Golriz Ghahraman: the Green MP who's found herself in the midst of a media storm because she worked on the defence teams of two war criminals accused of genocide. 

Central to it all seems to be how her work has been described on the Green Party website. 

It’s been changed, but it did say she'd lived and worked in Africa, The Hague and Cambodia putting on trial world leaders for abusing their power. 

And that is inaccurate. 

She did work voluntarily in a prosecution capacity at the Khmer Rouge tribunal, but she worked for the defence teams on trials involving Bosnia and Rwanda. 

The Green’s website has been changed to reflect that. 

The only failure in this situation is that she didn't accurately describe her work. She says she didn't write it, the party did, but it's a stretch to think Ghahraman didn't see her own profile online. 

But the accusations have intensified and she's now accused of being a genocide-denier. Why? Because she worked in a defence capacity in two cases involving genocide.

That, in itself, is madness. That is not an accusation that Ghahraman needs to shoulder, nor defend. 

Everyone, irrespective of their horrific crimes, has a right to justice. To suggest a lawyer, who worked in a defence capacity for two war criminals in some way supported their crimes and is a genocide-denier, is preposterous. It shows a major failure to understand the fundamental role of the justice system.

Phil Quin, a former Labour staffer, and a man who spent some years in Rwanda, said Ghahraman should resign. 

I think that's unfair. You have to put some distance between Ghahraman's role as a lawyer in the aftermath of the atrocities, and the true horror of what occurred in Rwanda and Bosnia. She was working in a legal capacity. She was not passing judgement. She was not showing support. She was a human rights lawyer working in that capacity. 

If I was a young intern lawyer, and an opportunity arose to work on a case of such magnitude as Rwanda, would I have jumped at it? Absolutely. In any capacity. Prosecution or defence. It wouldn't matter. You in court to learn and to see some of the finest international human rights lawyers either plea the innocence of these men, or hold the monstrous war criminals that they were to account. 

As a young human rights lawyer, I would do whatever I could to be in that court. 

Her only crime is that she did not accurately portray the role she played on the Green Party website.

It’s a harsh lesson to learn as a new politician, but in no way does her decision to work on those trials make Ghahraman unsuitable for public office. 

On the contrary, horrific as it was, I think her understanding of the true horror of what occurred in Bosnia and Rwanda makes her an asset to our parliament.