You know, having the council admit in open court that they've breached a legal requirement, you know, I think it's, it's huge, the importance of holding governments and, you know, public authorities to account using the law. I always think it shouldn't have to be up to small community organizations to make sure that public authorities are doing what they should do. But that's the world in which we live.

Hello and welcome to the lawmanity podcast where we explore the complex relationship between law and activism and discuss the different ways that law can oppress people, but can also lead to real social changes. I'm Jen Ang, a human rights lawyer and activist based in Scotland and your host on the Lomanity Podcast. This week we're speaking to human rights lawyer, activist and legend Maria McCloskey about how she and the Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal, or swat, campaign brought a legal challenge that halted plans to develop a major fossil fuel terminal being developed directly offshore a beautiful and sleepy seaside town near Belfast in Northern Ireland. Maria is an experienced human rights solicitor with a Master's degree in Human Rights Law from the Queen's University Belfast and has substantial experience both in private practice as well as at the Children's Law Centre where she represented unaccompanied asylum seeking children. She then went on to head Public Interest Litigation Support as their director solicitor from 2022 to 2024, where she was the instructing solicitor in the case that we will be discussing today. This year, she's taken her work global by stepping into her new role as Executive Director of Irish Rule of Law International. Irish Rule of Law International is an all Ireland nonprofit that promotes and supports the development of law systems around the world. The organisation does this with the support of judges, lawyers and other justice sector experts from both jurisdictions in Ireland who provide their time, skills and expertise on a pro bono basis to support the mission. Welcome, Maria, to the podcast. I am so excited to have you here.

Thank you, Jen. It's lovely to see you and I'm delighted to have been invited on, so look forward to our discussion.

Brilliant. So do I.

Now, I like to start this podcast.

With kind of a surprise opener question to get us settled. And just to learn a bit more about the people behind the legends we're interviewing. A good friend of mine pointed out to me that our sense of smell is one of our oldest senses and that we can actually hold deep connections between the sense of smell and our memories. So if you don't mind, please, can you tell me about a smell that's meaningful to you? Maybe something you really like. Or something that's connected to a place or time that you like to bring to mind.

Yeah, I love that question. It's definitely a unique one. So I think a sense of smell that always brings back a lot of memories and sort of evokes certain emotions is the smell of freshly cut grass. So I am a country girl. I grew up outside a small village in county Derry. My dad's a farm. And I think that the smell of fresh cut grass kind of brings me back to my childhood. It's one of those smells that makes me feel good inside. I don't know why, but I think there are others who would say that they love that smell as well. It sort of reminds me of just the sort of the start of spring or we're getting into spring. And when I was at school, it was also a sign that the summer holidays were coming or weren't too far away. So it evokes a lot of positive emotions in me. And I think that given the topic that we're discussing today and climate justice in general, I think it fits very well with that whole theme.

Absolutely. Thank you for sharing that. And actually, when you describe that, I can almost picture, yeah, spring around the corner sort of younger you in a quieter and maybe simpler time. But I think you're right. A lot of people have spoken about smells from nature and also something that conjures to mind a counterbalance to maybe the busy kind of workaday world that human rights lawyers, activists often sit in. So thank you for sharing that. And I will now turn to today's main topic, which is about helping listeners understand how you and colleagues used the law to achieve significant change in your successful legal challenge in the Stop Whitehead oil terminal case. So I wanted to start by understanding better your work with the campaign, and then we'll move on to maybe your reflections about what you accomplished and what still needs to be done. Just about one year on now, as I understand it from that legal challenge. So to start with, can you explain to us how you got involved with the campaign, what it was about, and what was at stake that made you think that legal action was going to be the answer?

Okay, so as you had mentioned just in your opening about my background, at the time I was working with a small NGO in Belfast called Public Interest Litigation Support, and I suppose from a very, very small organization and trying to address and support cases which are in the public interest across the broad spectrum of human rights and equality issues. There had been, for the few years that the organization was in existence, a certain focus on the big issues in Northern Ireland and that residents and citizens and people living in Northern Ireland have faced in the last decade or so. And they were largely probably around issues like the troubles, cases coming out of the troubles, and issues affected by our troubled past. So things like housing, education, social welfare, those issues. And so those cases tended to be the cases that we were providing our support where we could. But we are. You know, PILLS is an organization which supports that broad range of human rights inequality issues. And I think that there had been a growing appreciation even before I joined the organization, but certainly when I joined and when we started to work more closely with some of our members, that environmental and climate justice is key to the future. I mean, if we don't have. If we don't protect the planet, which we have, and we don't protect the resources and the environment that we all share, we won't have issues like housing and those sorts of things that require our attention. So I think that it's one of the areas of law that people appreciate more and more, connects with so many other areas of law. And so when then an organization did come to us and say, we would like your support, we have a potential legal challenge and we don't have a solicitor. It was a great outcome of the work that we had done to try and attract this, but it was really asking us then to step into that space and provide the solicitor representation because this particular organization, Stop White Head Oil Terminal, didn't have the resources, didn't have a solicitor on board, but were very much up against the clock in terms of the challenge that they wanted to take. So a little bit of a, you know, a scary moment, I suppose, for me, as the only solicitor in the organization, to say, yes, we will represent you.

So let's take a moment to discuss who the Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal, or SWAT campaign are and what they were challenging when they approached Maria and the PILLS project for help. Here is some recent news coverage from ITV News.

Whitehead is a sleepy seaside town in County Antrim, but it may not be sleepy for long as a new oil terminal development has been proposed nearby and campaigners are concerned of what impact it will have on the town.

We're talking about huge, a huge impact in terms of climate change. Huge emissions from this 85.5 million tons of carbon.

At the weekend, Whitehead is full of tourists, with many camper vans pitching up in the area to take in the sea views and enjoy water sports like swimming and sailing. Some residents feel the development could put an end to all of that.

We are A town that is based.

On a tourist economy.

And I worry very much that this.

Development is going to have an impact on that, that we could turn into one of the typical small towns with.

The closed shops, with the deteriorating centre, with the lack of activities for its.

Residents and others to participate in. So at the time the SWAT campaigners came to Pills for help, they were looking for a way to legally challenge the council's decision to approve the plan application for development of this oil terminal. Maria goes on to list some of the other challenges the legal team in the campaign faced in getting their case off the ground.

Another challenge, I suppose being in this space is that, you know, often you're talking about small teams of, and I'm speaking personally here, relatively inexperienced, you know, lawyers. And that's just. It was a challenge, I think probably for me personally, but also appreciating this is what we're here to do. We're here to provide the support I've got the skills, the knowledge, the qualification of being a lawyer. I might not know this area of law in and out, but with the help of the likes of the pro gono lawyers with the team at Pills who worked night and day at times to get this ready, that it is a challenge that can be overcome, provided again, you're realistic about it. And the great thing about being in this space, in the human rights spaces, there's very much a. Well, we'll all pull together and we'll make it happen. The local residents that people involved in the, in the campaign and in the organizing organization itself, they had been working for a number of years, I mean, ever since this proposal was sort of, or the planning application was submitted, they were trying and succeeding in my view and getting together and making those freedom of information requests and looking at the relevant laws or what might be relevant, looking at what the company had submitted and all of those things. There was a huge amount of work went on before we became involved. And to Geraint and Claudia, who we worked with very closely at Pills, you know, I just want to commend them on their commitment and I think that it came at the expense of, you know, their own personal time. These are volunteers, as they often are with camp, you know, local community campaigns, people who have full time jobs and other commitments who are doing this kind of thing in the evening and at the weekends, you know, to no personal benefit or gain really. It's about the community in which they live and wanting to protect that environment. So I mean, I'm still in such admiration of them. Their commitment to this cause. So yeah, a huge amount of work went on in the background and before we got involved, the importance of community in holding their elected representatives and officials to account, I think that was very, very clear in this case. It took a small organization, a campaign group, a grassroots campaign group together with, you know, myself, Emma, Kate, Hillary at Pills, you know, together we hadn't done this before and we then engaged pro bono lawyers Acland Bryant and Mark Willers, kc and you know, I remember Mark and Acland coming over and us going out with Geraint and looking at the area. We drove out, we said this is where they're planned with this. And you know, we got a real sense of what we were talking about. And again, I think that that's hugely important in these types of legal challenges and campaigns is that, you know, we were all kind of invested in it, you know, we were invested in it anyway on behalf of the group and what they're trying to achieve. But then you go out and you see it and you see the beautiful landscape and you see some of the nature that exists there and then it makes you realize why, why you're doing what you're doing. So, you know, I just think that at the outset and looking into, I maybe would have been afraid to say yes, we can do this because I'd never done it before. But how are you ever going to learn how to do it unless you do it, you know, so it's one of those things that feel the fear and do it anyway.

I went on in our interview to ask Maria what challenges did she face as a lawyer in bringing a strategic legal challenge alongside the work of a long running environmental justice campaign.

Yeah, so from that perspective, I suppose it's always the being clear on what a legal challenge can do. So, you know, obviously many of these types of organizations like Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal, they're very much focused on it, says it in their name, they want to stop the redevelopment of this oil terminal. And I suppose the challenge within that is being realistic about what you can do and what is going to come out of this at the end. So, you know, the challenge that we brought, which was successful, did not mean the end of that campaign and has not meant the end of what Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal are trying to do, because what it did, it was stopped a particular process from happening, but that process can now be restarted. And you know, these plans to redevelop the oil terminal, you know, are in the process of being brought forward again addressing the challenge that we brought. But also then with Their end goal being, well, we want to redevelop the oil terminal. So the challenge is always being realistic and about being realistic about what you can do, being realistic about your prospects of success. And also, I think, you know, when you're bringing together legal teams and campaigners who are very passionate about the overall issue about protecting our environment, you know, that the law cannot address that, you know, one legal challenge can't address the overarching aim or, you know, goal of the, of the organization or of environmental campaigners in general. You have to focus in on one thing. Realize, okay, well, we can stop at this one way, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be stopped and it doesn't necessarily mean we're going to achieve the end goal of protecting our environment. But I think once everybody is fully on the same page about that and still recognizes that, yes, this is an important step for us to take as part of the overall campaign and then move forward with that information, I think that that's really important at the outset about also, you know, what is it going to cost? What are the risks? What, you know, are we prepared for those risks? Does that mean any risk to any individual? Does that mean any risk to the organization? You know, so it's about pulling all of those things into the conversations at the outset and continuing to have them as things move forward. But I think that that's part of the beauty of public interest litigation, because, you know, public interest litigation is about sort of advancing the space for others. You know, that's kind of the nuts and bolts of it, albeit that you're doing through different legal challenges. So, yeah, I think that that was a challenge. But also then once you have acknowledged that as a challenge and addressed it, then you can all move forward from the same perspective. And just one other sort of challenge I think is, you know, legal literacy in general. I mean, we talk lawyers and anybody in the human rights space will maybe talk kind of freely about judicial reviews, about, you know, certain terms that come with the space. And it not necessarily being in the vocabulary of the campaigners, the people who are, you know, who are working on planning applications is not necessarily the lingo that they're used to. And so for us, it was very important that we break that down as much as possible and keep the lines of communication open because. And our space in working in sort of pro bono allows for that because we can take it very much at a pace that suits whoever we are working with. It's more difficult. Whenever you talk about fee paying clients because, you know, time is money and all of that. But I think that that can lead to difficulties in some cases where things are just moving and you have to go with it. But if everybody in the campaign doesn't necessarily know what's happening and why, that can be a challenge. It's not necessarily. I just feel that for people to properly buy in to the whole process, it's better that they know exactly what we're doing and why we're doing it. So, again, another challenge that we. That we had to overcome.

Thanks, Maria, for those really thoughtful reflections.

I think you're. I think you're being a wee bit modest about your readiness to take on this case. But also, I certainly recognize myself from practice, the idea that legal challenges are sort of novel, novel types of public interest litigation always sits in an area for anyone that's just a little bit outside what's been done before sometimes. And actually there's an element of not just assembling your team and acknowledging the expertise of others, but also just perhaps bravery in taking on something new or taking on something different. And now turning to the legal case itself, just to make sure our listeners understand, what was the change in the law that the campaign sought to secure and what was the significance for them in terms of what they were fighting for?

This sort of public interest litigation case was, you know, it's one of those cases that's not necessarily about the change in the law, because the law was there, but the law hadn't been complied with. So it's about adherence to the laws that already exist, because, you know, as you know yourself, Jen, it's a huge battle to get a piece of law across the line, and then it's many more battles to ensure that whoever is required to comply with those laws. So this was really about adherence to the legal principles and commitments that this particular legal challenge was looking to address. And again, I suppose that's maybe going back to the previous question in terms of challenges. You know, you need a law upon which to bring a challenge, and sometimes that can be a challenge in and of itself. And you may also have to be selective about which aspects of the case are ripe for legal challenge, because obviously campaign groups feel very strongly, maybe, that if we were to take a bird's eye view of this, this doesn't comply with the Paris Agreement or the commitments made at that time. But we have to look at the arena in which we're challenging it, in which we have to challenge it in the first instance and what the laws are applicable to this region so that's where I suppose the legal expertise and the campaign itself have to come together and be clear about that and be clear about maybe the niche aspect of this particular challenge, but that ultimately that will help address the overall aim of the campaign and the organization. So I think, yeah, this challenge obviously did help achieve that aim. It highlighted that the council involved in this case didn't comply with its legal obligations and effectively, through this legal challenge, got the Borough Council in midany stantrum to admit to their failing in that regard. So, you know, as a success in one sense, but not in the overall. The overall battle, I suppose.

Do you think the case had the impact you'd hoped?

What I can say is that the. The legal challenge that we brought this time last year was hugely significant in a number of respects. You know, having the counsel admit an open court that they've breached a legal requirement, you know, I think it's. It's huge because that's what these types of cases really. I mean, when you talk about a judicial review, you're never going to get money, you're never going to get them to overturn the decision. But to get the council to admit that was wrong and ultimately the aim is it will comply by its legal obligations on the next time round. And even though the council didn't admit to the other breaches that we had raised in the proceedings, you know, they didn't necessarily have to admit to them because they already admitted to the one breach. That meant that, you know, the planning application was quashed.

Maria explained here that the decision to grant planning application on this occasion, that the Stop Whitehead oil terminal campaigners were challenged was quashed. Quashing is one type of remedy or order that a court can be asked to make when you're challenging the lawfulness of a public action. It means that the decision to grant the planning application is nullified or withdrawn and everyone returns to the position as if the application had never been granted.

But it was hugely important in the sense that they know that this organisation is keeping a very close eye on what they're doing. They know that this organization has legal support. They know that this organization has community and wider support within, you know, the whole region. And so the importance of holding governments and, you know, public authorities to account using the law, that is what we want to try and achieve because we're not the lawmakers, but certainly we, you know, and it shouldn't have to be. I think. I always think it shouldn't have to be up to small community organizations to make sure that public authorities are doing what they should do, but that's the world in which we live. But certainly when you are, you know, when public authority knows that kind of you're onto them, then hopefully they will do everything correctly on the next occasion. I suppose that then what happens going forward, you know, obviously that part of the case will properly be presented or the planning application will properly be complied with on the next occasion. But whether there are other feelings, maybe some that we are addressed that keep the, the door open for legal challenge.

If you needed to do this again today, would you, would you run the case the same and do you think the outcome would be the same or different, or is it just hard to say?

Yeah, I suppose it is hard to say because, you know, a year on, if I was still involved in the case, I would certainly feel much more confident in my knowledge of planning, law and all, all those sorts of things. But I think if the case came to us in the same way that it did last year, you know, I think we would probably address it in the same way. You know, maybe we'd be slightly more efficient in certain things. But I, I think the, the way that we dealt with that request for legal support was the epitome of what PILS is and what it does for community organizations. And there was a real, you know, I think a sense of achievement not only for the Pills team and the organization and the pro bono lawyers that were involved, but for the wider community and for the wider kind of climate justice, environmental campaign community. It was hugely, hugely important and hugely motivational and inspirational in a sense, because there were other benefits to the success that weren't just directly related to the case. I think the consequence of it was hugely important for other organizations, for other campaigns, for other people who are living in their community and potentially facing, you know, the same or similar types of challenges where there's an application for planning permission or something's being done to their local environment or area in which they live. And you always feel this sense of, well, what can I do? And actually, I think this case proved that there's a whole lot that you can do and you can be hugely impactful, despite the fact that there's maybe not the equality of arms. You know, we're talking about government departments that are, you know, hugely resourced in terms of their legal capacity and all of that, versus well, when there's, where there's a will, there's a way kind of thing. So, yeah, I think for me it was, it was just such a wonderful and valuable experience. For me personally, but more so to be part of it, you know, because when you succeed by yourself, that's one thing, but when you succeed because of the impact of or input of a number of people, it's just so heartwarming. And, you know, I attended an event shortly after, and the sense in the room was one of positivity, where I think in previous years in these spaces, it has very been much been. I don't want to say defeatist because there's so many, you know, campaigners, organizers, people who work tirelessly on these issues. But there maybe was a sense of, well, the legal system's not going to help us, or, you know, it's not. It's not worth our time because, you know, it's not going to be successful. And this kind of showed them.

Well, I'm feeling. I am feeling inspired just listening, but.

I also, I can sort of hear.

In your reflection, and it's. Again, it's interesting for me, from my perspective as a kind of peer practitioner, it sounds very much like you and the team at Pills as well, felt that you gained so much from being a part of this experience. You know, as much as you contributed your skills, I can just sort of. I can see the smile on your face. I can hear it in your voice, this reflection, that in some ways it sounds like you were. You felt lucky to be able to be a part of this piece of work. So standing back, this is sort of my final big question, and then we'll move to a closing question. But standing back for you, what more needs to be done to secure justice in this space?

Yeah, it's a great question, and I think it's. A number of strands of things need to happen. I mean, from the perspective of, say, pills and other organizations or firms, even of lawyers who are trying to work on these issues, I think it has to be properly financed and resourced. I mean, you can't continue to rely on pro bono legal expertise to fight these cases or to support these cases being brought before the courts. There has to be access to the arenas and there has to be an element of equality of arms in that. So, you know, I would like to see more investment in legal challenges of this nature, be that through government funding or probably an. And through community or, sorry, foundations and charitable donors providing the support for these types of cases to be taken forward. Because, you know, the amount of time involved in preparing a case like this, which actually didn't go to a full judicial review hearing, you know, it was. It was huge. And I probably didn't have a full appreciation of myself, but I certainly think many people don't have full appreciation of the fact that it's the time and, you know, the expertise required that go into it. So I think it's an unfair to expect that organizations, you know, take this without. Without being financially supported. You know, as I mentioned earlier, this is about making sure that public authorities abide by their obligations and their legal responsibilities. You nearly shouldn't have to be doing it, but, you know, the world we live in, we do have to do it. And so that being the case, I think that there should be an aspect of investment in making sure that institutions and public authorities are held accountable. And so I think also just that equality of arms, which comes from, you know, having the resources and having the finances to be able to challenge equally, I think is hugely important because, you know, this all happens in complex legislation, and these requirements go into very, very dense pieces of legislation, which sometimes are very difficult to break down for lawyers speaking personally again, never mind for people who are trying to navigate this in the context of an issue that has arisen in their community. So there's like, access to justice doesn't just mean having money to go to court. It means understanding the legal obligations that exist. And so, you know, how can you hold someone to account if you don't understand what the. What they, you know, where they're supposed to be in carrying out their duties? So I think sort of investment in education pieces around that is also key to making the system work more effectively in the future.

So I have one final question, and it is this. So throughout this podcast series, there will be people out there listening who are perhaps activists already or thinking about the law, and they might be looking at what you've accomplished today and who you are now, and they might even want to be you. So my question for you is, do you have some advice for a younger version of you or maybe just someone who is curious about, you know, keen to forge a career like yours that you would share with our listeners now?

Yeah, sure. I mean, to think that somebody would want to be like me is very. It's funny for us in. In this part of the world where we think, no, no, no, no, no, I haven't achieved very much or, you know, I still feel in one sense that I have so much more to. To, you know, there's so much more. I have to learn to feel very comfortable. But then I've also got to the point in my career where maybe you never feel really, really comfortable, but you just accept that and work with the, the knowledge that you have in this point in time and never be afraid to admit that you don't know something. I mean, this was a key, this was a prime example of that. When the group came, we had discussions in the office and I don't know where, whether the members of Stopweight Headed Oil Terminal know this, but it was like, oh, can we do this? Oh, I don't know. And me probably mostly saying, you know, and it was just because my name as the solicitor would go on the papers. Not that it was. I thought it was all down to me because it certainly was a team effort and the vast majority of the real hard work was done by others, including Hillary and Kate and Emma. But actually having those conversations and not be afraid to say, I'm not sure and I feel a bit shaky here and others around you actually supporting you. So, yeah, I think just not being afraid to say you're not sure and then having those discussions with others because they can remind you, well, yes, you can do it. You're a qualified lawyer. And you know, first of all, you're allowed to do it. You're allowed to kind of learn about it. You don't have to know everything at the outset. And also it doesn't just depend on you doing all the work. And that was very, very obvious in this case because, you know, Emma, Hillary and Kate, they, I mean, talk about a team effort. It really was everybody kind of coming together and taking the burden on, the burden being, you know, the huge responsibility of getting this right. So I think that, you know, inspiring, being inspired by others around me and them giving me the confidence was hugely important in this, in this particular case. So what I would say to aspiring lawyers or aspiring, you know, people who want to go further in their career, I recall when I talked about moving into the human rights sector that, you know, a lot of people I spoke to said, well, yeah, that's very interesting, but, you know, you won't get a job in that space. And, you know, I just kept working on the issues that were important to me and that I was interested in researching. You know, going to events, being in the spaces and letting this, you know, a huge amount of knowledge just keep penetrating and then eventually feeling, well, actually I do know something now that in itself gives me the confidence to say, well, I'll maybe look into this issue on behalf of someone. I'll maybe just take on this one query. And that just builds and builds over time. So, you know, it's hard work, but it's a Lifetime's work. I don't ever think that there's a final destination and you get there and you go, ah, now I know what I'm doing in this human rights space. I mean, you know, Jen as well, it's so vast. It actually keeps changing on a daily basis. You know that you have to keep yourself up to, to speed with the changes. But if you're committed to it, if you're passionate about it, it definitely you will get there. And I think the world kind of opens up opportunities to you when you're in the right head space, when you're in the right place and you know, you go to the right things, you speak to the right people, people that know a bit more than you or a lot more than you. And you know, I suppose, just being humble, that I've now come to accept that I don't always get it right and sometimes I'm not really sure what I'm doing. But if you have others around you who are supporting you, then that's really what you need.

Oh, thank you, thank you for that.

Wise and warm and I would also.

Say strangely reassuring advice. I feel like, Maria, if I ever sort of have some doubt in my career at the stage that I've reached, I'm just going to need to ring you up and ask you to tell me that again because I mean, I think what you said really rings true. I see that humility, but also that really strong sense of mutual support and solidarity in the Pills team. And I also recognize that in other legal teams and campaigns that I've been a part of.

And I think just one final point that you kind of have sparked that reminds me to make clear in any avenue or than any channel that I can like, this space needs all the help it can get. If you are thinking about a career in human rights, please pursue that interest and don't give up on it. Because the corporate and commercial world I feel is growing whilst the human rights space is sort of under pressure at the moment. And there are many critical issues happening both at home and further afield that we really need kind of all hands on deck with at the moment. So it may not be the most financially rewarding, but it's certainly the most personally rewarding from my experience. And I can highly recommend it to anyone who's thinking about it as career.

Yeah, 100%. Thank you so much for your time, Maria.

Thank you very much, Jen. That was great, great to chat to you.

I caught up with the Pills team this week for a follow up on this case and they told me that SWAT and PILS are still working together closely. They explained Mid and East Antrim Borough Council's Planning committee now need to make a fresh decision on whether or not this fossil fuel infrastructure should be given planning permission. In swat's own words, we got a stay of execution, but we still need to stop the development. A revised application for this unnecessary and unwanted fossil fuel infrastructure is now with the Council. End quote. SWOT are asking local communities and supporters to take action to speak to their local elected representatives and to lodge an objection. They've got a handy template letter on their website which is stopwhiteheadoilterminal.org that's stopwhitehead oilterminal.org since SWAT went to court, it's clear from the updated environmental information submitted to the council by the developer that this proposed fossil fuel infrastructure would have a massive impact on emissions and the region's ability to to meet any emissions targets. We're all waiting to see how the Council responds. This is definitely one to watch and thanks so much to you the listener, for tuning in to the Lawmanity podcast today. In our next episode we'll be doing something a little bit different. We'll be kicking off a series of three themed episodes bringing together individual conversations we've had with 12 incredible Scottish activist leaders, asking them to reflect on the connections between law and social change. We asked them whether the law treats them and their communities equally, whether we think the law is a tool or a barrier to change, and what justice looks like to them. Their answers are frank, honest and pure. Dynamite. Tune in in two weeks time if you want to hear what they had to say. And if you loved this podcast, please do hit the subscribe button and also like or share our episodes with friends and colleagues and who might enjoy learning a little bit about how the law really works in practice and how it can be used to make the world a better, brighter place. Our podcast has been generously supported by a grant from the Clark foundation for Legal Education and the lawmanity Podcast is co produced by me, your host Jen Ang, and by the brilliant and talented Natalia Uribe. And the music you've been listening to is Always on the Move by Musicians in Exile, a Glasgow based music project led by people seeking refuge in Scotland.