lawyers and an outraged old lady to name but a few. It features high profile cases from the history of recent Britain and most notably that of The Satanic Verses.

It is a must read for anyone interested in UK history, law and you will discover that fact once more does surpass fiction. If you devour fictional lawyer novels, then this slice of reality will trump anything you have read to date.

Robertson ensures that the scales of justice are kept firmly balanced so the rest of us may go out into the world and express our feelings without fear of arrest.

[Michelle King · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was one of the formative books of my legal life, and with some relief I can report that it holds up well to a much later second read. Read it to be shocked by how closely morality was (and is) policed in Australia and the UK, and by the call to arms we should all feel about the inhumanity of the death penalty throughout the world. It feels like we should have come further, and gave me a sense of an opportunity our world has so far missed in giving all people access to human rights and a place to have them upheld.

[Beardo Gomez · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic! Robertson's esteemed career has required his presence as counsel in some truly incredible precedent-setting cases of which this book details a considerable and varied cross-section. The matters are fascinating on their own merits but are brought to life with the brilliance and immediacy of his writing, which is equal parts descriptive, prescriptive, humorous and poignant - not to be missed!

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Geoffrey Robertson QC has written a truly fascinating overview of his career defending artists, publishers, poets, civil servants who have fallen foul (or been accused of falling foul) of laws to curb their free speech.

Heartily recommended for lawyers or those with an interest in the subject.

[Lill Dong · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read the foreword, read the afterword.
meh
i'll say I'm pretty done with this.

[The Final Chapter · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mid 4. Robertson has provided an invaluable account of his legal career in defence of civil liberties, and delivers a fascinating and thought-provoking analysis of the duty of the courts to defend the rights of the common man against the power of the state. Dspite not being naturally gifted as a writer, his zeal and dedication grip the reader from the outset. His passion to protect the sanctity of human rights has led him to become involved in some of the most important legal wrangles to secure the independence of the justice system in the face of state interference. The author's career path largely shadows that of his predecessor in the crusade to defend our freedoms, Gerald Gardiner, the defender of 'Lady Chatterley's Lover', whose acceptance of the post of Lord Chancellor in Wilson's government was made dependent on abolition of the death penalty, and on abortion and homosexuality being protected outside the reach of the criminal law. In addition, Gardiner would ensure through the Law Commission he estalished under Scarman, much reform of the archaic legal system. Robertson's first true foray entailed a defence of freedom of expression alongside John Mortimer against charges of corrupting public morals laid against the editors of a satirical magazine, 'Oz'. The author reveals that this law, created in 1663 to prosecute the poet Sir Charles Sedley for foolhardedly urinating onto a crowd from a balcony in Covent Garden, largely fell into disuse, until the voices of the establishment resurrected it in their attempts to rein in the Swinging Sixties. Robertson brilliantly captures the farce whereby the conservative elements of the establishment and the judiciary were determined to make the publication of a 'Rupert Bear' cartoon, in which the titular childhood figure proudly displays an erection,the trial case for the defence of public morals against obscenity. Indeed, Robertson's determination to defend artistic freedom against charges of obscenity would bring him into repeated battles with the doyen of the conservative backlash, Mary Whitehouse, turning him into a veritable satanic figure for the latter. Of all these cases described wonderfully within the book, the most memorable was the author's defence of Salman Rushdie. Having had a fatwa imposed upon him by Khomeini, Rushdie actually sought secret refuge in Robertson's own apartment, before the latter agreed to defend the author of 'The Satanic Verses' against charges of blasphemous libel. A similar death threat levelled against the defence team and presiding judge should a favourable judgment not be reached was defiantly ignored by Lord Justice Tasker Watkins, a fiery Welshman who had been awarded a VC in World War Two for single-handedly taking out a trench of 17 German soldiers. Robertson deserves all the plaudits for the UK government's belated decision to refuse to extend the blasphemy laws to other religions. The underlying logic for the decision, based on Robertson's defence, being that the Christian faith, for which these laws had been created to defend, no longer itself employed them against its critics and detractors. Another issue to which Robertson dedicates himself is the sanctity of human life, and his opposition to the death penalty. As such, he relates his own involvement in the fight to end what he believes is one of the greatest iniquities of capital punishment; namely, the inhumane practice of extending inmates' confinement on Death Row awaiting execution. This campaign stemmed from his own failure to prevent the long-delayed execution of another striking figure from the Sixties' counter-culture. Michael X, formerly an enforcer employed by the tyrranical landlord Peter Rachman, had risen to a degree of public acceptance through his attempts to transfer Black Power rhetoric to British shores, joining the enourage of the Beatles, and meeting with Malcolm X on the latter's visit across the Atlantic. Having returned to his native Trinidad in 1970, believing the times propitious for Black supremacy, his followers had become embroiled in the murder of a prominent member of their commune, the daughter of an ex-Tory MP. This had led to his own brutal murder of one of his followers who had attempted to blackmail him. Though powerless to prevent the eecution of Michael X proceeding in 1975, despite visits of support from Lennon and Ali, Robertson's tireless campaign led to the release from Death Row of fellow Trinidadian inmates who had awaited execution for lengthy periods. The author believes the US acts as the 'abiding testament to the futility of capital punishment', and quotes the words of John Bright in 1850: 'If you wish to teach the people to reverence human life, you must first show that you reverence it yourself'. Robertson also heavily criticises unlawful torture and imprisonment by the state of its opponents and critics, and in particular denounces the archaic legal institution of the Privy Council, in its role as the last court of appeal for Commonwealth countries for failing to proceed against those ruling without recourse to respecting human rights. Of the latter, perhaps the worst was Dr Hastings Banda, whose control of Malawi was so brutal that in 1983 he had his four leading parliamentary critics summarily executed and tried to hide this bloodthirsty act as a fatal road accident with no denunciation from the British authorities. No better example exists of one previously imprisoned under the emergency laws drawn up by British imperial rule, utilising the very same measures to squash dissent to their personal rule. Robertson gained first-hand experience of a repressive regime, backed by emergency powers inherited from British rule in Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew had allied with communist forces to remove the colonial yoke in 1959, before establishing his own personal rule which controlled his people's hearts and minds as effectively as any former communist regime in Eastern Europe. Having previously trained as a lawyer in Britain, his knowledge of the legal oopholes enabled him to use the legal powers of the Privy Council through British QCs to defend the status quo, and until 1988 the Privy Council was prepared to accept arguments of the protection of national security to defend indefinite detention of opponents to the Singaporean regime. Robertson entered this particular lion's den to defend 22 Catholic activists accused of being involved in a communist plot, and having to do so on live television. For the author, the most fundamental right of all is that of habeas corpus, which establishes the immediate setting free of those wrongfully detained. Despite Robertson winning the case on this exact point, proving that the order of detention had not been signed officially by a government minister, but by a secret policeman, the activists were immediately detained once more and the right to habeas corpus quashed. This should be a book which should have a much wider readership, detailing the ignominy of the trade in arms, the plight of those seeking to overturn repression, and above all the importance of safeguarding a fair hearing.

[Eleanor · Rating 4 out of 5]

At times very witty and amusing, and at others quite horrifying as Robertson details some of the many cases in which he has defended people against apparently hopeless odds. Often, these people are on Legal Aid - he is not just in it for the money by any means. He has acted as an observer for Amnesty International in some of the murkier parts of the world and over decades has tried to ensure that justice is done.

In one of the cases, brought in 1985 against a bookshop called Gay's the Word, "Operation Tiger" was an exercise which over 18 months was concerned with the importation of "indecent" books. The proprietors opted for public commital proceedings, in order to expose the warped priorities of a customs service which devoted more of its resources to impounding literature than to seizing cocaine.

He then recounts the moment when (i)n an atmosphere where everyone was enjoying the prosecution discomfort, I made three mistakes in the course of asking one question in cross-examination. I played to the gallery; I deployed sarcasm, the lowest form of wit; and I asked a question to which I did not know the answer. Pointing an accusing finger at the young customs officer who had code-named the operation, I declaimed, "You called this operation 'Tiger', did you not, because that name was redolent of swaggering machismo?" The officer replied, "Well, no sir. Actually, I named it after my cat."

Such laugh-out-loud moments help bring needed lightness to a book which often deals with very dark matters indeed, not least those caused by the UK government of the day being prepared to have innocent parties accused of wrongdoing in order to cover up its own criminal behaviour. One of the worst of these is called UK Ltd: The Matrix Churchill Trial, and it makes for chilling reading. Plus ça change ...

Highly recommended.

[Misty Gardner · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having read other books by the same author I knew what to expect. I galloped through 7/8 of the content - as the blurb on the front cover of my copy says, it reads 'like a John Grisham (novel)' and is an easy read. The final case covered seemed to drag rather but was still instructive - if only to underline that our current political climate is not that far removed from two decades ago...I certainly learned more about politics than I probably wished! The final 'Afterword' also seemed to drag (for me) but it is always instructive to read other opinions when they are expressed so lucidly

[Michael Kerjman · Rating 5 out of 5]

An astonishing inside into a British style game of justice a prominent writer himself plays a spectacular part in is dramatically limited with respectful professional's personal clinching to universality of ancient institution subtly sustaining just one of the branches of a common tree any state is.

[Peter Burton · Rating 4 out of 5]

An entertaining read about his legal education in the British court system.it covers a sequence of cases in which he was involved in which usually he helped secure the rights of individuals.A nice run through history from 1970 to 1997 dealing with significant court battles.Well written and amusing in parts.An historical perspective of cases probably forgotten today.

[Jay Moran · Rating 4 out of 5]

An inspiring book that almost managed to restore my faith in the legal profession. Almost.

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 stars

[Lutz Barz · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good education in what Mr Robertson QC defended when the powers that be got offended.

[Chrismueller · Rating 4 out of 5]

5/10

Robertson's memoirs are interesting and he makes good points about social justice issues.

I read this for school, so I only read parts of the book.

Robertson, despite his writing flair, is a self-agrandised douche, at times. I generally can agree with him on certain issues. However, in the Afterword, he explains how "justice is a game, and the most important thing is to win." To me, that was like finishing a novel and the author going, 'it was all a dream'.

It occurred to me that the views Robertson portrays may just be constructs through which he can 'win'.

That being said, the book was enjoyable, despite the author's crass attempts to persuade his audience.

It's worth a read, if you like the legal non-fiction genre. Despite his irritating flaws, Robertson is an experienced Human Rights lawyer and his experiences are to be valued.

Recommended.

[Jess · Rating 4 out of 5]

What can I say about this...

The school curriculum says "read!, or you won't pass", so naturally, I must. It certainly isn't something most people pick up as an everyday read, but that being said, it isn't simply a dull read. In fact the sarcastic nature of the book is quite hilarious. I like satire, and I like when people act like dicks towards extreme conservatism and conformity and whatnot, so hence, it wasn't too bad of a read. The fact that this book determines (or at least will play a part in determining), oh, I don't know...a large chunk of my life (despite what everyone says), does make it very, very off-putting. Therefore, have I built up a little aversion to ever reading this with the sole intent of pleasure? Well, yes. Never. Again.

[Maureen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some of this is a bit dated in content now, but still some interesting observations about the Oz trial and other blasphemy and obscenity trials from the 70s. Lots of other legal matters Robertson has been involved in, including fighting capital punishment, the dodgy dealings of the British Government in Iraq, including colluding with the Americans to stop full investigations into their 'friendly fire' killings of British soldiers.
A timely reminder of the suppression attempts governments use to keep their secrets hidden and unpopular views under wraps.

[Ambika · Rating 3 out of 5]

(Mar09) This book keeps getting 10/10 at my book club. Very curious to see how good it is.

(May09) It's a good book, but sometimes just hard to read. He uses so many rather big words and talks about cases that are interesting, but I really have no memory of (since I wasn't born).

(August09) Finally gave up. Interesting book, but just couldn't get to the end.

[Shaun Major · Rating 4 out of 5]

After a tough week, an important reminder of the importance and fascination of Courts. There is perhaps a little too much moral high ground and not enough courtroom evolution of the law in the third quarter, but overall Robertson demonstrates why the profession of the law, when played well and properly, is so important.

[Amanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

While it took some time to get through it was a really interesting book about the justice system - its shortcomings and it's potential. Must read for anyone interested in law. Robertson writes in an entertaining way - my favourite quote is from the Boggs case. "they're as different as chalk and cheese. Or should I say as different as chalk and chalk shaped cheese".

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

This work is very detailed and very scholarly, and a thorough exploration of the very nature of justice. Whilst interesting, it wasn't as entertaining as Robertson's frequent appearances in public had led me to suspect it would be, which in some respects may make it a stronger and more useful work than what I was hoping for.

[Jess Pace · Rating 1 out of 5]

Please don't be swayed by this rating, it is a very intelligent collection of 'essays' although, I am studying it for English HSC and have no interest in law, so I found the whole thing tedious and boring

[Jas · Rating 3 out of 5]

"The Justice Game" is certainly my type of book. Robertson's style of writing (for me at least) finds the perfect balance of metaphor and straight-forwardness. It's a dense read though, which is why I've set it aside until the summer holidays. I will finish it though!

[Edith]

Recommended by Gaila from my Book Club Oct 2008

[Teera · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not holiday reading! I just wanted to know a bit about him....youth, background etc. Hard to directly relate to much of it, but an insight nonetheless!