Early Life
Harman was born Lesley Harriet Harman in London to Anna Harman (née Spicer), a solicitor, married to a Harley Street physician John Bishop Harman FRCP. Her parents each had non-conformist backgrounds – her grandfather, ophthalmic surgeon Nathaniel Bishop Harman, was a prominent Unitarian and the Spicer family were well known congregationalists. Her aunt was Elizabeth Pakenham, Countess of Longford, and her cousins include writers Lady Antonia Fraser, Rachel Billington, and Thomas Pakenham.
Harman attended a fee-paying public school, St Paul's Girls' School and then the University of York, where she gained a BA in Politics.
After qualifying as a lawyer, Harman worked for Brent Law Centre in London. Between 1978 and 1982, Harman was employed legal officer for the National Council for Civil Liberties. In this capacity, she was found in contempt of court by Mr Justice Hugh Park. before becoming MP for Peckham in a by-election in 1982. However, Harman took the case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and successfully argued that the prosecution had breached her right to freedom of expression. Harman v United Kingdom is still considered a significant case in British public law.
Harman was later involved in a European Court of Human Rights case against MI5 after it was revealed (during a television interview given) by whistleblower Cathy Massiter in 1984 that personal files were held by MI5 on Harman and on the by then former General Secretary of the NCCL, Patricia Hewitt. They successfully argued that there had been an infringement of their rights because MI5 was not a legally constituted and democratically accountable organisation, this being the minimum standard in democracy. The success of the case led to enactment of the Security Service Act 1989.
Read more about this topic: Harriet Harman
Famous quotes containing the words early and/or life:
“Names on a list, whose faces I do not recall
But they are gone to early death, who late in school
Distinguished the belt feed lever from the belt holding pawl.”
—Richard Eberhart (b. 1904)
“The man Shelley, in very truth, is not entirely sane, and Shelley’s poetry is not entirely sane either. The Shelley of actual life is a vision of beauty and radiance, indeed, but availing nothing, effecting nothing. And in poetry, no less than in life, he is “a beautiful and ineffectual angel, beating in the void his luminous wings in vain.””
—Matthew Arnold (1822–1888)