Tuesday, August 04, 2009

McKenzie Friends for Scotland backed by Ministry of Justice & Consumer Focus as Holyrood petition moves to end 40 year Scots access to justice delay

moj-logoUK's Ministry of Justice & Consumer Focus support introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland. Evidence submitted to the Scottish Parliament's Petitions Committee by the UK's Ministry of Justice and Consumer Focus Scotland in favour of the McKenzie friend Petition 1247, demonstrates that ‘McKenzie Friends’ should be introduced in the Scottish Courts as a matter of urgency so that the rising numbers of members of the public who cannot afford or obtain legal representation in Scotland for a variety of reasons, can access the help & assistance of a 'McKenzie Friend' so they may handle their own legal affairs in Scotland's restrictive & unfriendly courts system.

Lord HamiltonLord President Lord Hamilton – the only one so far to suggest more delays to the introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland. The written evidence so far lodged for Petition PE1249 - McKenzie Friends, has, with the exception of suggestions by Lord Hamilton to defer parliamentary consideration of the petition, been mostly supportive of the aim to introduce the facility of having a 'McKenzie Friend' accompany party litigants in Scotland's courts, a facility which has existed in England & Wales for FORTY YEARS. However, the steady stream of support for Petition 1247 from consumer organisations and law reform campaigners, is raising questions on just why Scottish politicians have done nothing for the past forty years to bring equality to rights of Scottish court users, while the rest of the UK has enjoyed such an invaluable courtroom facility for so long.

You can view & download submissions to the Scottish Parliament in support of Petition 1247, from the Scottish Parliament’s website HERE or alternatively HERE

You can watch earlier video coverage of the Petitions Committee debate on the McKenzie Friend petition, here : Margo MacDonald MSP speaks at Holyrood on the merits of McKenzie Friends and my earlier reports on the progress of Petition 1247, to bring McKenzie Friends to Scotland, are here : Bringing a McKenzie Friend to Scotland

Ministry of Justice on McKenzie Friends for ScotlandUK's Ministry of Justice supports advantages of having a McKenzie Friend in court. Bridget Prentice MP, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Justice, writes : "The main advantage of a McKenzie Friend is to further the interests of justice by achieving a level playing field and ensuring a fair hearing. This is because a McKenzie Friend is allowed to quietly assist a Litigant in Person at hearings by taking notes, making suggestions, and giving advice to the Litigant in Person when called upon. That is why there has to be very compelling reasons for the court not to allow a Litigant in Person to have a McKenzie Friend. However a McKenzie Friend has no right to conduct litigation and has no right of audience.

The Under Secretary of State went on to say that : “Most unrepresented litigants cannot afford lawyers and to ensure that justice is done, it is vital that unrepresented litigants can access help to comprehend the law and procedure.” You can read the full Ministry of Justice letter to the Petitions Committee HERE

Consumer Focus on McKenzie Friends in Scotland 3Consumer Focus Scotland also supports the introduction of McKenzie Friends. Martyn Evans, Director of Consumer Focus Scotland said in his letter to the Petitions Committee : "Consumer Focus Scotland therefore supports the introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland. The SCC made such a representation in its response to the civil courts review. We see the introduction of such a measure as offering valuable support to unrepresented litigants. By providing moral support or indeed offering guidance, for example suggesting questions for the litigant to ask, a McKenzie Friend may help the litigant t present their case better, which we see as an advantage not only to the unrepresented litigant but also to the court and the other party in the litigation.

Mr Evans went onto say : "The value of a McKenzie Friend has been recognised by the President of the Family Division of the Judiciary of England and Wales, whose guidance on McKenzie Friends sates that allowing a McKenzie Friend to assist a unrepresented litigant 'will often be of advantage to the court in ensuring the litigant in person [unrepresented litigant] receives a fair hearing. The presumption in England and Wales is strongly in favour of McKenzie Friends being allowed. We would like to see such a presumption adopted in Scotland". You can read Consumer Focus Scotland’s submission to the Petitions Committee HERE

Law Society of ScotlandLaw Society of Scotland are rumoured to be planning to obstruct introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland. While the petition has received support from consumer organisations, justice officials from south of the border, and some politicians, the Law Society of Scotland is rumoured to be 'very angry' over the proposals, worried that its member legal firms, who are already short of business, will lose out to members of the public 'wising up' to the advantage of presenting their own case, assisted by a McKenzie Friend, rather than trying to hire solicitors and expensive legal teams, who claim huge experience on all things legal but will invariably lose their client’s case, albeit a few years and tens of thousands of pounds down the line.

A legal insider today accused the Law Society of Scotland of 'plotting against the introduction of McKenzie Friends', saying : "Its all about money as it always has been. The Law Society know its not in their members financial interests to allow the use of McKenzie Friends in Scotland and this is solely why McKenzie Friends have been kept out of Scotland's courts for the past forty years. Anyone who doesn’t realise that is living in cloud cuckoo land."

He went on : "I have heard there has been debate within the Law Society whether to obstruct the introduction of McKenzie Friends to Scotland. I would therefore encourage campaigners to be on their guard against any dirty tricks from the legal profession to stall progress on this issue, even if Lord Gill does recommend McKenzie Friends be introduced as we all expect him to do."

MacAskill tight lippedWill Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill allow McKenzie Friends in Scotland’s courts, or play for time for more delays and more solicitors profits ? Well, little surprise these proposals are upsetting the Law Society of Scotland and lawyers who are more concerned with making money than giving the public access to the courts we all pay for through our taxes ... but the market protectionism of the legal profession in trying to control ordinary people's access to justice cannot be allowed to continue. McKenzie Friends must be introduced to Scotland, indeed, as a matter of urgency, and those who are responsible for access to justice being held back for these past forty years must face the questions, and perhaps be thrown out of the justice system for their ill deserved hold over the public's right to have a fair hearing in the courts we pay for.

It is however, clearly the case that Scotland's courts and the judiciary cannot be trusted on access to justice reforms such as the introduction of McKenzie Friends to Scotland's courts. Simply if they could be trusted, we wouldn't be here forty years later writing about it and asking the Scottish Parliament to legislate to introduce increased rights of access to justice for Scots, because of the fact that Scotland's courts themselves have failed to do so.

The Scottish Parliament must therefore legislate to allow the use of McKenzie Friends in Scotland’s courts, rather than leaving it up to the judiciary, who if they could I’m sure, would with the rest of Scotland’s closed shop legal profession, cook up another forty year delay to implementation of wider access to justice in Scotland. That simply will not do.

Allowing McKenzie Friends in Scotland’s courts, and indeed, opening up the rights of audience system where your legal representative doesn’t need to be a member of the Law Society of Scotland or Faculty of Advocates, will lose the current Law Society controlled legal profession a lot of cases. That is a good thing for the public and a good thing for justice. Justice, and the public’s access to it should not be about profit and wealth, it is about Human Rights and the right to a fair hearing of a matter of law affecting a person’s life.

Support the introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland, and make your feelings known on this to the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee. You can support the McKenzie friend Petition 1247 by contacting the Petitions Committee via email at : petitions@scottish.parliament.uk

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

here we go again ! might have guessed a judge and a bloody lawyer would protest against their business going down !

Anonymous said...

the Law Society of Scotland is rumoured to be 'very angry' over the proposals, worried that its member legal firms, who are already short of business, will lose out to members of the public 'wising up' to the advantage of presenting their own case, assisted by a McKenzie Friend, rather than trying to hire solicitors and expensive legal teams, who claim huge experience on all things legal but will invariably lose their client’s case, albeit a few years and tens of thousands of pounds down the line

Yes thats the way to get ripped off for certain.I would advice anyone to keep the hell away from a lawyer - they will ruin you long before they win your casse

Anonymous said...

The way this is going the Ministry of Justice will have to do it for us.

Scottish courts : the den of crooked lawyers out to fleece anyone they can

Anonymous said...

On the other side of the coin,don't you think it might be because we are so good at representing clients there is no need for McKenzie Friends in Scotland ?

Anonymous said...

40 years is a disgrace and I'd also like to know why ALL our politicians have sat back and twiddled their thumbs.
Too many fat brown envelopes from the Law Society ?

rules but not for the rulers said...

Oh dear!
Have the SNP lost their voice on this one ?

Usually Salmond's mob are shouting about Scotland having less rights and getting the shit end of the stick to the English but here we are 40 years on and not a peep from wee eck ?

There must be some heavy greasing of palms going on in the background to keep this one out the press !

Anonymous said...

Doubtless vested interests will fight 'tooth and nail' to prevent this measure - while knowing any continuing denial is indefensible. The legal profession can however cope with amateurs assisting amateurs but the Petition they realy fear - as do their notorious professional indemnity insurance provider Marsh - is PETITION 1234 proposing that Class Actions be allowed in Scotland.

The Dean of the Faculty of Advocates has already stated that such a provision - in relation to banks - is long overdue.

Everyone with an interest in any meaningful access to justice in Scotland should write NOW to the Petitions Committee and their MSP, urging they support the petition.

Anonymous said...

rules but not for the rulers :

The snp have their noses stuck so far up the arses of industry and the professions that the ordinary man does not matter.Its always the same with nationalist parties and just wait until they start building WORKCAMPS for anyone who doesn't contribute or wear the party badge!

Anonymous said...

Peter, thanks for all your efforts exposing self regulators. I would rather present my own case with a McKenzie Friend that trust the trashy scum from The Law Society. Bastards who are reaping what they sow.

To all lawyers, you taught me the true meaning of hate, but I try to control this because the hater only hurts himself. I warn everyone I meet about the scum from the Law Society of Scotland. Never trust a lawyer, you will be crucified if you do.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

the Law Society of Scotland is rumoured to be 'very angry' (WONDERFUL, MY HEART BLEEDS FOR THEM) over the proposals, worried that its member legal firms, who are already short of business, will lose out to members of the public 'wising up' to the advantage of presenting their own case, assisted by a McKenzie Friend, rather than trying to hire solicitors and expensive legal teams, who claim huge experience on all things legal (THEY DO HAVE HUGE EXPERIENCE IN NEGLECTING CLIENTS AND STEALING FORM THEM) but will invariably lose their client’s case, albeit a few years and tens of thousands of pounds down the line. (YES MY FRIEND THESE PEOPLE TAUGHT ME WHAT RUTHLESS CRIMINALS LAWYERS ARE, HUMAN VERMIN FIT FOR GASSING)

Yes thats the way to get ripped off for certain. I would advice anyone to keep the hell away from a lawyer - they will ruin you long before they win your casse. (THE PUBLIC ARE CATCHING ON AND THAT WILL RUIN LAWYERS, EVEN MORE SO WHEN MCKENZIE FRIENDS ARE INTRODUCED. AS ONE LAWYER SAID, "SAVING PRIVATE PENMANN HAS COST US". THE LAW SOCIETIES ATTEMPT TO SAVE THE REPUTATION OF THIS BASTARD BACKFIRED ON THEM. I URGE PEOPLE TO WRITE TO MARGO MACDONALD IN SUPPORT OF MCKENZIE FRIENDS BECAUSE SHE IS ON THE SIDE OF THE PUBLIC BECAUSE SHE SAID THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS WERE BEING ABUSED, OR SOMETHING ALONG THESE LINES. I WROTE TO HER AND I BELIEVE SHE WILL PUSH THIS IN PARLIAMENT. VICTORY TO THE PUBLIC, CRUSH THE POWER OF ALL SELF REGULATORS. END THIS CESSPIT OF INJUSTICE SO THAT SELF REGULATORS ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO OUTSIDERS FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

7:02 PM

Anonymous said...

Interesting.So how long does Hamilton want to delay it further ? Another 40 years or more like 400 years ?

Sack the lot of them and make those bloody judges elected and the courts answerable to us!

Anonymous said...

Allowing McKenzie Friends in Scotland’s courts, and indeed, opening up the rights of audience system where your legal representative doesn’t need to be a member of the Law Society of Scotland or Faculty of Advocates, will lose the current Law Society controlled legal profession a lot of cases. (YES PETER AND GIVE PEOPLE A CHANCE OF JUSTICE LAWYERS WILL BLOCK TO LINE THEIR SLIMY POCKETS) That is a good thing for the public and a good thing for justice. Justice, and the public’s access to it should not be about profit and wealth, it is about Human Rights (YES PETER THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND DO NOT WANT US TO HAVE HUMAN RIGHTS, BECAUSE OF THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR THEIR MEMBERS, CRIMINALS ALL OF THEM) and the right to a fair hearing of a matter of law affecting a person’s life.

MACASKILL YOU AND SALMOND BLOCK THIS AND WE SHOULD BE TAKING YOU TO THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, FOR YOUR CRIMINAL LOVE OF LAWYERS.

Anonymous said...

The public should view lawyers the same way as the Jewish people and all decent people view Hitler. Both are evil to the core and lawyers would do to us what Hitler did, if they could, evil bastards, just like Hitler's regime.

The Law Society of Scotland, Scotland's Nazi regime.

Anonymous said...

40 years of delay proves to me Scotland is UNFIT to run its own justice system never mind going independent !

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting.So how long does Hamilton want to delay it further ? Another 40 years or more like 400 years ?

Sack the lot of them and make those bloody judges elected and the courts answerable to us!

11:05 PM

Yes spot on.Obviously the courts and lawyers dont want McKenzie Friends in Scotland because as Peter says it will mean a lot of lost money to the greedy legal mafia and who in their right mind would hire a lawyer to rip themselves off when a McKenzie Friend will be miles cheaper or even free!

Anonymous said...

Good posting.Someone should make posters saying "Scots Justice is being held hostage by terrorist lawyers and judges" because that is whats going on if people are kept out of court for 40 years just because some little scumbag lawyer wants to make a few more £££

Anonymous said...

GREAT NEWS : : CROOKED LAW SOCIETY HAS TO SACK STAFF HAHAHA
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Staff-face-axe-at-Law.5523080.jp

THEY WILL HAVE TO FIND MORE WAYS TO STEAL FROM CLIENTS TO KEEP UP THEIR THIEVING LIFESTYLES SO BEWARE EVERYONE!

Anonymous said...

If MacAskill was worth his salt at justice he would have allowed this long ago.Clearly he is against Mckenzie Friends or anyone else getting into the lawyers money pot.Sack him!

Anonymous said...

Having read enough of your blog I sacked my lawyer today after 2 years of mucking me around in Perth Sheriff Court over a misidentified title which I'm now sure he has had something to do with after I was told of certain things.

Lawyers are the last people I will ever have near my legal affairs.Nex time I handle it all myself and I hope soon these McKenzie friends will be available for hire.

Anonymous said...

I think your writing raises serious questions about the validity of justice in Scotland in general - both civil and criminal.

This issue of having a McKenzie Friend in England & Wales but not in Scotland for forty years indicates to me your justice system is not geared to respecting the rights of citizens.

For a country which some hope to be independent I cannot see any reason that wish should be granted until the justice system respects everyone rather than those who appear to control it.

Good work and good luck Mr Cherbi in your noble campaigns.

Anonymous said...

This issue of having a McKenzie Friend in England & Wales but not in Scotland for forty years indicates to me your justice system is not geared to respecting the rights of citizens.

WELL SAID, WE HAVE A CORRUPT, SELF PROTECTING GROUP OF LEGALLY QUALIFIED DICTATORS WITH A LICENSE TO STEAL FROM CLIENTS. REMEMBER MACASKILL, HAS BLOCKED ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND HIS BOSS SALMOND WANTS INDEPENDENCE FOR SCOTS, BUT WITHOUT RIGHTS AGAINST CROOKED LAWYERS. THEY ARE BOTH TRAITORS TO THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE.