First Minister claims register for judges interests is ‘unworkable’ SCOTLAND'S First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has joined Scotland's outgoing top judge in a bid to block increased judicial accountability & transparency with the creation of a register of interests for judges.
The surprise move by the country’s most senior politician comes amid fears the judicial transparency proposal currently being considered by MSPs will expose the secret links between big money, big business, offshore private banking, staggering property wealth and Scotland’s mega powerful & secretive judiciary.
The First Minister also repeated claims made by Lord President Lord Brian Gill (73) - who accused “aggressive media” and court users in an attempt to thwart the Scottish Parliament probe into why judges are so secretive about their vast wealth and connections.
MSPs on the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee are due to debate plans to create a register of judicial interests as called for in Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary tomorrow, Tuesday 12 May 2015.
The proposals – under investigation by MSPs since January 2013 - call for the creation of a single independently regulated register of interests containing information on judges backgrounds, their personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world.
The petition has cross party support from msps who backed a motion urging the Scottish Government to create a register of judicial interests at Holyrood on 7 October 2014 - reported along with video footage and the official record, here: Debating the Judges.
The latest, surprise intervention by the First Minister in the bid to bring transparency to Scotland’s secretive judges only came to light last week - although Ms Sturgeon’s letter is dated 30 March.
In the letter, which gives the First Minister’s view of petitions relating to justice issues - Nicola Sturgeon also revealed Legal Affairs Minister Paul Wheelhouse had a secret meeting with Lord Gill to discuss the petition in February of this year.
Writing in the letter to John Pentland MSP, Convener of the Public Petitions Committee, the First Minister said: “This petition calls on the Scottish Government to create a Register of Interests for the Judiciary. The Scottish Government considers that such a register of judicial interests is not necessary and that the existing safeguards - the Judicial Oath, the Statement of Principles of Judicial Ethics and the system for complaints against the judiciary - are sufficient. These safeguards, together with the register of judicial recusals, are sufficient to protect individuals from judicial bias.”
“Further to the evidence that the Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, Mr Wheelhouse, gave to the Committee on 9 December 2014, he discussed this petition when he met the Lord President in February. The Minister acknowledged the Lord President's concerns about the introduction of a register of judicial interests. The breadth of such a register would make it virtually unworkable. It would need to cover not only financial interests, but also memberships of groups and associations and familial and social relationships. Even so, such a register might not capture relevant issues that could arise.”
“The position of the judiciary is different from that of MSPs and others who hold public office. The judiciary cannot publicly defend themselves. The Lord President has cautioned that such a register could also have unintended consequences. Consideration requires to be given to judges' privacy and freedom from harassment by aggressive media or hostile individuals, including dissatisfied litigants. In addition, there is currently no evidence that judges who should have recused themselves from cases have not done so.”
The First Minister’s letter is an almost word for word quote from previous letters written by Lord Gill who has previously blasted msps on the Petitions Committee foreven to dare to consider the issue of increased transparency of the judiciary.
And, following what some have referred to as a ‘script’ written by Lord Gill - the First Minister’s letter is dated two days before the latest 1 April letter from the top judge to the Petitions Committee.
Lord Gill has previously claimed such a register could compromise judges' privacy by encouraging "aggressive media or hostile individuals" and that "The establishment of such a register therefore may have the unintended consequence of eroding public confidence in the judiciary."
Gill also refused three invitations to appear at the Scottish Parliament and take questions on his hostility towards judicial transparency and a register of judges’ interests.
The surprise letter from Nicola Sturgeon supporting the elderly top judge – who has been caught in headlines flying around the world on grand 5 day taxpayer funded state visits to countries such as Qatar - predates Lord Gill’s announcement of his ‘retirement’ last week.
Having served three years as Lord President – the shortest term in the post for some time, the ageing Gill said he is stepping down at the end of this month.
The latest development in the debate around creating a register of interests for judges comes as MSPs were handed a copy of internal Scottish Government communications which conflict with testimony previously given to the Public Petitions Committee by Legal Affairs Minister Paul Wheelhouse.
The emails reveal Mr Wheelhouse deliberately misled MSPs over claims gangsters had threatened SEPA officials - claims which wheelhouse used to argue with MSPs at an earlier evidence session that judges wealth and connections to big business, banks and the legal profession must be kept hidden.
Conversations between aides to Mr Wheelhouse begging SEPA for examples of evidence for “the Minister to have in his back pocket” revealed no gangster threats had occurred. Instead, a farmer threatened a SEPA employee with a stick, and a fence had been pushed against another SEPA employee.
The now released email also raises questions on what knowledge the then Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill knew of the material used by Wheelhouse – after MacAskill – who is now on the Petitions Committee – failed to question the Minister during his interaction with Wheelhouse at a previous Petitions Committee meeting, reported here: Too Many Secrets: Legal Affairs Minister Paul Wheelhouse substitutes for top judge in evidence to MSPs
MacAskill – a lawyer who trained at Glasgow based law firm of Levy & Mcrae who are now caught up in a multi million pound writ over the £400m collapse of Hedge Fund Heather Capital - is known to be against the plan to create a register of interests for judges.
MSPs on the Petitions Committee have now been asked to recall Mr Wheelhouse to account for his misleading testimony, and to face questions on his private meeting with Lord Gill.
It has also been suggested Moi Ali - Scotland’s first Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR) be recalled to give evidence on changes relating to judicial conduct complaint rules put forward by Lord Gill. The changes have been branded tweaks & window dressing in a previous report here: THE LORD'S RULES: Top judge's two year consultation & tweaks to rules allowing judges to investigate themselves is 'missed opportunity'.
During an earlier evidence session before the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee, Moi Ali told msps there is little transparency or accountability in Scotland’s judiciary.
Among papers released for tomorrow's meeting, clerks have now recommended MSPs seek information from legal affairs Minister Wheelhouse on what took place at the secret meeting with Gill held in February and also to recommend Gillian Thompson OBE - the new Judicial Complaints Reviewer who replaced Moi Ali last year, attend to give evidence.
Gillian Thompson has already registered her support for a register of judicial interests in a letter to MSPs, reported here: DECLARE THE JUDGES: New Judicial Complaints Reviewer supports proposal to Scottish Parliament to create a register of interests for judges
The Sunday Herald newspaper reported on First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s intervention on behalf of the judiciary and her opposition to the judicial transparency proposal:
First Minister rejects call for register of judges' interests
Paul Hutcheon
Investigations Editor Sunday 10 May 2015
NICOLA Sturgeon has rejected calls for judges to declare details of their finances in a register of interest. The First Minister said the proposal, lodged by justice campaigner Peter Cherbi, was "not necessary" and claimed existing rules were "sufficient".
Holyrood's Public Petitions Committee is in the middle of a long-term probe into whether judges, sheriffs and justices of the peace should be brought into line with other senior public sector figures.
MSPs, MPs, councillors and board members of public bodies are all required to register their outside financial interests.
A petition lodged with the Scottish Parliament in 2012 called for members of the judiciary to declare their "pecuniary" interests, which would include shareholdings, directorships and membership of external bodies.
Judicial officer holders can recuse - or remove - themselves if a conflict of interest arises during a case, but nothing more is required.
The plan was met with hostility by the country's top judge, Lord Gill, who repeatedly snubbed calls by the committee to give oral evidence. He relied on written testimony to blast a proposal he said could compromise judges' privacy by encouraging "aggressive media or hostile individuals".
Lord Gill concluded: "The establishment of such a register therefore may have the unintended consequence of eroding public confidence in the judiciary."
The issue has now reached the desk of the First Minister, who has backed Lord Gill.
In a letter to John Pentland MSP, the Committee convener, she supported the status quo: "The Scottish Government considers that such a register of judicial interests is not necessary and that the existing safeguards - the Judicial Oath, the Statement of Principles of Judicial Ethics and the system for complaints against the judiciary - are sufficient.
"These safeguards, together with the register of judicial recusals, are sufficient to protect individuals from judicial bias."
She also repeated Lord Gill's fear about "aggressive media" and noted: "The position of the judiciary is different from that of MSPs and others who hold public office. The judiciary cannot publicly defend themselves."
The First Minister also revealed that Paul Wheelhouse, her Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, met Lord Gill in December to discuss the petition.
In his evidence to the Committee, Wheelhouse said he feared a register could leave judges open to "threats or intimidation", adding that colleagues at an environment quango had already been threatened by organised criminals. However, emails between the Government and Scottish Environment Protection Agency revealed no link to organised crime.
Cherbi said: "I am surprised Nicola Sturgeon supports a judicial ban on transparency just because judges have been asked to declare their substantial interests. "We are always told if you have got nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. What are the judges hiding and what do they fear? "There cannot be one set of rules for judges and another for everyone else. A register of interests will enhance public trust in the justice system, not detract from it."
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "The Scottish Government considers that a specific register of interests is not needed. Existing safeguards, including the Judicial Oath, the Statement of Principles of Judicial Interests and the system of complaints against the judiciary, are sufficient to ensure the impartiality of the judiciary in Scotland."
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
No way Nicola.Lets have this register of the judges.
ReplyDeleteShe backed the wrong guy I reckon..
ReplyDeleteSCOTLAND'S First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has joined Scotland's outgoing top judge in a bid to block increased judicial accountability & transparency with the creation of a register of interests for judges.
ReplyDeleteThe surprise move by the country’s most senior politician comes amid fears the judicial transparency proposal currently being considered by MSPs will expose the secret links between big money, big business, offshore private banking, staggering property wealth and Scotland’s mega powerful & secretive judiciary.
WTF???
Why are we allowing judges to be secret about their interests???
Make it happen MSPs!!!
Wow what a bloody liar Wheelhouse turned out to be.
ReplyDeleteWhere are the gangsters in that email?It says farmers!
Liked your quotes in the Sunday Herald yesterday
ReplyDeletehttp://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/first-minister-rejects-call-for-register-of-judges-interests.125549499
First Minister rejects call for register of judges' interests
Paul Hutcheon Investigations Editor Sunday 10 May 2015
NICOLA Sturgeon has rejected calls for judges to declare details of their finances in a register of interest.
The First Minister said the proposal, lodged by justice campaigner Peter Cherbi, was "not necessary" and claimed existing rules were "sufficient".
Holyrood's Public Petitions Committee is in the middle of a long-term probe into whether judges, sheriffs and justices of the peace should be brought into line with other senior public sector figures.
MSPs, MPs, councillors and board members of public bodies are all required to register their outside financial interests.
A petition lodged with the Scottish Parliament in 2012 called for members of the judiciary to declare their "pecuniary" interests, which would include shareholdings, directorships and membership of external bodies.
Judicial officer holders can recuse - or remove - themselves if a conflict of interest arises during a case, but nothing more is required.
The plan was met with hostility by the country's top judge, Lord Gill, who repeatedly snubbed calls by the committee to give oral evidence.
He relied on written testimony to blast a proposal he said could compromise judges' privacy by encouraging "aggressive media or hostile individuals".
Lord Gill concluded: "The establishment of such a register therefore may have the unintended consequence of eroding public confidence in the judiciary."
The issue has now reached the desk of the First Minister, who has backed Lord Gill.
In a letter to John Pentland MSP, the Committee convener, she supported the status quo: "The Scottish Government considers that such a register of judicial interests is not necessary and that the existing safeguards - the Judicial Oath, the Statement of Principles of Judicial Ethics and the system for complaints against the judiciary - are sufficient.
"These safeguards, together with the register of judicial recusals, are sufficient to protect individuals from judicial bias."
She also repeated Lord Gill's fear about "aggressive media" and noted: "The position of the judiciary is different from that of MSPs and others who hold public office. The judiciary cannot publicly defend themselves."
The First Minister also revealed that Paul Wheelhouse, her Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, met Lord Gill in December to discuss the petition.
In his evidence to the Committee, Wheelhouse said he feared a register could leave judges open to "threats or intimidation", adding that colleagues at an environment quango had already been threatened by organised criminals.
However, emails between the Government and Scottish Environment Protection Agency revealed no link to organised crime.
Cherbi said: "I am surprised Nicola Sturgeon supports a judicial ban on transparency just because judges have been asked to declare their substantial interests.
"We are always told if you have got nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. What are the judges hiding and what do they fear?
"There cannot be one set of rules for judges and another for everyone else. A register of interests will enhance public trust in the justice system, not detract from it."
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "The Scottish Government considers that a specific register of interests is not needed. Existing safeguards, including the Judicial Oath, the Statement of Principles of Judicial Interests and the system of complaints against the judiciary, are sufficient to ensure the impartiality of the judiciary in Scotland."
Gill looks like he is about to explode in that picture with all the headlines around him.
ReplyDeletePoor Nicola allowed herself to be dragged into this by the judge.She really should have more sense and back the register petition.
As a 'law blog' you are far from the usual boring legal crowd.
ReplyDeleteDo you not feel slightly apprehensive about taking on the judiciary?
As one of the msps said sometime back in one of the clips me thinks Lord Gill and Sturgeon protest too much!
ReplyDelete"The proposals – under investigation by MSPs since January 2013 - call for the creation of a single independently regulated register of interests containing information on judges backgrounds, their personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world. "
ReplyDeleteWho is daft enough to oppose this and MORE IMPORTANTLY why is it not already the case judges have to declare their interests?
Vote for me I am going to keep the judges secrets and they can tax dodge all they like!
ReplyDeleteNot a wise move.She should be supporting it like everyone else.
ReplyDeleteAs you say, the same tired old arguments from Sturgeon which have already been comprehensively debunked when earlier presented by Gill.
ReplyDeleteSturgeon was if I am not mistaken also a lawyer in a previous incarnation - so no conflict of interest there then - and I would suggest all your readers email her directly and complain in the strongest terms about her eagerness to deny the Scottish Public a transparent and independently accountable legal profession.
Quite simply this is a disgraceful letter from Sturgeon and given it occurs so early after the election vote a sign of more to come..........unless the petitions committee show some backbone and vote it through regardless. She is after all only 1 MSP.
unworkable as in better not just in case it turns out the public do not like what they will hear
ReplyDeleteget it on Nicola and stop messing about protecting big money judges
Surprising on one has yet scooped you up as your posts regularly hit a lot of detail.Too difficult to control? or is it the usual Scottish prejudice up there against anti establishment types.
ReplyDeleteJudges have to declare their interests just like everybody else.
ReplyDeleteMy father was a councillor and he was required to do it.No exception for the judiciary no matter who comes out of the woodwork to protect them.
Sturgeon is WRONG to support a judge who refused to go to the Scottish parliament
ReplyDelete"The surprise move by the country’s most senior politician comes amid fears the judicial transparency proposal currently being considered by MSPs will expose the secret links between big money, big business, offshore private banking, staggering property wealth and Scotland’s mega powerful & secretive judiciary."
ReplyDeleteYes exactly,Peter.
This is what Sturgeon and Gill's interference with the petition is all about.Protecting judges who are up to no good and they both know it.
Well done for getting this far and good luck for tomorrow.I hope this becomes law and the judge must be held accountable.
Backslapping again!
ReplyDeleteSomeone must have the dirt on her so she had to write up a good letter for her boss Lord Gill!
Cherbi said: "I am surprised Nicola Sturgeon supports a judicial ban on transparency just because judges have been asked to declare their substantial interests.
ReplyDelete"We are always told if you have got nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. What are the judges hiding and what do they fear?
"There cannot be one set of rules for judges and another for everyone else. A register of interests will enhance public trust in the justice system, not detract from it."
Yes absolutely correct Peter there cannot be rules for us and special rules for judges so they can do as they please.
No surprise there.
ReplyDeleteSturgeon is also an ex lawyer probably plenty in her past worth digging up before she gets her pals on the bench to pass laws banning free speech.
It says in those emails you posted "The Minister wants to have another example or 2 in his back pocket tomorrow. Need only be in very general terms-have you got more examples to hand from Unit Managers?"
ReplyDeleteHAHA .. what else has Paul Wheelhouse managed to fit into his back pocket lately?
Hope this committee has a right go at him over this and his non gangster farmers with their sticks and fences!
So get Sturgeon in to give evidence and she can explain why Gill refused three times to go to parly!THREE TIMES!
ReplyDeleteShe must have something to hide as well
ReplyDeleteSo Nicola supports a judge who joked about people being hanged and also said transparency is insidious.
ReplyDeleteA good way to start the day in a one party state!
Is it not perjury to lie to a committee at the parliament?Wheelhouse should face the consequences just like everyone else.
ReplyDeleteIt just seems mad to me this is not already happening!Judges must register their interests probably everyone believes they already did it and now we know they do not because of what they fear!
ReplyDeleteWOW what a read so you stripped out any moral authority judges can claim and they are p*ssed off about it because everyone can read they are just as corrupt as crooks!
ReplyDeleteSturgeon I am not surprised she sides with Gill. WEe have been here before with our corrupt politicians not really any better then the Westminster crowd of which they are now a part. As bad as the Tories.
ReplyDeleteThis is why democracy is an illusion, Srurgeon would let those who voted for her perish before she would break the lawyer lawyer bond.
ReplyDeleteFairly clear to everyone Sturgeon was called in to protect her real bosses - the judges.
ReplyDeleteAfter all who but a judge or a vested interest would argue their money stash and all their links to big business have to be kept secret.
Nichola Sturgeon's letter in support of the unsupportable is a remarkable error of judgement from someone who has demonstrated in recent times that she is absolutely spot on and in harmony with the mood of the Scottish People?
ReplyDeleteThis just goes to show that once a Scottish lawyer always a Scottish lawyer, with all that this means, where Nichola Sturgeon has shown that where she voices an opinion on the insidious secrecy, unaccountability and power grabbing nature of the Scottish Judiciary and the Law Society of Scotland, she has a blind spot?
If the hitherto unelectable (Scottish Labour, Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Liberals) concentrated on this blind spot they could make hay while the Sun shines and allow the Scottish Public to begin to trust them again?
Transparency and accountability are the corner stones of a lawful judicial system.
ReplyDeleteSecrecy, threats and criticising the public and Press are signs that the whole process is as corrupt as a 3 Pound Note?
Get back on the side of the Scottish People Nicola or else in short order your arse will be oot the windae the same as Gill?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWOW what a read so you stripped out any moral authority judges can claim and they are p*ssed off about it because everyone can read they are just as corrupt as crooks!
12 May 2015 at 00:20
()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()
This was their and Sturgeon's reasons to try to keep this a secret because if the Scottish Public were to find out it would erode the Scottish Public's confidence in them?
However, Gill & Sturgeon (fishy) are of the opinion that it is Peter Cherbi who is in the wrong for exposing this corruption?
Note, their double standards by not wanting to accept responsibility for their actions by abrogating their responsibilities?
The Lord President job is not a given right to make money and the First Minister role is not so she can be an apologist for self interest and corruption?
Remember, Sturgeon gave deeds owned by the Scottish People to the tune of £65Million Pounds to lawyers and judges and had the brass neck to say she didn't see a problem with this and accepted zero responsibility for doing so?
The Scottish Parliament inexplicably let her off the hook for that one. Just shows that MSP's are impotent and it is the lawyers who hold the power?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteBackslapping again!
Someone must have the dirt on her so she had to write up a good letter for her boss Lord Gill!
11 May 2015 at 18:12
£££££££££££££££££££
Gravy-gurglers the pair of them, as thick as thieves.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThis is why democracy is an illusion, Srurgeon would let those who voted for her perish before she would break the lawyer lawyer bond.
12 May 2015 at 07:47
.....................................
Good point, well made and so true.
Why did she intervene it is not her place to do so and anyway you already got the debate so why are the msps messing about and not just make it law?
ReplyDeleteFirst she gifts the Court of Session premises to the Faculty of Advocates, now this.
ReplyDeleteWe know what to expect from Sturgeon, Salmond, McAskill and Co, more of the same.
I just hope the mainstream press jump on this and give it lots of publicity so people know exactly what is going on - in their name!
Since when was telling the truth unworkable?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-32716749
ReplyDeleteWont be long before this sort of thing come to Scotland
Both will have dirt on the other so this is why they are in it together.It is so obvious.
ReplyDeleteBankers support bankers and lawyers support other lawyers no matter how bad the crime or how much the dirt.
So Scotland's First Minister has something to hide does she?
ReplyDeleteOnly people who have something to hide back up other people who have something to hide.
It will come out at some point no matter who tries to keep it quiet.
The Scots vested interests club supporting their own again in ways so up front they will make it the law they can get away with an armed bank raid in broad daylight.
ReplyDeleteInteresting letter thanks for posting it.
ReplyDeleteNicola Sturgeon interfered in four petitions including your own and the rotten useless billion pounds a year BBC say nothing about it.
Why is BBC Scotland so dead against reporting on legal reforms or anyone who is trying to obtain justice?
I can see the BBC must hate you because of your petition and the fact you can write and get your points across.
Also too bad for bbc you are politically neutral so they cannot use you in their lefty agenda.
But if you can please give the other petitions some air time too because as I said Sturgeon interfered in FOUR petitions including yours and they all happen to be about justice issues.She said NO to every one.This coming from Sturgeon a former lawyer who probably had to deal with the same kinds of issues raised in the other petitions and well now she says NO to everything when it is to do with trying to obtain justice or change the law for the better.
@14 May 2015 at 09:38
ReplyDeletePoint taken ... the FM's intervention on legal issues before the PPC with a resounding No to each is a good angle and will be aired.
BBC Scotland are not much interested in reforms of the legal system if said reforms are not promoted by legal vested interests or as you say poster persons who fit in with policy.
And .. with BBC Scotland reporters dribbling out Crown Office Press Releases almost word for word on monetary seizures when even Police Scotland complain they are not seeing payments from proceeds of crime, well .. not worth bothering with is it.
It will be interesting to see how our "free" press and the opposition latch on and publish this rather silly mistake by our first minister.
ReplyDeleteAt last!Thank god you had a go at the bbc!There is hope for you yet my son!Ignore Sturgeon she does not speak for all of us we get your petition thing!
ReplyDeleteMaybe this is Sturdeon's pitch to become the knew NoNo?
ReplyDeleteIf it is so super secret nothing can be declared about judges we have to consider they are all corrupt every single one they say the same about anyone who does not do as they tell them to so same applies to them
ReplyDeleteThe email with Wheelhouse telling porkies is a good find
ReplyDeleteSurprise move?
ReplyDeleteNot really.First Minister needs the judges to support what is coming next in Scotland.It will be pleasant for some and not for others.The unpleasant parts are to be so unpleasant the secrets of judges are guaranteed if they side with power.If you want to know the finale read Animal Farm by George Orwell.
Night Night you folks on the other side.Don't end up living in a country where everything is a fright.
One can imagine the arm twisting brown envelopes msps called in for a chat and skulduggery going on in the background to support Gill.
ReplyDeleteThe SNP front bench enjoy a good old fashioned bully of their own members and anyone who does not fall into line - just ask one of their former msps who resigned the whip.
Expect more revelations when time is right.
or the time someone caught up with an msp and told him if he did not shut up someone would personally see he was deselected and lose his seat.
ReplyDeleteand the time when an elderly msp was brought back by the Police because she was drunk and incapable
ReplyDeletedoes anyone remember when someone forgot herself so much in those anti catholic jokes about the candidate for speaker?
ReplyDeleteGill would have a fit if he knew same said about *cough cough*
How did it go again?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"The surprise move by the country’s most senior politician comes amid fears the judicial transparency proposal currently being considered by MSPs will expose the secret links between big money, big business, offshore private banking, staggering property wealth and Scotland’s mega powerful & secretive judiciary."
Yes exactly,Peter.
This is what Sturgeon and Gill's interference with the petition is all about.Protecting judges who are up to no good and they both know it.
Well done for getting this far and good luck for tomorrow.I hope this becomes law and the judge must be held accountable.
11 May 2015 at 17:59
Yes!!Well done Peter for getting this far!
Scotland could do with a few more like you!
Wouldn't the C****** ambassador like to know what SG Foreign Affairs brief said about them and their country after backing the No campaign?
ReplyDeleteTerribly two faced one person who likes to play the victim will say about another and an entire race behind their backs then fly off to beg for trade!
What was that remark about "listening in on the embassies if we had the capability".
How about the msp who was caught shoplifting and the charges were dropped after a certain Scottish Minister intervened on the quiet?
ReplyDeleteHow about all those ipads mobile phones and laptops loaded with keyloggers handed out to msps and *cough* researchers.
ReplyDeleteNo one would even guess Stationery and Equipment claims are being used to fund spying on one's own!
I do hope those who resigned the whip are clever enough to check out their equipment thoroughly as it may still be phoning home!
Oh come on Peter just publish my comments.Being a fan of John Swinney you must also be a fan of the truth!
ReplyDeleteYou have been in the game long enough to know what I wrote comes from an equally long serving insider and you probably know at least half of it by now!
Why do you think the committee did not ask Mr Wheelhouse for his report on meeting with Gill?
ReplyDeleteBecause said Minister's aides are busy fabricating notes for your request.
Go on Peter publish my comments.
Why didn't Crown Office take on a certain senior citizen msp for her position on corroboration?
ReplyDeleteThey and you know she met with the family of a convicted rapist and offered help with an appeal against conviction on condition of no quotes or references in the press.
Was any of this declared at Holyrood?Certainly not!
Why did your chums in the press sit on it and your non chums at Crown Office resist using it?
"The proposals – under investigation by MSPs since January 2013 - call for the creation of a single independently regulated register of interests containing information on judges backgrounds, their personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world."
ReplyDeleteFailing to create this register confirms the entire judiciary are corrupt and on the take.
@ 16 May 2015 at 16:50
ReplyDeleteHuge salaries, unlimited power, links to big business, family dynasties and long careers in the legal world connected to the financial world and secret criminal records, offshore tax evasion, property empires etc ... clearly much to fight for against calls for transparency.
"Parly insider" if you feel like discussing or expanding on your comments please contact the blog or journalists via usual channels.
Name of the msp who is secretly helping the rapist??
ReplyDelete“The position of the judiciary is different from that of MSPs and others who hold public office. The judiciary cannot publicly defend themselves."
ReplyDeleteWhy on Heavan's Earth would a Scottish Judge ever put themselves in a position where they would need to publicly defend themself?
This excuse only makes any sense if there is an inherent worry that the public will find out what these Scottish Judges have been getting up to?
Similarly, Lord Gill's refusal to appear to answer for his actions and explain himself in front of the Scottish Public Petitions Committee?
Many believe that the real reason is that he didn't want to appear in front of the Petitions Committee because he would be placing himself in a compromising position?
Why?
Well if he defended secrecy and it leaked out that he had many secrets that were being kept from the Scottish People, in a forum that was recorded on Parliament TV, then he would be hounded out of Office and the whole Scottish Judiciary would be brought into even more disrepute?
By abrogating his responsibilities he was ensuring that one or two MSP's on the Petitions Committee could not ask him very difficult questions regarding some of the crookedness that has leaked out; like the multiple Judges who are convicted felons but The Lord President has allowed their identities to be kept a secret, so that they can continue to work as Scottish judges (even though they have chosen to disqualify themselves by their unlawful actions) and continue to pick up their lavish salaries at the expense of the Scottish Tax Payer's pockets?
He simply had too many skeletons a rattlin' to risk being put under scrutiny and to squeel 'judicial independence' was a real moral low for the entire Scottish Judiciary?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWow what a bloody liar Wheelhouse turned out to be.
Where are the gangsters in that email?It says farmers!
11 May 2015 at 15:11
---------------------------------------
I think the Media refer to his type as a 'Spin-Merchant' - clearly very intelligent and has the gift of the marbles in the mouth gabb but who has decided it is more lucrative and self serving to sell your soul to the dark side and to seek to twist the truth into something else in order to help his paymasters?
Another paid for by the Law Society of Scotland?
If you stop, look and listen you will be able to identify very many individuals in positions of power and influence who are put there by the Machiavellian machinations of the Law Society of Scotland?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWhy did she intervene it is not her place to do so and anyway you already got the debate so why are the msps messing about and not just make it law?
12 May 2015 at 19:49
£££££££££££££££££££££
Because it does not suit the self-interests of the Law Society of Scotland.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteSo get Sturgeon in to give evidence and she can explain why Gill refused three times to go to parly!THREE TIMES!
11 May 2015 at 20:17
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
Sturgeon is fast becoming known for having a neck the same colour of her hair.
BRASS
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteunworkable as in better not just in case it turns out the public do not like what they will hear
get it on Nicola and stop messing about protecting big money judges
11 May 2015 at 16:43
upuupuupuupuupuupu
It turns out that Democracy actually means that the Scottish Judiciary are NOT answerable to the People as we were led to believe and that actually they have been a law-unto-themselves all along and that the Scottish Judiciary is really all about the cash, self interest, power and greed?
Who knew?
They did apparently.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteBoth will have dirt on the other so this is why they are in it together.It is so obvious.
Bankers support bankers and lawyers support other lawyers no matter how bad the crime or how much the dirt.
13 May 2015 at 21:37
£££££££££££££££££££
Apparently, this Law Society of Scotland script was pushed in front of poor Nicola for her signature? No choice in the matter?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteIt will be interesting to see how our "free" press and the opposition latch on and publish this rather silly mistake by our first minister.
14 May 2015 at 11:51
//////////////////////////////////
More and more we see that it is all about them and us.
Parly insider said...
ReplyDeleteHow about the msp who was caught shoplifting and the charges were dropped after a certain Scottish Minister intervened on the quiet?
16 May 2015 at 14:09
???????????????????????
Name names.
In Scotland, this may sound naive but I do not understand why the Scottish judiciary cannot just tell the truth.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the Law Society of Scotland has a file on Nicola Sturgeon that they dipped into to coerce her into trying to save the reputation and secrecy of Gill?
ReplyDeleteDiary of Injustice said...
ReplyDelete@ 16 May 2015 at 16:50
Huge salaries, unlimited power, links to big business, family dynasties and long careers in the legal world connected to the financial world and secret criminal records, offshore tax evasion, property empires etc ... clearly much to fight for against calls for transparency.
"Parly insider" if you feel like discussing or expanding on your comments please contact the blog or journalists via usual channels.
17 May 2015 at 14:04
-------------------------------
Hats off to you Mr Cherbi and your team of incorruptible Public Service journalists. They are a credit to Scotland, to Democracy, transparency, truth and the rule of law.
The catalogue of scammery that you mention above is utterly appalling but I am most concerned about Nicola Sturgeon and Gill keeping it a secret from the Scottish People that there are convicted judges who are still passing themselves off as bona fide Judges and that Sturgeon and Gill are colluding to keep these convicts still presiding as a Judge on cases in court, when it has been proven in a court of law, that these Judges have disqualified themselves from being a judge because their judgement can no longer be trusted because they have chosen to break the law, proving that their judgment is corrupted and either they thought they could get away with this crime or they thought they were above the law and they could do what they liked without fear of the consequences?
These convicted judges should have been sacked from their job as Judges immediately upon their conviction, as the conviction is paper proof that their judgement can never be trusted again?
Scotland must now be unique in that convicted judges are sitting in judgement of others? A clear violation of international accepted practice?
This is the type of consequence caused by a system which is so corrupt that it rewards convicted judges by allowing them to continue to pretend to be a judge when their actions have disqualified themselves from acting, where the rules do not apply to them, where Scottish Judges see Judicial Independence as a get out of jail free car?
What has Scotland become, when it's Lord President and First Minister are happy to mislead the Scottish People and to be happy for the morality of the country's Judiciary to be sold down the river, all so that Scottish Judges can continue to grab onto their lucrative salaries for as long as possible?
In Scotland corruption clearly pays and the rule of law is something that applies to us not them? Just the way they planned it?
The only conclusion there is too much dirt and cannot declare it because it will affect lots of cases the judges rigged for their own benefit and for political benefit.
ReplyDeleteThey do say a man is often judged by the strength of his enemies however seldom have I seen an entire legal establishment wheeled out against an issue everybody already thinks is won.
ReplyDeleteHere we have top judge + First Minister + vested interests holding hands against your reasonable petition for judges to declare their interests.
This is the coalition of money and self interests/preservation versus dogged determination good journalism and transparency.
Good luck hope you get this register of yours.
Wheelhouse is a creep if he lied on this he lied on other stuff too
ReplyDeleteWhat happened at this committee?
ReplyDeleteDid Sturgfear get her way?
@ 18 May 2015 at 07:26
ReplyDeleteYou'd be amazed at what sits among the files at Drumsheugh Gardens ...
One's acts while in the profession are always recorded and never forgotten, no matter how much those who rise to higher positions may try to alter the past ...
@ 19 May 2015 at 16:13
He did ... more to come in further articles ...
@ 20 May 2015 at 10:41
The Public Petitions Committee has kept the petition open and members decided to invite the new JCR in to give evidence ... an updated will follow.
More dirty tricks from Sturgeon she will have something else up her sleeve to help the corrupt judges get out of it one way or another.
ReplyDeleteWhy did the cops edit out the professions and names of judges and lawyers being investigated over child abuse http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/20/1400-suspects-operation-hydrant-politician-and-celebrity-child-sex-abuse-inquiry
ReplyDeleteWhy is it always ok for judges and lawyers to do whatever they want and get away with it and they get the backing of top politicians like Sturgeon?
The judges are no less than the bankers and allow the bankers to go on ruining us,so make them declare all their wealth and interests just like everyone else is forced to.Even Sturgeon declares her interests well those interests she wants to declare right so judges must also do the same.
ReplyDeleteFirst big slip up by Sturgeon and a sign of bad things to come.Mark my words.
ReplyDeleteI'd say you are doing well without the bbc.
ReplyDeleteLet's face it the beeb have their own agenda and are no stranger to extreme bias as in their handling of the indyref.
Also a lot of their reports have huge errors in facts and never corrected because some at the beeb prefer to make news instead of reporting it.
Sturgeon is on tv going on about a memo and Alistair Carmichael so why is she so determined to protect bent judges from having to declare their riches?
ReplyDeleteMoney talks as usual..
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWhy did the cops edit out the professions and names of judges and lawyers being investigated over child abuse http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/20/1400-suspects-operation-hydrant-politician-and-celebrity-child-sex-abuse-inquiry
Why is it always ok for judges and lawyers to do whatever they want and get away with it and they get the backing of top politicians like Sturgeon?
20 May 2015 at 23:52
--------------------------------
Because the Scottish lawyers at the Crown Office allow them to commit crime and be above the law.
Only 45% of all the cases where the police have investigated, collected corroborating evidence and referred the case for prosecution are prosecuted by Scotland's Crown Office?
This allows Scotland's Crown Office to get rid of damaging cases against Scottish lawyers and hide them within the 55% of cases where they could have got a prosecution but instead decided to throw them in the dustbin?
Some corrupt justice system?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteSturgeon is on tv going on about a memo and Alistair Carmichael so why is she so determined to protect bent judges from having to declare their riches?
Money talks as usual..
22 May 2015 at 18:16
wwwwwwwwwwwwww
Just shows the remarkable double standards.
Oh Nicola you are only damaging yourself and the party in this attempt to prop up an overtly unionist judiciary.
ReplyDeleteYou can whip msps into votes - and you regularly do because I sat here for years watching it happen right before my eyes,but you cannot whip the voters into following what is so obviously a more pro-union policy to protect wealthy people than the free and open Scotland you are selling to the electorate.
People have the right to question why and how judges and their families have become so rich in such a short space of time and conceal it in the courtroom.
Yes Nicola.You see,even I get it.Everyone gets it.Except you and Gill and anyone with something to hide.
Just do the right thing and let this through.
Your opener hit it on the head
ReplyDelete"SCOTLAND'S First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has joined Scotland's outgoing top judge in a bid to block increased judicial accountability & transparency with the creation of a register of interests for judges.
The surprise move by the country’s most senior politician comes amid fears the judicial transparency proposal currently being considered by MSPs will expose the secret links between big money, big business, offshore private banking, staggering property wealth and Scotland’s mega powerful & secretive judiciary."
This is exactly what is going on here.The fear of revealing the money link between judges and business AND political influence in and out of court to keep everyone in check.
Anyway the Sunday Herald already backed the idea and so does everyone else yeah?
What a good idea to require judges to register their interests!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteYour opener hit it on the head
"SCOTLAND'S First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has joined Scotland's outgoing top judge in a bid to block increased judicial accountability & transparency with the creation of a register of interests for judges.
The surprise move by the country’s most senior politician comes amid fears the judicial transparency proposal currently being considered by MSPs will expose the secret links between big money, big business, offshore private banking, staggering property wealth and Scotland’s mega powerful & secretive judiciary."
This is exactly what is going on here.The fear of revealing the money link between judges and business AND political influence in and out of court to keep everyone in check.
Anyway the Sunday Herald already backed the idea and so does everyone else yeah?
23 May 2015 at 22:27
---------------------------------
Nicola stole the multi-million Pound deeds for the court buildings from the Scottish People and handed them over to the vested interests advocates and judges and now she is actively promoting more secrecy so that things like what she did are kept a secret from the Scottish People?
It is all about filling their boots with cash and there is nothing that the police are allowed to do about it because the Law Society of Scotland dictate what happens in Scotland?
The success of A Diary of Injustice has only been possible because of the vacuum of unlawfulness that exists in Scotland and the sooner we return Scotland's Judiciary to honest and transparent the sooner Scotland will be a fair country?
More a case of both have dirt on the other so they have to support each other.
ReplyDeletePowerful dirt on FM & colleagues held by judges we must all assume.
There are some very interesting rumours going around about this and what someone has been offered in exchange for support..
ReplyDeleteNot impressed one bit with Sturgeon now she supports judges keeping their grubby secrets to themselves.She cannot sell this as progressive can she?!It is complete dishonesty.
ReplyDeleteI've heard it said that Alistair Carmichael was not crooked enough to remain a Scottish lawyer.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteNot impressed one bit with Sturgeon now she supports judges keeping their grubby secrets to themselves.She cannot sell this as progressive can she?!It is complete dishonesty.
26 May 2015 at 21:19
-------------------------------
Not pro-gressive just aggressive!
This is typical.
ReplyDeleteJust goes to show that politicians of every persuasion are in it for themselves and the self interests of their pals.
Why did we ever trust a Scottish lawyer. We should know better by now.
Alistair Carmichael is a case in point!
One of Sturgeon's team was going round msps telling them to have nothing to do with your petition.When the twit was asked why FM was so dead against the reply was a judge had threatened to release some information on someone's legal career if Scottish Ministers gave your petition support.You dont need to be a genius to figure out who I am talking about.Since the episode (last year) word got out so only a matter of time hopefully.Gives you an idea of just how much is at stake on your "little question of transparency" - as one msp put it!
ReplyDelete@ 1 September 2015 at 20:57
ReplyDeleteSounds familiar to what has been said to certain msps ...
Transparency is not an enemy of Scotland, it is a friend - and one the country sorely needs.
Ordinary Scots outside the murky bubble of legal & political double dealing and those with dodgy legal careers & secrets have a right to know what happens in the courts, how the courts work, how public money is being used, more about the judiciary who make the decisions on cases including a full register of judicial interests just like politicians of local & national positions undertake and everyone else in public life.
Much to hide.We are not stupid Nicola.You yourself have a register of interests so why not the judges.Too much corruption!!!
ReplyDeleteWell Sturgeon has a lot to hide so the rumours go so no surprise she wants to protect corrupt judges from declaring their interests.
ReplyDeleteAnd did you see today Nicola Sturgeon wants to drop the now inconvenient [to her] word "National" from the SNP.
Wont be long before she names it the Scottish Nicola Party
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40975105
Nicola Sturgeon would change SNP name
Nicola Sturgeon has said she wishes she could turn the clock back and change the Scottish National Party's name.
The SNP leader admitted the word "national" could be "hugely problematic" during a debate at the Edinburgh International Book Festival.
She was speaking with Turkish author Elif Shafak, who said the word had a "negative meaning" to her.
However, the first minister insisted her party was about self government and was not insular.
Ms Shafak, who was wrongly accused of public denigration of Turkishness for her novel The Bastard Of Istanbul, told the audience at the sold-out event: "Coming from Turkey, seeing the experiences there, not only in Turkey, across the Middle East, the Balkans, for us for instance the word nationalism is, for me personally, has a very negative meaning because I've seen how ugly it can get, how destructive it can become, how violent it can become and how it can divide people into imaginary categories and make them lose that cultural coexistence.
"Whereas when I come here, I hear the word nationalism being used in a different way and I felt that, can nationalism ever be benign? Can it ever be a benevolent thing? So there is a part of me that doubts that very much."
'Too complicated'
In response, Ms Sturgeon admitted: "The word is difficult."
She said: "If I could turn the clock back, what 90 years, to the establishment of my party, and choose its name all over again, I wouldn't choose the name it has got just now, I would call it something other than the Scottish National Party.
"Now people say why don't you change its name now? Well that would be far too complicated. Because what those of us who do support Scottish independence are all about could not be further removed from some of what you would recognise as nationalism in other parts of the world.
"Two things I believe that I think run so strongly through the Scottish independence movement are firstly that it doesn't matter where you come from, if Scotland is your home and you live here and you feel you have a stake in the country, you are Scottish and you have as much say over the future of the country as I do. And that is a civic, open, inclusive view of the world that is so far removed from what you would rightly fear.
"Secondly one of the great motivators for those of us who support Scottish independence is wanting to have a bigger voice in the world, it's about being outward looking and internationalist, not inward looking and insular.
"So the word is hugely, hugely problematic sometimes for those of us who ...but Scottish independence is about self-government, it's about running your own affairs and making your own mark in the world.
"So yes words do matter but I think we can't change the connotations that the word has in other parts of the world, what we have to do is just demonstrate through words of our own, through deeds, through actions, through how we carry ourselves, that we stand for something completely different to all of that."