Wednesday, January 13, 2016

LORD, FIRST CLASS: Scotland’s former Lord President demands expenses from Scottish Parliament - after challenging MSPs to close three year Holyrood probe to create register of judges’ interests

Anti-transparency judge demands MSPs foot bill for rain travel & meals. SCOTLAND’S former top judge has demanded taxpayers pay his dining expenses & travel to Edinburgh - after he was forced to face MSPs over a three year Scottish Parliament investigation of plans to create a register of judges’ interests as called for in Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary.

Lord Brian Gill (73) - who twice refused to attend earlier hearings of the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee who are considering proposals to require judges to register their interests – submitted a £225.05 claim for first class return rail fare from London, a £19.50 claim for taxis and a £23.20 claim for a meal the former Lord President treated himself to the night before he finally showed up to face MSPs at Holryood on 10 November, 2015.

Gill – who was dubbed “Lord No-No” for his refusals to give evidence to MSPs on judges’ undeclared links to big business, secret criminal records & hidden wealth, handed the claim to the Scottish Parliament after a stormy session at the Scottish Parliament - where the former top judge demanded MSPs halt their public debate on the judiciary’s interests and close down a long running public petition calling for transparency on judges’ wealth – which is backed by both of Scotland’s independent judicial investigators.

The proposals, backed by cross party MSPs during a debate in the Parliament’s main chamber on 9 October 2014 - Debating the Judges - call for the creation of a publicly available register of judicial 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.

As the petition was debated at Holyrood in the Lord President’s absence, it was revealed Lord Gill billed taxpayers for a five day state visit to Qatar. The top judge also travelled to numerous other international destinations – all charged to taxpayers.

An investigation by the Scottish Sun newspaper also revealed Scotland's top judges spent £26,000 on thirty three international trips funded by taxpayers - including journeys to destinations such as Russia, Israel, Switzerland,Germany, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania.

Previously, Lord Gill refused to give evidence to MSPs on their probe of the petition, instead, the top judge sent a series of letters to MSPs - demanding the judiciary remain exempt from the public’s expectation of transparency in Government and those in public life.

The Scottish Sun reports:

FIRST CLASS FURY - MSPs blast parly quiz judge expenses

Lord Gill claimed £267.75 expenses bill

By RUSSELL FINDLAY, Scottish Sun.

A SENIOR judge is being challenged over claiming first class rail travel to a Scottish Parliament grilling.

Lord Gill, 73 — who stood down from his £220,655-a-year post as Lord President in May — has been asked by MSPs to explain a £267.75 expenses bill.

It covers a £225.05 first class return rail fare from London, £19.50 on taxis and £23.20 for a meal the night ahead of appearing before Holyrood’s Public Petitions Committee last month.

The committee discussed the claim on Tuesday and its convener, Labour’s Michael McMahon, is now writing to Scotland’s former top judge about it. Last night, Mr McMahon declined to reveal the contents of the letter, saying: “I can’t discuss this as it was in private.”

But a source said: “There were raised eyebrows at the claim, and they intend to ask why he needed to claim for first class return rail travel. They may also ask about claiming for a meal the day prior to attending.”

After twice snubbing the committee while Lord President, Lord Gill spoke against law journalist Peter Cherbi’s petition for a register of judges’ business, financial and personal interests.

Lord Gill’s successor has still to be appointed. But we told last month, left, how the new Lord President will not be called before the committee.

Last night, a Scottish Parliament spokeswoman said: “It would be inappropriate for us to comment.”

JUDGE DEMANDED MSPS CLOSE JUDICIAL TRANSPARENCY PROBE:

Evidence of Lord Gill before the Scottish Parliament 10 November 2015

During  tough exchanges between the ‘retired’ judge and MSPs, Lord Gill got into arguments with members of the Petitions Committee, reflecting his underlying aggressive tone at being hauled before MSPs he twice refused to meet.

In an angry exchange with MSP Jackson Carlaw, Lord Gill demanded to control the kinds of questions he was being asked. Replying to Lord Gill,  Mr Carlaw said he would ask his own questions instead of ones suggested to him by the judge.

And, in responses to independent MSP John Wilson, Lord Gill dismissed media reports on scandals within the judiciary and brushed aside evidence from Scotland’s independent Judicial Complaints Reviewers – Moi Ali & Gillian Thompson OBE – both of whom previously gave evidence to MSPs in support of a register of judges’ interests.

Facing further questions from John WIlson MSP on the appearance of Lord Gill’s former Private Secretary Roddy Flinn, the top judge angrily denied Mr Flinn was present as a witness – even though papers prepared by the Petitions Committee and published in advance said so. The top judge barked: “The agenda is wrong”.

And, in a key moment during further questions from committee member Mr Wilson on the integrity of the judiciary, Lord Gill angrily claimed he had never suspended any judicial office holders.

The top judge was then forced to admit he had suspended judicial office holders after being reminded of the suspension of Sheriff Peter Watson.

A statement issued by Lord Gill at the time of Watson’s suspension said: “The Lord President concluded that in the circumstances a voluntary de-rostering was not appropriate and that suspension was necessary in order to maintain public confidence in the judiciary.”

Several times during the hearing, the retired top judge demanded MSPs show a sign of trust in the judiciary by closing down the petition.

During the hearing Lord Gill also told MSPs Scotland should not be out of step with the rest of the UK on how judges’ interests are kept secret from the public.

Questioned on the matter of judicial recusals, Gill told MSPs he preferred court clerks should handle information on judicial interests rather than the details appearing in a publicly available register of interests.

Lord Gill also slammed the transparency of judicial appointments in the USA - after it was drawn to his attention judges in the United States are required to register their interests.

In angry exchanges, Lord Gill accused American judges of being elected by corporate and vested interests and said he did not want to see that here.

However, the situation is almost identical in Scotland where Scottish judges who refuse to disclose their interests, are elected by legal vested interests with hidden links to corporations.

Scotland’s first ever Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR) - Moi Ali gave backing to the the judicial transparency proposal during a must watch evidence session held at Holyrood in September 2013.

Scotland’s current Judicial Complaints Reviewer Gillian Thompson OBE also backed the petition and the creation of a register of judicial interests during an evidence session at Holyrood in June 2015.

Scotland’s new top judge – Lord Carloway – who served as Lord Justice Clerk under Lord Gill - is to be asked to give evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee in connection with three year probe on proposals to require judges to register their interests,

Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations on judicial interests 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

47 comments:

  1. Disgrace!He is claiming an appearance fee for telling them to shut down your petition!Can this get any lower?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Haha..if Carloway backs Gill now he is going to look just as bad as his predecessor.
    Keep on digging Lord Gill!

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is almost as if GO-GO is determined to rub the Parliamentary Public Petitions MSP's noses in the shit by showing them he can do whatever he pleases and there is nothing they can do about it?

    Showing them who is in charge?

    ReplyDelete
  4. One rule for Lord Gill and a different rule for the general public.

    If everyone claimed for inflated expenses like this, then the Scottish Parliament would be bankrupt.

    Am I correct in saying that Lord Gill was not summoned to appear and that he did so voluntarily?

    If it was voluntary, then according to law, is this claim not fraudulent?

    He cannot claim that he was appearing before the Public Petitions Committee in his capacity as Lord President because he had already voluntarily and hurriedly resigned?

    He cannot claim that he was giving evidence on matters while he was Lord President, as he had numerous opportunities and invitations to appear before the Scottish Public Petitions Committee but he refused to do so?

    If a member of the public had wilfully disrespected the Parliamentary process in this way in order to make money, then I am sure they would be reported to the police?

    As suspected...it is all about the CASH?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is definitely not someone who commands respect and has a character above reproach. I can only imaging with horror what went on when this man presided over victims cases, where it was his way or the highway?

    Is this the standard of judgement exercised by remaining Scottish judges?

    In it for all they can screw the public for and to hell with the Rule of Law?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The antithesis of Robin Hood?

    ReplyDelete
  7. From GO-GO to Dick Turpin in one foul swoop..

    ReplyDelete
  8. Beginning to wonder if Gill is secretly working for you because this is one hell of a foot in mouth bloke.

    He refused to attend the parly for a jolly to Qatar then when he does give evidence decides to charge us for the privilege of commandeering the Petitions Committee hearing.

    Reason enough to pass your petition perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Full-on Gill up to his old tricks again
    Makes you wonder what really went on in "his court"

    ReplyDelete
  10. He wants expenses, he must be short of a few bob.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just finished watching that outrageous performance at the Scottish Parliament.

    So now we are not allowed to debate anything about the judiciary unless they give their permission and if not it becomes a "constitutional issues"???

    Outrageous and an absolute disgrace this is allowed to go on without someone pulling him up.The way he spoke to the committee looks like a teacher scolding a Primary school class and he goes as far as to control the questions he is being asked.Gill certainly made a fool out of Jackson Carlaw when he started asking his own questions.

    Ridiculous and shows utter contempt for your petition and the committee.

    ReplyDelete
  12. More like First Class Loony too used to getting his expenses on taxpayers and why is he coming up first class from London when he is/was Scotland's "top judge"!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Little wonder Gill refused to go along to face the music.His conduct during that session could be described as "vile" and at times "reprehensible".

    ReplyDelete
  14. power gone to someone's head by the sounds of it here's hoping the msps pass your petition pronto and get things moving instead of listening to weirdo judges who deffo have way too much to hide

    ReplyDelete
  15. Difficult to see how Carloway can repair the reputation of the judiciary after this.

    Gill refusing to go along was one thing then how he acted out the part on camera and now he bills the parly for his time.

    Reputation of judiciary dead and buried.End of.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The brazen cheek of the guy doing this - just shows you the power these judges have over us and politics it is high time this despotic regime on the bench is ended once and for all bring on your petition and the register ASAP!!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Three years this has been on the go? Your blog and the newspapers present a convincing argument for the register so about time laws are passed to require your judiciary to declare their assets and everything else!

    ReplyDelete
  18. no words to describe this other than msps should refuse the expenses because Lord Gill kept on refusing to appear for all that time if anything they should charge him for wasting the parliament's time

    ReplyDelete
  19. He demanded his expenses because he knew he could get away with it.Next time save the taxpayers and try a pizza and the bus,Mr judge.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Our company involved in a legal dispute at Court of Session.
    Judge holds conflict of interest (investment,family member on board of pursuer) drawn to our attention by senior employee.
    Information passed to legal team and QC who half heartedly raise it with judge.
    Judge stops QC in his tracks half way through his remarks,warns no recusal will be offered,says the matter should not be discussed in open court.
    Upshot is we lose,warned not to appeal by own legal team,hit with significant bill for legal fees of pursuer who we later found out is represented by relative of judge hearing the claim.
    Two years on firm has pulled out of Scotland.Not worth the trouble,small market,no honesty,courts and legal are corrupt from top to bottom yet our head office still pestered by letters from industry quango begging us to return and promise of ministerial visit to reopened factory.
    The industrial unit (in liquidation) next to our former site now in the hands of the same law firm who represented the pursuers.Need I say more?
    I am not saying this cannot happen in England but it did happen in Scotland and hit us hard financially.

    ReplyDelete
  21. In reply to the last comment of 14 January 2016 at 13:13 the situation you describe where counsel reluctantly request a judge to recuse themselves is more frequent than some may imagine.

    Counter to testimony in the video clip I know of numerous situations where recusal was requested or refused and not recorded.

    Is down to clerks and the judge on the day if information is recorded or not.If the judge says no there is no record.If the clerks cannot be bothered or feel they must protect the judge there is no record.

    There is no disciplinary action for failing to record a recusal nor any scrutiny of the handling of or publication of recusal information put in place by the previous Lord President.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Good question = Why is Scotland's former "top judge" traveling up from London to Edinburgh to give a lecture on who can debate what at our own parliament?
    Is this London trip a new feature or did he do same while he was "top judge"?
    Intriguing chap and his Qatar visit..

    ReplyDelete
  23. @ 13 January 2016 at 16:59

    Lord Gill was invited to appear before the Public Petitions Committee after he 'retired' as Lord President.As Lord Gill was no longer Lord President it is doubtful he could have refused to attend.

    This was the third invitation.Lord Gill refused two earlier invitations to appear before MSPs.

    @ 14 January 2016 at 13:13

    Contact the blog with more details please ...

    @ 14 January 2016 at 14:51

    Guessed as much given the number of cases going through the courts and tips to the media.Feel free to contact the blog to discuss further ...

    ReplyDelete
  24. A shocking performance from a judge just shocking really

    ReplyDelete
  25. I would love to get inside Mr Gill's head, the guy just does not get it. Talk about stopping digging when you are in a pit. Incredulous.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Better pay his expenses or he will take the Scottish Parliament to court. The man is unbelievable. Power damages the mind no doubt about it.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The worrying thing is this guy was head of the justice system in Scotland.How many others like him have this terrible attitude towards the rest of us when we ask them the questions for a change.
    High time the entire judiciary and all their control freakery is outed to show them in their true light.At least you are doing your bit and some newspapers but the time has come for judges to face full accountability and to be compelled to be as open as everyone else.No more of this secrecy nonsense and a judge walking into the parliament demanding to control the lines of questioning and so on.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous said...

    Difficult to see how Carloway can repair the reputation of the judiciary after this.
    =====================================================================================
    Let's face it who would trust these people. The new Lord President has an impossible task repairing the reputation of the judiciary. Obedience is what the legal profession want from the public, like big brother in Orwell's 1984, just as well we do not have a totalitarian state.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Gill fights against your petition for over two years then pitches up at Holyrood starts banging the tables and charges it up to public funds for the privilege of doing so - you couldn't make this up.

    And remember - the entire time Gill was Lord President his deputy was Lord Carloway and said nothing publicly about the conduct of his then boss over the course of two years - a long time to remain silent while Gill went about ruining the reputation of the entire judiciary.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Given all this one has to wonder what Lord Neuberger was thinking of when he invited Brian Gill to join the Supreme Court.Generally the done thing to have ex LPs on UKSC but Gill takes the biscuit.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Must be quite a thing to topple Scotland's foremost judge.Not even a politician can oust a judge from the top spot.You managed it though and Gill is very bitter.He is seething with anger against you and your petition throughout that video clip.Needless to say I agree judges should be required to declare their interests although to be honest I always thought this was the case until reading of your petition.
    Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Well just about every section of society is corrupt or crooked in one way or another so is reasonable to expect a fair degree of same corruption in the judiciary because the judges are at the top and if you think about it the rich bankers and all the sports now exposed as corrupt have been doing as they pleased because they knew the people at the top would let them away with it and the people at the top are the judges with interests in all these corrupt businesses and groups as we all now know

    ReplyDelete
  33. As well as passing your petition and the register of interests the Parliament should now institute a full investigation into the judiciary and their links to business and the rest of it and also what the judges have been doing over the past 3 years of this investigation

    ReplyDelete
  34. I see the "Competition and Markets Authority will assess affordability of sector as well as impact of profession’s unwieldy regulatory framework" as reported at;

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jan/13/solicitors-investigation-cost-uk-legal-services-competition-markets-authority

    No chance I suppose of them doing something similar here......and not whitewashing the results?

    ReplyDelete
  35. There is a very simple formula here, a thing is either right or wrong and these crooked bastards have been trying to convince the public that a wrong thing in their court is right because of complications in law ABSOLUTE BALLOCKS. As soon as they say a wrong doing is right they have a vested interest.

    What would they say if we all started doing things that are wrong, I mean would that make these things right, because we are meant to look up to those people because they are law makers and uphold the law right?

    Wrong, that lot have ruined lives all over the country for their own gain and have put people in jail for lesser crimes than they have all committed.

    ReplyDelete
  36. So let me see, he wants the taxpayer to pay for his expenses and wants no Register of Judge's interests so that those taxpayers cannot find out if they are being screwed in the courts by the Judiciary. One thing he was right about was his Civil Court Reform that did not happen like he wants the register not to happen. Stalling and operating with no controls, no wonder Miss Ali called them a law into themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Good blog.The judge is clearly in the wrong.And it should not take three years to consider applying transparency and codes of conduct to the judiciary which as you point out exist in other walks of life.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anonymous said...
    More like First Class Loony too used to getting his expenses on taxpayers and why is he coming up first class from London when he is/was Scotland's "top judge"!
    13 January 2016 at 19:24
    ------------------------------------------

    What an example to set!

    This shows you the extent to which Scottish Judges are immersed in the perquisite culture by claiming as much as they can out of the Public Fund?

    Why?

    Because they have been allowed to get away with it?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Lots of sly answers in that video backed up by aggressive behavior - if this how British judges react we should be keeping a watch on them all over

    ReplyDelete
  40. 14 January 2016 at 12:39
    Anonymous Anonymous said...
    Our company involved in a legal dispute at Court of Session.
    Judge holds conflict of interest (investment,family member on board of pursuer) drawn to our attention by senior employee.
    Information passed to legal team and QC who half heartedly raise it with judge.
    Judge stops QC in his tracks half way through his remarks,warns no recusal will be offered,says the matter should not be discussed in open court.
    Upshot is we lose,warned not to appeal by own legal team,hit with significant bill for legal fees of pursuer who we later found out is represented by relative of judge hearing the claim.
    Two years on firm has pulled out of Scotland.Not worth the trouble,small market,no honesty,courts and legal are corrupt from top to bottom yet our head office still pestered by letters from industry quango begging us to return and promise of ministerial visit to reopened factory.
    The industrial unit (in liquidation) next to our former site now in the hands of the same law firm who represented the pursuers.Need I say more?
    I am not saying this cannot happen in England but it did happen in Scotland and hit us hard financially.

    14 January 2016 at 13:13
    ----------------------------------------

    This is what happens when Alex Salmond sells his soul and Scotland to the Law Society of Scotland?

    Now we have a vision of Scotland for the purposes of the Law Society of Scotland, where corruption and deceit is their moral code?

    ReplyDelete
  41. you should ask the judiciary about some of the backhanders their sons are getting for submitting falsified papers in property repossession cases
    bank goes to court judge grants repossession order on false grounds to law firm run by his own son who deals with same bank

    ReplyDelete
  42. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3405836/Cherie-Blair-s-law-firm-gets-493-000-Albania-husband-Tony-adviser-legal-dispute-British-scanning-company.html

    ReplyDelete
  43. Have to laugh at all that rubbish from Lord Gill about the well respected Scottish judiciary.The reality is he and his colleagues are responsible for over 90% of injustice in the country and the justice system.
    Rich judges protect the rich and powerful from the poor and protect the corrupt from justice.People are finally beginning to wake up to this thanks to journalists like you and some decent newspapers.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Well respected is the Scottish judiciary says Gill?

    No chance of anyone believing that one now!Mainly thanks to him!

    ReplyDelete
  45. that old judge is kinda creepy threatening everyone just cause your petition asks them to declare stuff

    brill effort hope u get it good luck!!xx

    ReplyDelete
  46. Anonymous said...

    Have to laugh at all that rubbish from Lord Gill about the well respected Scottish judiciary.The reality is he and his colleagues are responsible for over 90% of injustice in the country and the justice system.
    Rich judges protect the rich and powerful from the poor and protect the corrupt from justice.People are finally beginning to wake up to this thanks to journalists like you and some decent newspapers.

    19 January 2016 at 12:26

    Well they head the courts so there is no one else to blame but themselves.All the talk about reform from judges is just a blindside to confuse the public as you say it IS the judges who are causing injustice themselves and they know it.

    What else can we expect from the rich protecting the rich when they have horrible attitudes like Gill against openness.

    ReplyDelete
  47. The arrogance of this judge is unbelievable.He is trying to paint a picture of the Scottish judiciary being some key player in the globe when in fact it is a dangerous power mad little clique best to be avoided.

    We should all be paying more attention to what judges are up to because they are not acting in their interests not ours.

    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.