New Judicial Investigator Gillian Thompson follows Moi Ali in support for judges register. SCOTLAND’S new Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR) Gillian Thompson OBE has told a Scottish Parliament Committee she supports proposals currently before MSPs to create a register of interests for Scotland’s judges.
JCR Gillian Thompson’s backing for Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary comes after Moi Ali - Scotland’s first ever Judicial Complaints Reviewer – quit her role as JCR after describing the job as “window dressing” during an evidence session with MSPs in September 2013, reported 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
In responses to MSPs questions, Moi Ali revealed she had no statutory powers over judicial complaints, and received no cooperation from Scotland’s top judges.
Now, the new JCR - Gillian Thompson - who also authored a report on undeclared interests of Scottish Court Service staff in relation to how interests are recorded in the Scottish Court Service - has given her full backing for the judges register petition, writing in a letter to MSPs stating: “As a general principle I am in favour of those in public life, whether paid or unpaid, being required to maintain a register of interests including hospitality given or received.”
Ms Thompson continued: “We live in an age in which transparency about interests and activities of those in the public eye is regarded as good practice. There is a perception that anything less is the result of attempts to hide things. In the case of Judges, it is clear that court users and the public more widely seek reassurances of fairness and impartiality.”
Ms Thompson has also disclosed her own interests to MSPs, following on from the example set by Moi Ali - who created her own register of interests while in the office of JCR.
The Sunday Mail newspaper reports:
BACK IN THE DOCK - NEW BROOM WANTS JUDGES TO OPEN UP
Second legal watchdog says judges' refusal to support register of interests looks suspicious
Jan 18, 2015 By Mark Aitken
NEW judicial complaints reviewer Gillian Thompson has given backing for register despite protests from Scotland's top judge, Lord Gill.
A LEGAL watchdog who quit after supporting a register of interest for judges has been backed by the woman who replaced her.
Moi Ali was appointed as the country’s first judicial complaints reviewer in 2011 but resigned last year claiming she had no power and got no co-operation from law chiefs.
She was also criticised by Scotland’s top judge, Lord Gill, over her support for a register of interest for judges.
But her successor Gillian Thompson has also given her backing for a register.
Holyrood’s petitions committee are considering a submission by legal campaigner Peter Cherbi for a judicial register of interests which could details gifts, hospitality and links to outside bodies such as law firms.
In a letter to the committee, Thompson wrote: “We live in an age in which transparency about interests and activities of those in the public eye is regarded as good practice.
“There is a perception that anything less is the result of attempts to hide things.
“In the case of judges, it is clear that court users and the public more widely seek reassurances of fairness and impartiality.”
Lord Gill has repeatedly dismissed calls for a register of interests.
But Cherbi said: “Two judicial complaints reviewers in a row have supported a register while Lord Gill suspiciously clings to secrecy and refuses to accept transparency must be applied equally to judges as it is to everyone else in public life.”
Submission from JCR Gillian Thompson to Public Petitions Committee: I have seen the evidence provided to the Committee by my predecessor Moi Ali in May 2013, what was said by the Lord President in his written submission of 21 November 2014 and previously, the evidence provided by the Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs on 9 December 2014.
As a general principle I am in favour of those in public life, whether paid or unpaid, being required to maintain a register of interests including hospitality given or received.
We live in an age in which transparency about interests and activities of those in the public eye is regarded as good practice. There is a perception that anything less is the result of attempts to hide things. In the case of Judges, it is clear that court users and the public more widely seek reassurances of fairness and impartiality. I think it is difficult for those outside the Judiciary to understand the notion that the Oath taken by Judges on appointment should be regarded as sufficient evidence of their commitment to uphold the principles of public life.
Of course a register as called for by this petition would require to be kept up to date and the burden of cost and responsibility would have to be borne by, most likely, the public purse. It seems to me however that the costs attached would be offset to a degree by an increase in confidence and, conceivably, a drop in complaints.
In respect of the Annual Report by the Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR) for the period 1 September 2013 to 31 August 2014, the Report is now on the JCR website. It was sent in draft to the Lord President prior to publication.
Finally, I have undertaken to publish my own register of interests on my website. Currently in addition to my appointment as JCR for which I am paid a daily fee of £213 over a restricted number of days annually, I am a non- executive director of Registry Trust Ltd a not- for-profit company based in London (fee of £8,200 paid for 10 days work a year), I am a Scottish Trustee of Stepchange Debt Charity (unpaid), a Scottish Ambassador for Tomorrow’s People a charity that works with disadvantage young people to find employment (unpaid). For each body I am required to provide regular updates of my interests. I am a member of the English Speaking Union Scotland and the Scottish Dachshund club. I make a monthly payments in support of Cancer Research, the RSPB and the SSPCA.
I hope this is helpful in the Committee’s on going consideration of petition PE1458.
While Scotland’s top judge continues to oppose the creation of a register of interests, MSPs held a debate in the Scottish Parliament’s main chamber on Thursday 7 October 2014. The debate resulted in cross party support for the proposal. MSPs overwhelmingly supported motion S4M-11078 - in the name of Public Petitions Convener David Stewart MSP on petition PE1458, urging the Scottish Government to give further consideration to a register of interests for judges.
The parliamentary debate was reported by Diary of Injustice along with video coverage here: TRANSPARENCY TIME: Top judge & Scottish Government told to rethink refusal on declarations of judges as Holyrood MSPs support calls to create a register of judicial interests. The coverage of individual MSPs who spoke in the debate along with video footage & the official record, is here: Debating the Judges
Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations by Diary of Injustice including reports from the media, and video footage of debates at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary
Well done and good to see the new JCR do the right thing and support the petition.Proves you are correct to ask for these declarations of judges.
ReplyDeleteBloody marvelous start to the New Year - Gill and his cronies at the discredited Law Society of Scotland really have their backs against the wall now.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the pressure!
Lord NONO will not be amused!
ReplyDelete“There is a perception that anything less is the result of attempts to hide things."
ReplyDeleteYes exactly the judges are hiding things because we never knew any of what has come out until the papers started on the judges and their interests so lets have this register.
This register of interests proposal goes much further than judges concealing their interests.
ReplyDeleteI say this because there are others in the loop who are currently benefiting from a lack of a register and a lack of adherence of the judiciary to their judicial oath.
An example - A client I represented on a charge of assault agreed to plead to a lesser charge.
The case was put back and returned with another agent for the Crown who did not wish to honour the plea to the lesser charge.
On instruction of client I raised with Crown agent his case discussion in sheriff's chambers prior to hearing.
Crown agent said if raised in court as recusal he intended to ask for adjournment and seek Police to further investigate my client with a view to attempted murder charge.
Result client entered plea of guilty and was given lengthy sentence outwith normal range.
The sheriff clearly influenced by discussion without myself present and appeal refused.
It has since been brought to my attention the acting Crown agent has a working relationship with figures in the judiciary of significant standing.
Well written and covered by the media.
ReplyDeleteCould be the biggest upset the legal system in Scotland has ever faced and about time too.
Congratulations on your effort and dogged determination to see it through!
"Of course a register as called for by this petition would require to be kept up to date and the burden of cost and responsibility would have to be borne by, most likely, the public purse. It seems to me however that the costs attached would be offset to a degree by an increase in confidence and, conceivably, a drop in complaints."
ReplyDeleteA cut in the judges financial fiddles will help pay for the register!
Read this by George Monbiot http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
ReplyDeleteThis sounds a lot like what you are reporting is going on within the judiciary and their interests not being declared.
it just seems mad to me they have not been declaring until now so why not just make this the law and for all judges not just in Scotland
ReplyDeleteLooking grim for Gill and any fool who spins the argument about judges keeping their wealth a secret..
ReplyDelete"As a general principle I am in favour of those in public life, whether paid or unpaid, being required to maintain a register of interests including hospitality given or received."
ReplyDeleteYes I agree now give us the register for judges one and all.
In reply to;
ReplyDeleteRead this by George Monbiot http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
So did I, and it just demonstrates once again why the public - under 60 - are turning to, and relying upon, the internet to provide a sell informed and comprehensive news service.
This blog is an outstanding example.
There is a very high perception the judges are hiding things from us.Why else would Scotland's most senior judge bring the parliament to a halt when asked to declare interests.Very fishy smacks of corruption and others have already said this has never happened before as in anywhere!
ReplyDeleteSO much for the judiciary and full marks to this blog for bringing down one of the huge myths of society that we must always trust judges no matter what.
ReplyDeleteTurns out the judges fell down at the first hurdle when you asked about their interests.What a negative reaction.Who would have expected it.The top lord then turns his guns on democracy and the Scottish parliament in a fit of anger and guilt.He will know exactly what is going on with his colleagues finances and does not want it revealed.It is the only conclusion anyone can reach after reading what happened.
Keep up the good work.
Judges in other countries are being reported for failing to declare their assets so what about here in Scotland http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2014/10/31/hammer-to-fall-on-15-judges-who-failed-to-disclose-interests
ReplyDeleteHammer to fall on 15 judges who failed to disclose interests
Sapa | 31 October, 2014 14:05
Fifteen judges who failed to declare their financial interests will be reported to the Judicial Conduct Committee, the office of the chief justice said on Friday.
Spokeswoman Lulama Luti said the Registrar of Judges' Registrable Interests Pat Gagai had confirmed that 15 judges had not disclosed their interests.
This was after one judge submitted the necessary disclosure form on Friday.
"The registrar is currently finalising the process of reporting judges who have not disclosed their interests to the Judicial Conduct Committee."
In terms of the Judicial Service Commission Act judges were required to fill out a disclosure form and return it to the registrar.
"The registrar verifies the number of completed forms received against the total number of judges who must disclose," she said.
"The registrar enters the information provided by judges in the forms into the Register of Judges' Registrable Interests."
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
This register of interests proposal goes much further than judges concealing their interests.
I say this because there are others in the loop who are currently benefiting from a lack of a register and a lack of adherence of the judiciary to their judicial oath.
An example - A client I represented on a charge of assault agreed to plead to a lesser charge.
The case was put back and returned with another agent for the Crown who did not wish to honour the plea to the lesser charge.
On instruction of client I raised with Crown agent his case discussion in sheriff's chambers prior to hearing.
Crown agent said if raised in court as recusal he intended to ask for adjournment and seek Police to further investigate my client with a view to attempted murder charge.
Result client entered plea of guilty and was given lengthy sentence outwith normal range.
The sheriff clearly influenced by discussion without myself present and appeal refused.
It has since been brought to my attention the acting Crown agent has a working relationship with figures in the judiciary of significant standing.
20 January 2015 at 21:57
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
This is the funniest post I have ever read on this blog.
On the face of it, the Scottish lawyer is crying until the cows come home that he was treated badly by Scottish Justice and firmly points the finger at the Crown and the Judge being in coohoots but the real clue is in the story itself which seeks to point out that his client was offered a reduced plea by the Crown and then the Crown withdrew the plea?
Why so funny I hear you ask?
Simple. Plea-bargaining in Scotland is a criminal offence?
Go figure, says it all really!
What other secrets do these judges have we do no know about yet?
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me there is too much to hide and everyone involved in this debate now knows the reality.This register must happen and all laid bare for everyone to see.
What about the first para in her letter about not receiving the letter from the petitions committee?
ReplyDeleteWhere did it go?Did a judge intercept it?!
What is Gill's next move?
ReplyDeleteto shut down the entire Parliament until they comply with his view?
saw this in the Sunday Mail last weekend good to see this new judicial reviewer supporting Moi Ali and your petition!
ReplyDeleteThe judges are allowed to get away with it and in return they keep us down and pass unjust laws so this is the big reason there is lots of injustice everywhere
ReplyDeleteHey kid get a load of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=656Lmg4pKQg
ReplyDeletesame applies to ur judges all gettin it on and paid for by u guys!
keep up the bloggin :)
Are there plans for Gillian Thompson to testify to the msps?
ReplyDeleteAny judge involved in a complaint has to be named and withdrawn from their duties until the complaint is resolved published or whatever otherwise if they continue to hear cases and are eventually found guilty of whatever the complaint is there is an even bigger mess to clean up.
ReplyDeleteNot that the judges care one way or another because they have so much power they are doing as they please and no one dare stops them.
I have a complaint being investigated by the JCR and will let you know of the outcome and what if anything happens to the judge
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAny judge involved in a complaint has to be named and withdrawn from their duties until the complaint is resolved published or whatever otherwise if they continue to hear cases and are eventually found guilty of whatever the complaint is there is an even bigger mess to clean up.
Not that the judges care one way or another because they have so much power they are doing as they please and no one dare stops them.
24 January 2015 at 21:35
Yes I agree however as you also say the judges have too much power so do not bother about who thinks what of them or what they are doing because there is no real accountability is there
Did Gill have a plan on this or did he just stick to his court appointed role and treat everyone else as accused persons because this is the way he is coming across and I suspect the new jcr realised this and backed your petition.
ReplyDeleteTo the person with the complaint at the jcr - make sure you name the judge and all the other judges who covered up!
ReplyDelete"“There is a perception that anything less is the result of attempts to hide things."
ReplyDeleteExactly what a judge may say to someone in court if they refuse to answer a question so yes I agree with Gillian Thompson,Moi Ali and yourself we need this register of interests for the judges and everything out in the open.
Looking forward to the next installment!and congrats on shaking up the judges a bit!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI have a complaint being investigated by the JCR and will let you know of the outcome and what if anything happens to the judge
25 January 2015 at 17:20
------------------------------------
I am also aware of a complaint involving corruption which has been sitting on The Lord President's desk since July 2014 but nothing has been done?
Police?