Justice 2 Committee responds to questions from Peter Cherbi on Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill deliberations

Well, as you can see from the following email response I received from the Justice 2 Committee, the rules of the game are that it will be the Convener who will decide what is defamatory in a submission to the Committee on this inquiry into the Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill ... and that would be this man, David Davidson MSP profile : http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msp/membersPages/david_davidson/index.htm .

I'm not rushing to judge of course ... but it strikes me as somewhat odd - that a Committee Convener can judge or decide what is a defamatory statement .... usually that is left to the Courts, and possibly, dare I mention - a jury ... as after all - claims of defamation can be totally spurious .. and many defamation accusations and Court actions fall by the wayside due to a lack of proof .. but here at the Scottish Parliament - that logic has been put aside and it is claimed the Committee Convener will decide on that, arbitrarily by the sounds of it ... Well, I don't buy it at all ....

As we all know, and as those of us who had a bitter experience with the Justice 1 Committee "Regulation of the Legal Profession" inquiry which occurred in 2001 - which oddly enough, I am reporting on just now in this blog ... it is the Scottish Parliament lawyers who actually make the accusations of defamation against submissions from members of the public .... and of course .. the Law Society of Scotland top brass interfere too .. to make sure anything challenging the point of view of the legal profession is chucked out as a "defamatory statement" ....

So, what does the Justice 2 Committee class as "defamatory" ... or should we more realistically say .. what DON'T they want to hear or read ???

Well - they don't want to read about your solicitor and how crooked they were to you .. and they certainly don't want to see your solicitors name, or the name of the firm of solicitors which ripped you off ... (there are an array of excuses for this - Data Protection Act, Defamation, etc ...) - but if you were to sit before the Committee - or a Court for that matter, and say to the Judge or Committee membership- sorry, I can't answer that question, it's against the Data Protection Act, or it could be defamatory to the accused or the pursuer - you would be directed to answer the question immediately ....

As you can also see - it looks like 'hearing from individuals' is OUT again - probably for the same reasons as before - the Scottish Parliament DON'T want a trail of clients ripped off by lawyers attending the hearings to give oral evidence .... for one thing - they could be hearing from thousands of people across Scotland who have been ripped off by crooked lawyers! .. but more to the point - having a queue of members of the public telling horror stories about lawyers and how corrupt they, and the Law Society of Scotland has been, and is ... would be just too much for the legal profession to bear .. and of course, it would most certainly raise questions as to WHY the politicians have allowed this situation to go on for 20 years or more ....

*************************************************************************************************
Email from Justice 2 :
From: <Anne.Peat@scottish.parliament.uk>
To:
Subject: : Bill on reform of the legal profession
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:15:35 +0100

Mr Cherbi I note your two questions regarding the Justice 2 Committee's call for evidence on the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill and can respond as follows:-

The Committee will decide from whom it wishes to take oral evidence and will review all written evidence received, before deciding whether it wishes to hear from individuals.

The decision on whether any submission contains defamatory statements is one for the Convener.

I trust this answers your questions.

Anne Peat
Senior Assistant Clerk
Justice 2 Committee
The Scottish Parliament
Direct Dial Telephone 0131 34 85220 Fax 0131 34 85252
RNID Typetalk 1800 1 0131 34 85047

-----Original Message-----
From: PeterCherbi
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 6:13 PM
To: Justice 2
Subject: Bill on reform of the legal professionImportance: High

Dear Clerk to the Justice 2 Committee,

I noted the call for evidence in the LEGAL PROFESSION AND LEGAL AID (SCOTLAND) BILL.

There are 2 questions i would like to raise. It is said on your site that the Committee is taking oral testimony on this inquiry.

Exactly who can give oral testimony in this inquiry ? are those who submit papers to the committe eligible to give oral evidence, such as ordinary members of the public ? or is it just those who are invited to do so by the Committee ?

Secondly, it states that any defamatory material in a submission - the papers will be handed back to the author for editing or wont be considered by the committee. Who exactly will decide what is defamatory in such an instance ?

I look forward to hear from you

Peter Cherbi
**********************************************************************************************
I think I'm right in saying I won't be before the Justice 2 Committee - I've had far too many battles & arguments with the Scottish Parliament, I've helped to get rid of some of it's more famous members from various positions .. and a lot more in the background that I won't say - but they are well aware of ...

Many of the Parliament's staff I have encountered - all the way up to Paul Grice, hate my guts for pointing out & challenging their errors & prejudice against ordinary people but, well, I'm not particularly bothered by that. It just makes me stronger, and while they try to cover up issues and their little secrets, I am always around, poking holes in their little creations to help make big public scandals. People send me information - so I use it .. nothing wrong with that ... transparency assists everyone - only the crooks and the corrupt enjoy the fruits of their cover ups and secrets ....

I am, however, bothered that some of you, who have had lawyers rip you off and ruin your lives, SHOULD be in front of that Committee - and I will do everything I can to help you get there - because it is VITALLY IMPORTANT that members of the public be heard in this debate, so I ask you, please, to come forward, tell your stories of what has happened to you at the hands of the Scottish Legal Profession, the Law Society of Scotland, etc .. and give your views on the terms of the new Bill being discussed here so that the people most affected by the bad end of the Scottish legal profession can be heard !

Anyway, I hope you are all keeping an eye on developments at the Scottish Parliament Justice 2 Committee and their consideration of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill ... because like the previous Justice 1 Committee "Regulation of the Legal Profession" inquiry - it won't be that well advertised (so much so that I had to do leaflets myself for organisations such as Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers to distribute) ....

... so get to it everyone - write out a 3 page submission on your difficulties with Scottish Lawyers and submit it to the Justice 2 Committee of the Scottish Parliament - BEFORE 21 APRIL 2006