Monday, February 03, 2014

Transparency, but not for Scottish Judges: First Minister echoes MacAskill’s claim of no need to review powers, independence of “Window Dressing” Judicial Complaints Reviewer role

First Minister's Questions – No need for review of powers for "window dressing" judicial watchdog. REPLYING to a question from John Wilson MSP (SNP) during First Minister’s Questions last week on matters relating to the investigation of  complaints about misconduct by Scottish judges, Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond  claimed in an answer given in the Scottish Parliament’s main chamber that there is currently no need to review the powers of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR).

The First Minister also refused to increase the power of the JCR to at least match that of equivalent judicial investigators in England & Wales who have wide ranging statutory powers to deal with complaints about judges in the rest of the UK.

The statement from Mr Salmond, who legal observers say effectively sidestepped revelations of multiple breaches of judicial conduct by Scottish judges, comes after Moi Ali, the first person to be appointed to the role by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, officially described the role of JCR as “Window Dressing” during an evidence session before MSPs at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee who are investigating transparency within Scotland’s judiciary and failures of judges to declare their interests or recuse themselves in cases being heard in Scottish courts.

MSP John Wilson further asked the First Minister if the powers of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer could be “enhanced to give the role greater independence, especially given the equivalent powers and budgets in England and Wales and the role of the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Ombudsman”. However, in reply, the First Minister simply restated the current position of the Justice Secretary in that no review of the lack of powers held by the Judicial Complaints Reviewer or any move to grant the JCR greater independence is currently being considered.

Questions as put to the First Minister by John Wilson MSP and responses given:

First Ministers Questions, 30 January 2014: John Wilson MSP & Judicial Complaints Reviewer (Review)

Judicial Complaints Reviewer (Review)

John Wilson (Central Scotland) (SNP)
3. To ask the First Minister when the Scottish Government last reviewed the powers of the office of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer. (S4F-01852)

The First Minister (Alex Salmond): Last year, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice said in evidence to, I think, the Public Petitions Committee that the Government does not see a need for a review of the office of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer at this time. The Judicial Complaints Reviewer has been in office since September 2011. She has told Mr MacAskill that she does not wish to be reappointed. We are grateful for her work to date and her commitment to assist with a smooth handover to her successor.

John Wilson: As the First Minister has done, I highlight the valuable contribution that Ms Ali has made in her role, especially in relation to the 20 cases that she has identified as breaches by the Judicial Office for Scotland in relation to the judiciary since 2011. Following Ms Ali’s decision not to seek a second term and her comments, which were reported at the weekend, could the powers of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer be enhanced to give the role greater independence, especially given the equivalent powers and budgets in England and Wales and the role of the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Ombudsman?

The First Minister: Let me put it on the record again that, like the member, I am grateful to Ms Ali for her valuable public service over the past two and a half years and for the improvements that she has encouraged in the judicial complaints process. The Judicial Complaints Reviewer carries out her responsibilities independently of Government and the judiciary. In her report for 2012-13, she records having to see 43 review requests and inquiries. By comparison, the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman for England and Wales received 810 complaints and written inquiries, of which 482 concerned the personal conduct of judicial office-holders. The powers and the budget reflect that difference in the workload. There is not actually a process of independent review of judicial conduct complaints in Ireland. That is the current position. We are grateful to Ms Ali for her work and, in particular, for the commitment that she has given to smooth the handover to her successor.

JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS: How Scotland’s Judges look after their own in 2014 & beyond?

Contrary to claims made by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill and echoed last week by the First Minister during FMQ’s there is no need to review the lack of powers held by Scotland’s Judicial Complaints Reviewer, Moi Ali, the first person to hold the office of Judicial Complaints Reviewer recently told the Justice Secretary that she will not seek a second term in the role because she views her office as having such limited powers to render the JCR’s role as mere “tokenism” compared to how complaints against the judiciary are investigated in England and Wales, where the Office for Judicial Complaints has a complement of 15 staff and regularly publishes details of upheld complaints against judges.

Moi Ali testified before the Public Petitions Committee of the Scottish Parliament, providing revealing answers to questions about the powers of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer and her support for Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary a public petition calling for a register of interests of Scotland’s judges. More on Moi Ali’s appearance before the Petitions Committee can be read in an earlier report here: As Scotland’s top judge battles on against transparency, Judicial Complaints Reviewer tells MSPs judges should register their interests like others in public life

Footage of the Committee evidence session, which raises interesting points compared to the claims of Scotland’s Justice Secretary and now First Minister of no need to review the role of JCR , is available below:

JCR Moi Ali gives evidence to Scottish Parliament on a proposed Register of Judicial Interests (Click image to view video)

What's the point of a watchdog without teeth - Sunday Mail 22 September 2013A judicial watchdog without teeth, created after lobbying from angry judges with undeclared interests, secret wealth. The position of Judicial Complaints Reviewer was created by an Act of the Scottish Parliament in 2008, principally highlighted in Section 30, S31 and S32 of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008. However, protests from vested interests within Scotland’s judiciary and legal profession from Scotland’s judges who were “dead against” proposals to create an independent form of regulation of judges resulted in what legal observers have branded “a cowardly capitulation” by Justice Minister MacAskill.

Ultimately, lobbying from Scotland’s unaccountable judges and other vested interests from justice system led to the creation of the toothless role of Judicial Complaints Reviewer which, unlike its equivalent office in England & Wales, has no statutory powers, only works on a three days a month basis and with an annual budget of £2000 and has no staff. The JCR has been frequently frozen out of document sharing by Scotland’s judiciary as the media have recently reported in detail along with information obtained from annual reports released by Moi Ali, the current Judicial Complaints Reviewer.

Judicial Investigator Moi Ali left in the dark over complaints against Scottish Judges - NO She May Not 10 Feb 2013 Sunday Mail

First Annual Report of JCR for 2011-2012 revealed Scotland’s top judge froze out independent Judicial Investigator. To illustrate what has become a consistent lack of cooperate from the judicial office, the first annual report from Moi Ali last year reiterated concerns over refusals by judges  to share information  with investigators, previously reported in February by the Sunday Mail newspaper and featured on Diary of Injustice here: Annual Report revealed Lord President Lord Gill ‘froze out’ Judicial Complaints Reviewer amid series of revoked findings, secret unshared memos & dismissed complaints.

Ms Ali’s first annual report, which can be read online here : Judicial Complaints Reviewer Annual report 20011- 2012 or available via the JCR’s website HERE reveals a series of incidents where her office has been blocked by the Lord President from accessing communications, internal memos and reports between the office and the judges about complaints.

In one particular case, Ms Ali revealed in her report “When the Judicial Office made an initial assessment of this complaint, it was not reasonable for them to conclude that the behaviour complained about, which left the complainer “insecure and scared”, fell into the category of judicial decision/case management/court programming. According to the Rules, they should have referred that element of the complaint to the disciplinary judge for consideration. This did not happen, and instead the complaint, in its entirety, was dismissed. For that reason I made a referral to the Lord President, who then revoked that part of the original determination and referred it to the disciplinary judge, who then dismissed the complaint.”

Second annual report - JCR lacks much needed powers. The Judicial Complaints Reviewer’s 2012-2013 annual report revealed continuing issues of concern and further instances where the Judicial Office has refused to share files and paperwork in relation to complaints made against judges and how were handled.

The report also makes reference to incidents such as where Scotland’s top judge Lord Brian Gill refused to hand over information to the JCR. Gill claimed Moi Ali’s office was a "Third Party" and that data cannot be shared with her office for reasons of confidentiality. However, the confidentiality concerns of Gill appear to be restricted to Scotland, as the same information in England & Wales is published online.

It also emerged in the JCR’s second annual report that even though a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the JCR & Judicial Office earlier this year on respective roles, responsibilities and agreed undertakings, the situation regarding the contents of files has not been resolved to Ms Ali’s satisfaction.

The Sunday Mail newspaper reported on issues raised in the JCR’s second annual report, including calls from Moi Ali for the Scottish Government to act over the lack of scrutiny and transparency in Scotland’s judiciary.More can be read here: Calls for Justice Secretary to get tough with anti-transparency judges as Judicial Investigator reveals weak-by-design scrutiny fails to protect public from errant judges

63 comments:

  1. Mr Salmond reads prepared statements very well.

    Did he read it off in consultation with the Lord President?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice try Alex but you sound very lame VERY LAME on this one.

    Is it a case you need the judges on side to back you up on something we are not privy to?

    ReplyDelete
  3. As Victor Meldrew would say, 'Unbelievable'

    ReplyDelete
  4. Separated at birth - Brian Gill and Alex Salmond..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr John Wilson MSP you can hold your head up high for standing up for Democracy and doing the right thing by the Scottish People and standing up against tyranny and self-interest?

    I wish I could say the same for your colleagues MacAskill and Salmond, who have by their actions have likened themselves to a Laurel & Hardy tribute act?

    They have sold their soul to the dark-side and until they man-up and grow a pair and deal with the cancer that infests the flesh of Scotland then they can be sure the Referendum 2014 result will be a landslide and have the SNP turned into a Pariah Party?

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-26024191

    Advocate Mark Strachan goes on trial for fraud

    An Edinburgh advocate has gone on trial charged with defrauding and attempting to defraud the Scottish Legal Aid Board of more than £54,000.


    Gossip says Crown Office only prosecuting because you and the papers took an interest in the case.

    Thumbs up mate.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is comedy Gold?

    Now the under fire and discredited Law Society of Scotland are looking to regain some of the loss of faith of the Scottish Public by saying that we should copy New Zealand's example and should televise court cases here?

    So, presumeably they will also agree with the New Zealand proposal to have Judges have their Interests Registered too, after all this is all in the name of Transparency isn't it?

    Should this be seen as a dagger-in-the-heart of Lord Gill's aspirations to preserve secrecy and do away with Transparency?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The weight of Democracy is now heavily on the shoulders of the remainder of the Public Petitions Committee?

    The Convenor & his Deputy have abandoned their principles in favour of secrecy and lack of transparency, it is now up to the rest of the Committee to send them homeward never to betray the Scottish Public again and to stand up for Democracy and for doing the right thing?

    The Core of any Democracy is the Judiciary and we cannot be a plausible Country if we cannot be certain that Scotland's Judges are crooked?

    The reason we do not know is because Of Lord Gill's desperation to preserve secrecy and block transparency and accountability?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Isn't it amazing who is coming forward to stick their necks out to save these judges?

    Now we have the First Minister himself along with MacAskill laying down Lord Gill's line there will be no reform no transparency no register no thing.

    So when are they going to make it a criminal offence to criticise the judges because the way things are going we are heading that way now.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My suspicions about the character of Salmond have been proven correct?

    Slippery Salmon(d) cannot be caught because he has voted for Scotland's Democracy (The Keep Net) to have a glaring hole in it, so that he and his band-of-balatrons can evade Justice?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Good to see John Wilson making the points and about time we had Mr Wilson and others in the SNP who are like minded in the top jobs instead of people like MacAskill who duck and dive when they are asked to sort things out.
    Also really impressed with your blog and the clips and things you post really good!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Too quick to put it to bed Alex.We are not daft we know something is up here otherwise there would have been nothing to write about all this time..

    Corrupt judges rule the roost in Scotland that much we can see so until you clear up all this mess none of them can be trusted..

    ReplyDelete
  13. FFWD to 0:03 on the clip.
    Anyone notice Nicola Sturgeon turned round in her chair giving Wilson the eye!

    What an odd seating position for the Deputy FM.Did your teachers not tell you to face the front in class?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yes agree FM sounds like he has some vested interests with the judiciary himself haha what a twit arguing against reforming MacAskill's mistakes which I suspect this will be all about now because if there is reform of the JCR it will mean MacAskill f*d up the first time and we know he did anyway so clean it up Eck

    ReplyDelete
  15. oh yes very pathetic attempt to cover for the judges and cover up for all that mess the other day at the petitions committee after Gill drummed them into line too.

    Mr Wilson knows his stuff and is no stooge and you should all be thankful of this.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous said...
    Isn't it amazing who is coming forward to stick their necks out to save these judges?

    Now we have the First Minister himself along with MacAskill laying down Lord Gill's line there will be no reform no transparency no register no thing.

    So when are they going to make it a criminal offence to criticise the judges because the way things are going we are heading that way now.

    3 February 2014 18:26
    _______________________

    Could it be that Salmond & MacAskill have been read the riot act too by Lord Gill?

    ReplyDelete
  17. May as well swap Salmond for Lord Gill if we are going to have judges dictating fmq replies

    The last comment - Yes thanks for pointing out Sturgeon is looking right at Wilson and if you watch the two msps sitting behind him they look like they are also cowering in fear its SO obvious what she was up to!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Cherbi must be right on target again if they are wheeling out Salmond to defuse the oversight of judges bomb now sitting in Holyrood's main chamber.

    Just do the register thing and make JCR the same as the rest of the country already

    ReplyDelete
  19. No BBC again surprise surprise.No one willing to stick their neck out to cover it?

    ReplyDelete
  20. On Sturgeon - you had to be there to see it
    We had a few chuckles on the way out

    ReplyDelete
  21. All you need to do is put the clip of Salmond replying to Wilson on one screen while watching Moi Ali giving an honest and experienced account of what has been going on in the judiciary and how they have treated her and the role of JCR.

    Easy to conclude who is telling the truth (Moi Ali) and who should be backing her up (Alex Salmon) instead of just a thanks and cheerio.

    Well done Moi Ali.Eternal respect to you for doing the right thing.
    How about you do the same Alex?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Why is salmond sticking up for the judges????

    ReplyDelete
  23. So yet more flannel from Salmond & Co.

    Salmond conveniently ignores the fact that the population of England and Wales is approximately 10 times the size of Scotland's, and so the number of complaints here actually exceed those per capita down South.

    What a con!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Just rename it to Lord Gill's Questions because that answer is probably word for word from the judges.

    ReplyDelete
  25. and you know what? I didnt even know the Judicial Complaints Reviewer existed until Cherbi started writing about it!

    ReplyDelete
  26. ehhhh what is going on in Scotland with all these crooked judges and stuff???

    cant you guys get the better of these hoods and all their friends in the law???

    ReplyDelete
  27. Land of the Lawless, unless you are a member of the public

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous said...
    No BBC again surprise surprise.No one willing to stick their neck out to cover it?

    3 February 2014 19:42
    ---------------------------"---

    Notice Labour, Tories & Lib Dem's all conspicuously silent, even after a loyal SNP MSP condescends Salmond?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous said...
    So yet more flannel from Salmond & Co.

    Salmond conveniently ignores the fact that the population of England and Wales is approximately 10 times the size of Scotland's, and so the number of complaints here actually exceed those per capita down South.

    What a con!


    3 February 2014 21:42
    :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    Yes, not to mention the obvious; that when obfuscation , lack of transparency and corruption is kindly pointed out to you, the last thing you do is say thanks for pointing this out to us, smashing job but we like to keep things just exactly as they are because that way we can cover things up easier and do not have to act in the Scottish Public's best interests and instead we can stuff £50 notes into our boots with gay abandon?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous said...
    Just rename it to Lord Gill's Questions because that answer is probably word for word from the judges.

    3 February 2014 21:43
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You mean Lord Gill owns the Public Petitions Committee two as well as MacAskill and Salmond?

    Good point, well made?

    ReplyDelete
  31. The whole of Scotland stands firmly behind you John Wilson?

    You have total respect for standing up for truth & Justice, pity your colleagues do not posses your moral fibre?

    ReplyDelete
  32. This scandal beggars belief?

    Talk about defending the indefensible?

    The slippery slope is a slippin'?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Look at the headlines and then listen to Salmond slugging away trying to save the judges from any independent regulation.

    Looks very bad!

    ReplyDelete
  34. What's it gonna take for the penny to drop?

    First, Scotland lost the excellent and principled Moi Ali ?

    Is it going to take the resignation of a principled and patriotic John Wilson MSP before Salmond pulls his head out of the sand?

    Scotland is being held to ransom by crooked Scottish lawyers and by the sounds of it crooked Scottish Judges with self serving behaviour at the expense of the Scottish People?

    You cannot expect to win the Referendum if you are disenfranchising and hood-winking the Scottish People?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Clearly Scotland is not a place for transparency or respect from the Government for anyone who does speak out.Not the image of Scotland you see projected to the rest of us so thanks for putting the record straight.Hope you get someone in who actually does something instead of just spouting crap.

    ReplyDelete
  36. First Minister: your attitude stinks and is the reason I am voting no. You are an elected front man for Mr Gill and his cronies, we cannot remove them by voting but they have awesome unelected power. So fill a parliament with Law Society and Judiciary puppets and this is what happens. No need to review powers Mr Salmond, I see no need to give you all more power so I will vote no on my mothers birthday 18th September, she would vote no if she were here.

    Fortunately for us DOI tell us how things really are in Scotland but like Mr Cherbi's family I know from personal experience what lawyers are. Keep up the good work DOI you are a credit to Scotland.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Separated at birth - Brian Gill and Alex Salmond.....Brothers Grim they are "in it together"

    ReplyDelete
  38. Salmond and MacAskill are beneath contempt. I watch them occasionally on the news when I am at my relatives houses as I am TV free and I don't trust either of them. Lord Gill is the real First Minister and Lord President of Scotland. I wonder how many complaints were made against those who became Judges during their climb up the Judicial ladder?

    ReplyDelete
  39. It's not only about need, they don't want more powers that is what Alex means. I detest the man and all he stands for.

    ReplyDelete
  40. They've lost the plot

    ReplyDelete
  41. The body language indicated to me that this had been rehearsed, and showed an uneasy posture, MR Salmond had to read it all from script and not once made eye contact with Mr Wilson, and everybody was happy with the outcome, not a whimper from the opposite side, yes Mr Meldrew would have said unbelievable, of course they are really all in it together. Regardless of which party if you contact a politician about a legal dispute you have they all have the same pathetic response. This performance has swung me to a no vote.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Anonymous said...

    Why is salmond sticking up for the judges????

    3 February 2014 21:19
    ==================================
    Because he chooses to be controlled by them. Yes indeed it is out of order, his attitude is bad and he thinks the voters should have no rights against the unelected Judiciary so how can it be a democratic country when power resides with the unelected few? Voting for Salmond and his so called Justice Minister is pointless, Law Society and Judges have them in their control. The justice system in Scotland is corrupt and this is a direct consequence of the omnipotent being allowed to operate in secrecy. Shame on you Mr Salmond and any MSP who agrees with your stance on this issue of national importance because it can affect any of us at any time. Disgusting you are not fit to be in Parliament never mind First Minister.

    ReplyDelete
  43. As always Salmond is so predictable. Just like Gill's bullshit when he spoke of the Victorian civil courts system, [his intention to reform it was bull]. They clearly have a lot to hide and Salmond wants to keep them protected, he is doing what the Law Society have always done. Odious creature indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  44. MacAskill & Salmond's decision to stick up for Lord Gill's secrecy agenda, abandoning all sense and reason and against the interests of Justice of the Scottish People, could this lead to their impeachment resulting in a vote of no confidence in the pair of them?

    After all, no other Banana Republic would risk supporting the total secrecy of the Judiciary against the People?

    It is simply impossibly to defend a system which has shown to be incapable of showing that it is fit for purpose and is unable to prove in its current form that there is any system in place for accountability and preservation of standards?

    Moi Ali did everything but shout out to these two men that the biggest problem to change and accountability was the complete unwillingness of Gill to accept change for the good and his resistance to require transparency as a basic tenet of law and justice?

    ReplyDelete
  45. I thought all of the laws of a country were supposed to be founded upon the core belief that the Judiciary is sacrosanct?

    Since, we have absolutely no way of knowing if our Judiciary are even fit for purpose, other than one man's say so, notwithstanding that he cannot and refuses to show any evidence for his assertion, when will the Scottish Parliament be shut?

    If our Judiciary cannot show that they are trustworthy then it may be incumbent on the People to escort the politicians out of the Scottish Parliament building and lock the door behind them for they would be incapable of representing the People of Scotland and to fulfil their statutory obligations?

    ReplyDelete
  46. For all those dont knows on the indy ref just remember this-

    The justice system of a country is a microcosm of what is actually going on in the fabric of that country's leadership, political structure and how public life functions and what the population can expect in terms of their rights how they live and how life goes on.

    Here you have the First Minister unashamedly covering up for a discredited, unaccountable judiciary who must apparently have the independence not to declare their interests, not to declare their recusals and not to declare anything which could harm their self fostered image of purity in the extreme.

    You have all now seen how the term "independence" is put into practice by a man who demands it for Scotland.Can you really trust the country to function any better under independence when the First Minister is so easily caught out like this?

    ReplyDelete
  47. The truth is these legal eagles individually make substantial donations to whatever political party they need to manipulate and it was clearly demonstrated by Alex Salmond in Holyrood

    ReplyDelete
  48. No ThankYou Mr Wilson and No ThankYou Ms Ali, we (on behalf of the People of Scotland) would rather stay living in the bygone days of yore, where there are no rules and where the elite can do as they please safe in the knowledge that they are 'The Untouchables'?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Anonymous said...
    Isn't it amazing who is coming forward to stick their necks out to save these judges?

    Now we have the First Minister himself along with MacAskill laying down Lord Gill's line there will be no reform no transparency no register no thing.

    So when are they going to make it a criminal offence to criticise the judges because the way things are going we are heading that way now.

    3 February 2014 18:26
    ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

    Thought-Crime will be the next thing they'll go for?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Anonymous said...
    First Minister: your attitude stinks and is the reason I am voting no. You are an elected front man for Mr Gill and his cronies, we cannot remove them by voting but they have awesome unelected power. So fill a parliament with Law Society and Judiciary puppets and this is what happens. No need to review powers Mr Salmond, I see no need to give you all more power so I will vote no on my mothers birthday 18th September, she would vote no if she were here.

    Fortunately for us DOI tell us how things really are in Scotland but like Mr Cherbi's family I know from personal experience what lawyers are. Keep up the good work DOI you are a credit to Scotland.

    4 February 2014 09:46
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    The DOI Team are the Sons of Scotland?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Anonymous said...
    Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Separated at birth - Brian Gill and Alex Salmond.....Brothers Grim they are "in it together"

    4 February 2014 09:47
    (((()((()((()(((()(((()(((()((()((

    More like twisted Vessen?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anonymous said...
    Salmond and MacAskill are beneath contempt. I watch them occasionally on the news when I am at my relatives houses as I am TV free and I don't trust either of them. Lord Gill is the real First Minister and Lord President of Scotland. I wonder how many complaints were made against those who became Judges during their climb up the Judicial ladder?

    4 February 2014 10:31
    schschschschschschsch

    Should it be Lord & President Brian Gill then?

    ReplyDelete
  53. I am a longstanding and loyal SNP voter as are all of my family, however, I have seen Salmond's Public Face Mask slip for the first time to reveal the real power brokers in Scotland and I have decided never to vote for the SNP again?

    I expected my Party to stamp this sort of cronyism and self-interest out, not to cosy up with them to be part of their inner sect?

    No More Mr Salmond?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anonymous said...
    As always Salmond is so predictable. Just like Gill's bullshit when he spoke of the Victorian civil courts system, [his intention to reform it was bull]. They clearly have a lot to hide and Salmond wants to keep them protected, he is doing what the Law Society have always done. Odious creature indeed.

    4 February 2014 11:16
    dohdohdohdohdohdoh

    What is your impression of the mindset of a man who criticises the system and calls it 'Victorian' and needs an urgent overhaul, in order to get the top-job and then when he gets the top-job he then does precisely nothing other than prevent transparency and to restrict all attempts to hold him to account?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous said...
    I thought all of the laws of a country were supposed to be founded upon the core belief that the Judiciary is sacrosanct?

    Since, we have absolutely no way of knowing if our Judiciary are even fit for purpose, other than one man's say so, notwithstanding that he cannot and refuses to show any evidence for his assertion, when will the Scottish Parliament be shut?

    If our Judiciary cannot show that they are trustworthy then it may be incumbent on the People to escort the politicians out of the Scottish Parliament building and lock the door behind them for they would be incapable of representing the People of Scotland and to fulfil their statutory obligations?

    4 February 2014 11:54
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ***********************

    It is almost as if Salmond & Gill (sounds fishy) already know that the Scottish Judicial System is irrevocably corrupt and broken but they are saying to the Scottish Public, look, we are going to insist that you believe that the Judges are sacrosanct because that is the way they are supposed to be, so you will just have to pretend that this is the case because it would be too messy for us to sort this unholy mess out?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Last one out, please switch off the light...

    ReplyDelete
  57. Oh dear.

    If Scotland was a ship, she would be holed by a torpedo below the water line.




    'I'm sorry but Kenny and I are not bothered that the Scottish Judiciary are not trusted by the majority of the People and could-not-care-a-jot that our Judges demand that they should operate in a climate of secrecy and insuperability and treat the Scottish Public with such contempt'

    ReplyDelete
  58. Did I hear John Wilson MSP correctly when he said there had been in excess of 20 serious cases brought against Judges in Scotland in the past few years, that some of these complaints were simply wiped away at the insistence of Lord Gill?

    What does this say about the standards and equitability of the Scottish Courts?

    What does this say about the measures and systems in place to explain the large number of reports against Scottish Judges?

    What does this say about Kenny MacAskill & Alex Salmond's attitude towards ensuring that the Scottish Judiciary are fit for purpose?

    My God.

    What a mess.

    ReplyDelete
  59. What is your impression of the mindset of a man who criticises the system and calls it 'Victorian' and needs an urgent overhaul, in order to get the top-job and then when he gets the top-job he then does precisely nothing other than prevent transparency and to restrict all attempts to hold him to account?
    ===================================
    Well actions speak louder than words and he clearly had no intention of reforming a system that causes delays and augments law firms accounts through Legal Aid and client fees. He got the top job because he had no intention of reforming it after all Legal Aid itself, Scotland has the highest amount spent per head in Europe. Delays and repudiation [once they ruin clients] are the norm in Scotland which makes a lot of money for the save justice or put another way save our Legal Aid motherlode is what they mean. It also allows them to fleece clients accounts and be cleared to do so again because there is no complaints system in place.

    ReplyDelete
  60. How ridiculous of Salmond and yes that looked entirely rehearsed as everything else he comes out with is rehearsed.

    Bye to independence under Alex phew am I happy about that!

    ReplyDelete
  61. The First Minister (Alex Salmond): Last year, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice. No no no Mr Salmond you are incorrect The Cabinet front man for the Law Society of Scotland is what he is. The bureaucracy that turns a blind eye to people being robbed by lawyers because the truth is that no complaints system is in place, this is the reality Mr Salmond. MSP's the majority are yes men for Gill and his colleagues, Scotland is a Banana Republic indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  62. MacAskill and Salmond could be Lord Gill, these two men are against the people of Scotland. No need to review powers, protectionism is what is happening. Again we see those against reform know they will never be ruined by crooked lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Same here had not heard of this Judicial Complaints Reviewer until I saw a story in the Sunday Mail and came found this blog

    Reading the post about John Wilson and watching the clip someone in the parliament needs to start putting up for a debate about why we do not have the same rights as England and Wales against judges and complaints.

    ReplyDelete

Comments should encourage & promote an acceptable & respectful level of public debate on law & legal issues, the judiciary, courts & justice system.

All comments are subject to moderation. Anonymous comments are enabled.
Abusive or unacceptable comments will not be published.
Comments & links to material may not always be published but will be noted and investigated.

Sourced information, news leaks, or cases with verifiable documentation for investigation should be emailed to blog journalists.