Scots public support strengthening of Freedom of Information laws says Information Commissioner in final speech to Holyrood FOI Conference

Scotland’s Information Commissioner Kevin Dunion calls on Scottish Govt to strengthen FOI legislation. THE outgoing Scottish Information Commissioner Mr Kevin Dunion has today called on the Scottish Government to strengthen & extend Scotland’s FREEDOM OF INFORMATION laws after new research revealed 91% of the Scottish public view FOI as an important way to hold public bodies to account for their spending decisions, and over 80% want FOI extended to cover other bodies that provide public services. The Commissioner, who has today delivered his final keynote address to the Annual Holyrood Freedom of Information Conference, also warned AGAINST changes which might limit the public's access to information, in light of evidence that being charged for information would deter 64% of people from making an FOI request.

Speaking on the eve of the conference, Kevin Dunion said: "Freedom of information has been a success story in Scotland, and public awareness of the law is at an all time high. However, there are clearly a number of areas where the law would benefit from further clarification and enhancement, and we await the Scottish Government's proposals. More generally, I have long called for FOI to be extended to a greater range of organisations, particularly in light of the loss of rights that occurs from changes in the way that public services are delivered. We are in danger of falling behind the rest of the UK where, unlike Scotland, designation of bodies such as the Association of Chief Police Officers has already taken place. Furthermore, the Westminster Government has indicated its intention to designate many more bodies including the Law Society and the Local Government Association.”

Mr Dunion added : "Where amendments to the law are being considered we must be extremely cautious about any suggestion that the FOI right should be restricted, for example through wider exemptions or the introduction of increased fees for requesters. We know from the experience overseas that this can have a very damaging effect on the public's uptake of FOI. The research published today shows that a significant proportion of the Scottish public - 64% - believe they would be put off making an FOI request if they had to pay to receive the information, and this figure is even higher among more vulnerable groups, such as young people and the unemployed."

Freedom of Information legislation has played a particularly important role in revealing just how inefficient & anti-consumer the Scottish legal services market is regulated by bodies such as the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, where consumers have faced regular & overt prejudice in the SLCC’s dealings with complaints made by members of the public against their solicitors. FOI also revealed earlier this year how corrupt usage of self regulation of the legal profession has led to millions of pounds of legal aid being stolen by solicitors who escaped criminal charges because their colleagues at the Crown Office did not gather enough evidence to prosecute.

The research, which was carried out by Ipsos MORI in December 2011 and can be downloaded via the  Commissioner's website or read online HERE here , also reveals that :

Awareness of FOI is at its highest level, with 80% of respondents stating that they were aware of the law, compared to 76% during the previous wave in 2009,

89% of respondents agree that it is important for the public to be able to access information held by public authorities,

Even in straitened times for the public sector, 77% disagreed with the suggestion that FOI was a waste of public money, with only 14% agreeing.

There is strong public support for FOI to be extended to cover additional organisations, with:

88% agreeing that trusts providing services on behalf of local authorities should be covered,
82% agreeing that housing associations should be covered,
83% agreeing that private sector companies who build and maintain local authority schools or hospitals should be covered,
73% agreeing that prisons which are run by the private sector should be covered.

The research was undertaken as part of Ipsos MORI's Scottish Public Opinion Monitor, a telephone survey of 1,001 members of the public. Fieldwork was undertaken between 1 December and 4 December 2011. 64% of respondents agreed that they would be put off making an FOI request if they had to pay for the information. For respondents who described themselves as "not working" this figure was 70%, while it was 80% for respondents aged 18-24.

In September the Scottish Government's Programme for Government 2011-2012 included a Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill, which is intended to add strength and clarity to the FOI legislation. The Government has announced its intention to publish a consultation paper on the Amendment Bill today which readers can find out more about on the Scottish Government's Consultations website with a direct link to the consultation on FOI here : Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill

FOI investigations revealed SLCC board members cared more about boozing-up & insulting consumers than prosecuting crooked lawyers. Freedom of Information legislation has played a particularly important role in revealing just how inefficient & anti-consumer the Scottish legal services market is regulated by bodies such as the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, where consumers have faced bitter booze fuelled anti-client hate rants by the SLCC’s own board members & regular & overt prejudice in dealings with complaints made to the SLCC by members of the public against their solicitors. While FOI has revealed many problems at the SLCC, the Law Society of Scotland, Faculty of Advocates & Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal remain exempt from FOI legislation due to a variety of excuses and an intense lobbying campaign from the legal profession for their own organisations to remain secret & unaccountable from the law & public opinion.

FOI also revealed earlier this year how corrupt usage of self regulation of the legal profession led to millions of pounds of legal aid being stolen by solicitors who escaped criminal charges because their colleagues at the Crown Office were not able to gather enough evidence to prosecute, even though lengthy investigations had already been conducted by the Scottish Legal Aid Board.

SCOTLAND’S FIRST INFORMATION COMMISSIONER DEPARTS OFFICE 2012 :

Kevin Dunion was appointed as the first Scottish Information Commissioner in February 2003. In February 2008 he was reappointed for a second, and final term. He will demit office at the end of February 2012. The Commissioner is responsible for enforcing and promoting Scotland's freedom of information laws. In January 2012, the Commissioner plans to lay a Special Report before the Scottish Parliament. The report will set out the Commissioner's views on the current state of Freedom of Information in Scotland. Find out more about the Scottish Information Commissioner’s work and FOI generally at www.itspublicknowledge.info

Scottish Ministers 'will fight' disclosure of secret legal advice ordering Law Society immunity from Freedom of Information laws

Secret legal advice ordered Scottish Ministers to keep Law Society exempt from Freedom of Information. BLACKED OUT DOCUMENTS containing secret legal advice issued by taxpayer funded Scottish Government lawyers show that Scottish Ministers WERE ORDERED by the legal profession to allow the Law Society of Scotland to keep its much coveted yet little-talked-about exemption from Freedom of Information legislation. The censored advice, issued by lawyers working for the Office of the Solicitor to the Scottish Executive, who are themselves, fully paid up members of the Law Society of Scotland has led to a policy by the present Scottish Government since it was elected in May 2007 to mislead members of the public, consumer groups, law reformers and FOI campaigners on the question of making Scotland’s legal profession accountable under Freedom of Information legislation.

Scottish FOI Commissioner Kevin Dunion. The so-far secret documents relating to the Scottish Government’s attempts to keep quiet about their involvement with the Law Society/FOI issue, have only now been grudgingly released by the Scottish Government in an attempt to persuade Scottish Information Commissioner Kevin Dunion from ordering the full disclosure of the legal advice, which has led to a policy of misleading the public for several years on the question of making the regulator of Scotland’s legal profession comply with Freedom of Information laws.

Secret papers disclosed during FOI investigation show Scottish Government ‘is afraid’ of Law Society of Scotland’s legal challenge against Freedom of Information compliance.

The move to keep the Law Society of Scotland free from scrutiny under Freedom of Information legislation will avoid any possibility that clients, the media and the general public could use FOI laws to find out key details of regulatory procedures at the Law Society itself, which are famed for allowing crooked lawyers to continue working no matter what they do to clients, discover actual records of complaints histories of Scottish solicitors, the criminal records of solicitors and staff working in the legal services sector, and also allow clients access to their own personal files held by solicitors, which are often ‘held to ransom’ by solicitors demanding payment before being handed over, in a vastly edited format.

While Scots are forced into the dark chasm of FOI exempt dealings with the Law Society of Scotland, the Law Society of England & Wales while also not FOI compliant, have an open policy of replying to Freedom of Information requests from the public, as I reported earlier, here : Criminal records of lawyers : Scots public kept in dark over convictions while England & Wales get ‘right to know’

Emails between Civil Servants show Scottish Government fear Law Society action against Freedom of Information Scrutiny. A legal insider said last night : "I understand the Law Society warned the current SNP Scottish Executive and the previous administration that it would legally challenge any attempt by Scottish Ministers using Section 5 of the FOI(S) Act to bring them into compliance. The documents now released seem to confirm this.”. He went on : "The civil servants talking about how the Law Society would challenge against any such move, using 'legal privilege' and 'client confidentiality' is very much spot on in terms of what tactics the Law Society would use to prevent itself being made compliant with FOI legislation although I also understand from colleagues that an option of Judicial Review would have been used by the Law Society, should the then Scottish Executive or present Scottish 'Government' have proceeded to bring the Law Society within the scope of FOI."

One Scottish Government civil servant wrote in an email between legal departments : “I am aware that the LSS (Law Society of Scotland) is not subject to the FoI Act and I suppose that any attempt to bring them into line with the spirit of FoI would be resisted on the grounds of legal privilege/client confidentiality.”.

However letters sent out on the authorisation of the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill to FOI campaigners claimed “No decision have yet been taken as a result of [a consultation on Freedom of Information in Scotland'] and Ministers are currently considering the requirement for any action on the issues considered, including coverage of the [FOI] Act” clearly portraying a deliberate policy by the Scottish Government to mislead the public with regard to FOI issues & the legal profession in Scotland.

Scottish Ministers will fight to prevent public knowing why lawyers are exempt from FOI legislation. While the legal advice apparently ordering Scottish Ministers to allow the Law Society of Scotland to keep its exemption from FOI legislation was made during the previous administration, the current SNP controlled Scottish Government have now forcibly warned Scotland's FOI Commissioner, Kevin Dunion, that they will fight to keep the public from knowing that Ministers have in effect been bullied by the Law Society of Scotland into keeping the Scots legal profession free of public scrutiny which would come with FOI compliance.

Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates remain secret, unaccountable to FOI scrutiny. The Law Society of Scotland is one of two key regulators charged with overseeing Scotland's legal profession, the other being the Faculty of Advocates who also enjoy complete immunity from Freedom of Information legislation, making the two regulators of Scotland's legal profession a dangerous unaccountable duo of self regulators who are subject to no oversight other than a passing glance from the beleaguered, scandal hit Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, who have spent the last year rubber stamping investigations into crooked lawyers carried out by the Law Society & the Faculty.

SLCC Chair, Jane Irvine supports making the Law Society compliant with FOI legislation. Ironically, while the Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates are both exempt from Freedom of Information, and have threatened the Government to ensure their exemptions remain, the former Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, Jane Irvine, who was appointed Chair of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, actually supports making the Law Society of Scotland comply with Freedom of Information laws, confirming this in a previous article I reported here : Legal Complaints Chief supports ‘consumer advantages’ of removing Law Society’s Freedom of Info immunity

Iraq War : SNP MPs badgered for Cabinet Minutes release on war ‘legal advice’ but now SNP Scottish Ministers will use public money to protect Law Society from FOI & fight release of Scottish Govt’s lawyers advice. This fight by the Scottish Government to keep information from the public which involves elements of the Scottish legal profession bullying the Government into submission over FOI protection for the public is in stark contrast to the SNP's position over the FOI battle for release of Cabinet meeting minutes from the Westminster Government in relation to the Iraq war, where, in a similar situation of legal advice against FOI release,UK Government lawyers based in Westminster also argued it would be against the public interest to release the Cabinet Minutes.

The now famous but still secret Cabinet Minutes containing references to the legal advice given to the Government on the legal basis of the war in Iraq, were ordered for release by England's FOI Tribunal which backed the original decision by the Information Commissioner for England & Wales, Richard Thomas, ordering the release of the Westminster Cabinet Minutes. However, Scotland has no FOI Tribunal, therefore the FOI Commissioner, and even applicants to the FOI Commissioner’s office must rely on going to the Court of Session in Edinburgh to force the release of information that Scottish Ministers may resist disclosing to the bitter end.

A senior official with one of Scotland’s consumer organisations branded the Scottish Government’s stance over the legal advice as “a grave mistake” and condemned the lack of attention to a clear public interest in making Scotland’s legal profession’s senior regulator comply with Freedom of Information legislation.

He said : "“The current arrangement consumers face with the regulation of legal services in Scotland, where the Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates are exempt from FOI legislation, yet the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is FOI compliant, is not in the public interest.”

He continued : “The public interest would undoubtedly be served if the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty were made to comply with Freedom of Information, but such a move will require action from the Scottish Government. It appears this will never take place, according to the documents which have now been disclosed, and even worse, it appears the Scottish Government have been deliberately misleading public enquiries on this issue for several years.”

Former Law Society Chief Douglas Mill threatened legal challenge against complaints reforming legislation LPLA Act which created the SLCC. This is of course not the first time the Scottish Government have been threatened with legal action by the Law Society of Scotland, where in 2006, during the Scottish Parliament’s consideration of the Legal Profession & Legal Aid Bill, which went onto create the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, the then Law Society Chief Executive, Douglas Mill, threatened a legal challenge against the then Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament, claiming that lawyers had a human right to regulate complaints against their colleagues. I reported on that earlier threat of a legal challenge by the Law Society, here : Law Society of Scotland threatens Court challenge against Scottish Executive over LPLA legal reform Bill

A Scottish Government insider commented on his colleague’s frantic discussions over the Law Society & FOI compliance, saying : “The problem here is the many dark secrets of the legal profession will end up being revealed under FOI if they are made to comply with it.”

“If you find out through FOI your lawyer is a habitual crook and has rolled hundreds of clients, you are not going to use them or their firm for anything. I believe it is the desire of the Law Society and the profession to protect their secrets which we are seeing as the Government’s driving force of maintaining an indefinite exemption rather than groundless arguments of client confidentiality."

Clearly, the public interest would be served by making the Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates compliant with Freedom of Information legislation and continuing the present secrecy which allows both of these powerful regulators to remain outside the law and outside the reach of public scrutiny & accountability is only helping those within the profession who are exploiting such weaknesses for their own benefit against the public and all users of legal services in Scotland.

Justice Secretary 'remains bitter’ over calls to make Law Society of Scotland comply with Freedom of Information laws

Law Society of Scotland officials are determined to prevent forced compliance with FOI. FOUR YEARS after the first calls were made to the Scottish Government to bring the Law Society of Scotland into compliance with Freedom of Information legislation, attitudes apparently remain unchanged at the Justice Department over calls to force greater transparency & accountability on the lawyers regulatory, despite the fact the new regulator for complaints against Scottish solicitors, the joint taxpayer-lawyer funded Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is itself FOI compliant.

I have reported on the Scottish Government’s reluctance to make the legal profession comply with Freedom of Information laws in an earlier article here : MacAskill’s ‘no intention to include Law Society in FOI review’ allows lawyers to keep scandals & criminal records hidden from public scrutiny

Justice Secretary MacAskill is rumoured to be 'bitter' over calls to make lawyers comply with Freedom of Information. The Scottish Government's three year go slow on bringing the Law Society of Scotland into the scope of Freedom of Information legislation, has today been attributed by sources within the administration to problems of bias in the Justice Department itself, with civil servants being described as 'very angry' that members of the public should even be calling for such reforms. The Justice Secretary himself, aware of publicity surrounding the secretive nature of the Law Society is also rumoured to be "very bitter" that critics of the legal profession have even dared suggest the Law Society be brought within the scope of Freedom of Information legislation.

A legal insider today said : "Officials at the Justice Department are less than pleased that members of the public, campaign groups and journalists have made enquires on the lack of progress of reforms in legal services. Occasionally, civil servants have themselves hit out at critics of the slow pace of justice reforms, with less than gentlemanly outbursts, due to impressions given the Justice Department itself is now covering up for corruption, and even perhaps criminality in the legal profession itself."

He went on : "The Justice Secretary himself, is well known to be vehemently against anyone who dares criticise his colleagues in the legal profession, to the point that any idea put forward from outside the legal establishment to 'improve' public access to justice, or, as in this case, making the legal profession compliant with freedom of information laws, MacAskill has set himself diametrically against, simply out of bloody mindedness."

A senior journalist with one of Scotland’s major newspapers confirmed the level of hostility towards those calling for reform of the legal profession. He said : “One civil servant I know launched into a shocking barrage of insults against particular individuals whom it is well known the Law Society tried to exclude from major Scottish Parliamentary inquiries on the state of regulation of the legal profession.”

“I don't think there is any need for this level of prejudice in the civil service. If it is the case that some officials within SG feel so partisan against the public on issues of reforming the legal profession, they should go work for the Law Society instead of the Scottish Government.”

The Scottish Government are bitterly resisting reforms to the legal sector. It seems somewhat at odds to me, with the era we are now living in, where secrecy, self regulation and the corruption & greed which both issues seem to breed, have virtually wiped out our main banks, trust in the financial sector, and even trust in politicians not to over claim on their expenses accounts, that the Scottish Government are still so bitterly resisting making the legal profession compliant with Freedom of Information laws, and also remain so opposed to implementing fully independent regulation of solicitors, to safeguard consumers best interests.

This resistance on the part of the Scottish Government to process any reforms of the way regulation and client business is handled by the Law Society of Scotland, is an almost perfect mirror image of the resistance from the legal profession itself, who are determined to remain immune from FOI legislation, and virtually all other forms of independent oversight which may very well end up revealing an even greater scale of corruption within the Scots legal sector which might take critics such as myself by surprise.

John Swinney revealed Law Society Chiefs threatened anyone who called for regulatory reforms. Indeed, while the first calls for making the Law Society of Scotland comply with Freedom of Information laws were being made, Cabinet Secretary John Swinney MSP, then in opposition, revealed that the Law Society’s then Chief Executive Douglas Mill was busy attacking such ideas, even issuing open threats to the Financial Services Authority and any future regulator who might consider taking a stick to the vast sea of corruption which surrounds areas such as the Law Society's discredited Master Policy & Guarantee Fund client compensation arrangements, which some liken to money laundering operations.

John Swinney says a sea change is needed in attitudes to regulating the legal profession. How true …

SLCC's Chair Jane Irvine, supports the idea of making the Law Society comply with Freedom of Information. However, while Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill continues his go slow on making the Law Society comply with Freedom of Information legislation, a growing number of consumer groups and even some from within the legal establishment itself, such as the Chair of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, Jane Irvine, are supporting the idea that the public interest would be best served by making the legal profession's governing body FOI compliant.

You can read an earlier article I wrote about the SLCC's Chief Jane Irvine who came out and supported FOI compliance for the Law Society of Scotland, here : Legal Complaints Chief supports ‘consumer advantages’ of removing Law Society’s Freedom of Info immunity

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has suffered several scandals as a result of FOI disclosures. Admittedly, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is no angel itself, when it comes to the Commission's own compliance with Freedom of Information laws. In some cases, the SLCC has chosen (allegedly through Ministerial direction) to censor disclosed material to particular journalists, and on other occasions, has apparently been authorised to lie in FOI disclosures. You can find some more good FOI scandals involving the SLCC HERE.

SLCC blacked out FOI disclosures in true Westminster style and Law Society might do the same if made FOI compliant. However, while the Information Commissioner is investigating these breeches of FOI laws by the SLCC, and has already criticised the commission in a number of decisions for their poor practices, FOI has brought us an invaluable insight into the way the legal profession will co-opt independent organisations set up as a result of legislation to look at client complaints, and perhaps even more importantly, has also shown us the steps some officials take, and the lengths some are willing to go, to stifle public debate and calls for legitimate reforms which are certainly in the public interest.

As politicians are subject to Freedom of Information laws, as the Police are subject to Freedom of Information laws, as indeed are many other public bodies & services, including local & national Government are subject to Freedom of Information laws, then so also must the legal profession be made subject to Freedom of Information laws, a reform which is definitely in the public interest.

Legal Complaints Chief supports ‘consumer advantages’ of removing Law Society’s Freedom of Info immunity

Jane Irvine, SLCC Chair supports Law Society's compliance with FOI. In a startling rebuke to the Law Society of Scotland's campaign to remain a super secret unaccountable regulator of Scottish solicitors, Jane Irvine, the Chairman of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has sided with law reformers and Freedom of Information campaigners who are seeking to bring the Law Society of Scotland under the scope of Freedom of Information legislation.

Jane Irvine, Chair of the SLCC said: “If the Law Society of Scotland were ever to become FOI compliant, there could be considerable advantages to consumers and practitioners.".

Jane Irvine, formerly Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, following on from Linda Costelloe Baker, and is now Chair of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, is the first high profile personality in the Scottish legal world to support the notion that the Law Society's secrecy status, which has caused much injustice to clients of 'crooked lawyers' over the years, is a thing of the past.

Ms Irvine believes, like many outside the secret society style bubble of the legal establishment, that now in the new era of the ‘independent’ Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, and greater demands for scrutiny, particularly in the wake of global banking failures, that consumers, and even the legal profession itself could benefit from the transparency, accountability & openness which compliance with Freedom of Information legislation brings to public bodies, services and industry.

Jane Irvine cautioned however, that some parts of the Law Society's work may yet be required to keep secret from the public : "However, under the terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 there would inevitably be significant areas of information that would need to remain confidential in order to comply with the legislation. It therefore it would be important for expectations to be managed.”

Law Society of Scotland proved many times it cannot be trusted as a secret regulator. As a law reform campaigner myself, I would have to slightly disagree with the SLCC Chair on some points, as evidence has shown from previous investigations carried out by the Law Society into crooked lawyers that it simply cannot be trusted as a secret self regulatory body, which has for the main, stood by many solicitors who ended up ruining their clients, and now it appears, has also allowed solicitors with criminal records to carry on practicing, with their clients totally unaware their legal representative is more of a criminal than some who arrive in their office requiring their services in court !

I would also point to some secrecy problems with the SLCC itself, where censorship of FOI requests has led to suspicion the Law Society, even after being forced to comply with freedom of information laws, would also use the black ink to hide behind confidentiality in order to continue protecting crooked lawyers …

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill’s intentions to keep Law Society secret outflanked by reformers. Jane Irvine's stance on consumers gaining increased protection from crooked lawyers by removing the Law Society’s exemption from information laws, contrasts radically with the Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill’s intentions, which were revealed last week after he issued a terse statement backing continued secrecy for the solicitors governing body.

Diary of Injustice exposed MacAskill's gaffe on Law Society FOI secrecy. Last Monday I reported in an article the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill made a staggering policy U-turn in the space of a few hours, after initially letting slip he "had no intention of including the Law Society in any FOI review". However later in the day, as Government officials became aware of others giving more positive quotes to the story, a spokesman for the Justice Secretary reversed his initial statement seeking to maintain the Law Society's much coveted exemption from Freedom of Information laws, saying the matter was still open for discussion and organisations could still be suggested for inclusion in the 'open ended' review.

Diary of Injustice starts campaign to remove FOI exemption from Law Society of Scotland. Late last week, I began an open campaign which anyone can join to bring the Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates into line with other parts of Scotland’s legal system, making them compliant with Freedom of Information legislation. You can join in the campaign to bring the legal profession into the scope of the anti secrecy FOI legislation too by emailing the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill here scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or write to him at : Kenny MacAskill MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice,The Scottish Government,St Andrew’s House, Edinburgh EH1 3DG.

There is no place in our society, currently being battered by banking failures produced by the same soft touch, closed ranks regulation which the Law Society has been forcing on clients of the legal profession for decades.

There can be no argument for maintaining any level of secrecy for the Law Society of Scotland. The Law Society is an organisation which has proved time and again it has no respect for the rights of clients of solicitors, and has no intention of compensating vast numbers of clients who have lost millions of pounds to the actions of ‘crooked lawyers’.

The Law Society must be stripped of its immunity from Freedom of Information laws, and its remaining powers of investigating complaints against its own members and discipline powers transferred to an entirely independent body not mired in the overriding policies of self protectionism and anti client prejudice.

Secret Scotland : MacAskill challenged over lawyers immunity from Freedom of Information law

Law Society of Scotland is currently immune from FOI. As I revealed in a report earlier this week, the Law Society of Scotland looked set to maintain its exemption from Freedom of Information legislation, blocking attempts by consumer groups and law reformers to bring the solicitor's self regulator body in line with the new 'independent' Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, which is compliant with FOI laws.

Justice Secretary MacAskill's gaffe revealed secrecy policy on lawyers to be maintained. However as I also revealed in Monday's article, the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, made a spectacular gaffe in admitting during questioning he had no intention of bringing the Law Society under the scope of Freedom of Information legislation. Kenny MacAskill abruptly changed the FOI landscape by saying : "The Law Society are a professional organisation and are not covered in the Freedom of Information Act. There is no intention to include them in the review.".

However, the Minister abruptly changed his mind a few hours later, and his spokesman issued a comment retracting his initial response and indicated suggestions for bodies to be included in the FOI review would be looked at.

You can read my earlier article from Monday on what happened, here : MacAskill’s ‘no intention to include Law Society in FOI review’ allows lawyers to keep scandals & criminal records hidden from public scrutiny

So, do lawyers deserve to be immune from Freedom of Information legislation ? I have not been able to find one person yet to say they do.

The only people who seem to feel the Law Society should remain the super secret self regulator of lawyers, are lawyers themselves .. and it turns out that some solicitors feel its time for FOI compliance to head the Law Society’s way.

An insider to the Law Society said “Bringing in FOI compliance would give the Society a much needed kick in the behind, and probably help our image with members and the public alike.”

He went on : “There will be a lot of recriminations though as FOI requests mount and documents have to be produced showing activities which many will end up feeling unfair. Many within the Society may end up facing hard questions as to their policies which have not always served the interests of the profession or the public.”

Why should the legal profession's governing body be immune from FOI laws which bind many other public bodies & public services to a much higher standard of transparency & public accountability, of which the Law Society of Scotland apparently doesn't wish to adhere to ... the reason being of course, as many point out, the Law Society simply has too much to hide in terms of its poor performance as regulator of solicitors and failure to address huge problems of poor quality legal service in the Scottish legal sector.

The Herald reported Law Society corruption on the Master Policy claims after intervention from John Swinney. There are other factors at the Law Society of Scotland, which promote fear of compliance to Freedom of Information laws, such as the many dark secrets which are connected with the Society's financial operations, particularly the roles of the consumer protection schemes known as the Master Policy and Guarantee Fund, both touted by Law Society officials as ensuring payback for the escapades of crooked lawyers, but in reality, widely known to be corrupt, unregulated financial schemes which never pay out in the event of a clients lawyer making off with their funds.

The lack of FOI compliance at the Law Society is making life very difficult for consumers of legal services in Scotland, and also considerably limiting the ability of the new legal complaints commission to ensure that transparency and accountability are brought to the matters of regulating complaints against crooked lawyers, long a den of cronyism & corruption at the Law Society itself.

Jane Irvine, SLCC Chairman. In a demonstration of the Law Society’s wish to maintain secrecy on all things to do with its operation, it turns out that the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, “is afraid to ask for a copy of the Master Policy”, according to staff at the SLCC who allege the Law Society holds far too much influence at the new regulator in virtually every matter discussed.

There is a genuine public interest in applying Freedom of Information legislation to the Law Society of Scotland, and of course, the Faculty of Advocates. To this end, I have written to the Justice Secretary asking him to extend FOI legislation to the Faculty & Law Society, given the severe imbalance in transparency, accountability & consumer protection the current exemptions create for regulation of legal services in Scotland.

Please join the campaign to bring FOI compliance to the Law Society & Faculty of Advocates, emailing your thoughts to the Justice Secretary at : scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or write to him at : Kenny MacAskill MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice,The Scottish Government,St Andrew’s House, Edinburgh EH1 3DG.

An open letter to Mr MacAskill :

The Law Society of Scotland, as you know, carry out the prosecution & disciplinary orders of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, after investigations are made and punishment determined. Having that part of the process exempt from FOI creates a layer of secrecy which continues the long standing problems of cronyism and the perception of it in the aspects of regulation of the legal profession in Scotland.

If your word is true on this matter and “contributions are always welcome”, I therefore propose the Law Society of Scotland and Faculty of Advocates should be made compliant with FOI legislation in the current review, given there is clearly a genuine public interest and advantage in having Freedom of Information legislation extend to the entire process of regulation of legal services in Scotland, rather than the present highly prejudicial situation where the main standards, policy, client protection & decision making parts of legal profession remain exempt from scrutiny & transparency.

A simple step for the Justice Secretary, and one you can all join in, to bring the balance back to consumer protection in the regulation of legal services in Scotland. A simple step to establish accountability & transparency so that clients issues are treated with transparency, respect and fairness, rather than maintaining the Law Society’s own desires to remain the super secret unaccountable regulator it has no right to be ….

MacAskill’s ‘no intention to include Law Society in FOI review’ allows lawyers to keep scandals & criminal records hidden from public scrutiny

Law Society of Scotland - How many criminals among their ranks ? Would you allow a rapist, a drunk driver, a serial fraudster or even a paedophile to attend to your legal affairs ? The answer to that question is most probably a resounding "No". However if left up to the SNP's Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, there may be no prospect you would ever get to find out one shred of detail including the criminal records of the solicitor trusted with your most intimate legal affairs, as the Minister revealed today, the Law Society of Scotland will retain for now, their exemption from Freedom of Information laws.

Kenny MacAskill today suggests continued secrecy on lawyers. Scots Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, apparently angered by continued inquiries on the Law Society's FOI exemption status, today issued a terse statement ending any public hope of openness reforms for the Scots legal profession’s regulator. His spokesman said : "The Law Society are a professional organisation and are not covered in the Freedom of Information Act. There is no intention to include them in the review."

SLCC is FOI compliant, Law Society is not. Mr MacAskill's statement appears to end any hope of real transparency being brought to regulation of the legal profession in Scotland. This leaves Scots consumers of legal services with a nightmare scenario of Government backed secrecy for crooked lawyers in that while the 'independent' Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is subject to Freedom of Information legislation, the Law Society of Scotland - who will actually carry out any disciplinary actions or prosecutions ordered after SLCC complaints investigations, remains FOI exempt, rendering most information available on rogue lawyers secret to public inquiries & external scrutiny.

You can read an earlier article I wrote about the Law Society ‘s FOI exemption status here : Consumer protection weakened by lawyers FOI exemption while new Legal Complaints Commission must comply to information laws

The Minister’s stance of earlier today however, contrasts starkly with previous indications from not only Mr MacAskill himself, but also the previous Scottish Executive that the Law Society's exemption status may well be ended.

Current Justice Secretry MacAskill shared former Minister Cathy Jamieson’s policy on Law Society FOI exemption until today :

When asked why there had been an apparent U-turn by the Justice Secretary on the Law Society’s exemption status, a spokesman indicated contrary to earlier statements on the Minister’s behalf, there had in fact been no change in Government policy on the issue of the Law Society’s FOI exemption status, and that it was still open for action to bring the Law Society within the scope of Freedom of Information legislation.

A Scottish Government spokesman said this afternoon : “There is no change in their line on the Law Society or any other organisation – no decisions have been made in respect of extending coverage of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. The Law Society are not currently covered by the Act However, the current discussion around extending coverage should not be seen as a one off. The operation of the Act – particularly in terms of the bodies, is kept under review and contributions/arguments putting forward organisations for consideration are always welcome.”

A legal insider this afternoon questioned the Justice Secretary’s continued exclusion of the Law Society from Freedom of Information laws.

She said : “It is a ridiculous situation for regulation of solicitors and consumer protection that on one hand. we have the Law Society of Scotland FOI exempt, and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission FOI compliant.”

“I am amazed the Justice Secretary cant seem to get to grips with any issue involving the Law Society and from what I read of previous policy indications, I don’t believe this 'eternal review’ situation of FOI compliance & exemption will ever see the Law Society subject to FOI requirements in the future because the Law Society does not want to be FOI compliant.”

Police Officers are subject to FOI, so why not lawyers, judges and the courts ? Any blind guarantees of FOI secrecy for lawyers is highly questionable, given the fact that most other parts of the legal system are indeed subject to Freedom of Information laws. Recently for instance, revelations saw statistics released on the numbers of Police Officers in Scotland who have criminal records . Strangely, while some feel that bashing the Police on FOI matters is ok, the public's right to find out if their lawyer is a convicted criminal doesn't seem to merit the same consideration in their eyes, however, it certainly does.

A solicitor who has represented members of the legal profession who have been charged with criminal offences (and in cases, found guilty)was asked for his opinion today on how many members of the Scottish legal profession have criminal records.

He said : “Out of about ten thousand practicing solicitors, you are probably looking at a hundred or more who have been convicted of criminal offences, but if you add paralegals and office staff to the equation the number will jump significantly”.

“Your readers will know very well that when it comes to a solicitor being convicted of a criminal offence, we are not talking about trivial matters, we are talking about serious criminal offences. Perhaps clients do have the right to know this information before making their judgement on allowing a solicitor or indeed any other legal services professional to represent their legal interests.”

Surprisingly honest words from a solicitor on how many of his colleagues may have criminal records. I for one would wish to know who exactly it is I am dealing with who will handle my legal business, and many other clients I have spoken to over the years would of course, like to know the full history of their legal agents, which if some had known about earlier, may have saved them some costly decisions to allow what turned out to be a ‘crooked lawyer’ to mishandle their legal affairs to the point of financial ruin.

Surely therefore it must be said : Mr MacAskill, do the right thing. Give the public the right to know all there is to know about their legal representatives – bring the Law Society of Scotland within the scope of Freedom of Information legislation.

Consumer protection weakened by lawyers FOI exemption while new Legal Complaints Commission must comply to information laws

For ever and a day, the Law Society of Scotland has been exempt from any law which would or could have helped clients who were or who are still having difficulties with their lawyers.

Currently, even though we are about to enter a world of 'dual regulation' where the legal profession and an 'independent' commission will regulate Scotland's 10,500 solicitors, the Law Society remains exempt from key areas of legislation such as Freedom of Information laws, which have proved so valuable in dealing with not only errant professions & industries, but also a few wayward politicians along the way.

The Law Society of Scotland, however, is unsurprisingly content, to the point of seeing to it that, it retains it's FOI exemption, lest some client use it to disgrace the legal profession (again) for covering up its dirty laundry as it has done so frequently and successfully in the past.

The twists & turns of the Law Society in Data Protection requests over the years, have demonstrated as much, with no useful information ever leaking out to a client who had a complaint against a solicitor being investigated .. or for that, anyone who had tried to investigate the way the Law Society operated.

Understanding now why the Law Society of Scotland must be brought within the unlimited scope of Freedom Of Information legislation, one must reflect on the progress of legislation passed in 2006 which was brought in to clear up some of the damage the legal profession has done itself over the many years lawyers have investigated their own.

Two years ago this summer, the Legal Profession & Legal Aid Bill rumbled through the Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament, amid threats of legal action from the Law Society to kill it, and even threaten the Parliament itself if the 'crooked lawyer' busting legislation was passed into law.

Despite the many problems the legal profession made for the LPLA Bill, and the many amendments thrown up from politicians who were so obviously in the pocket of the Law Society, the legislation was eventually passed by the Scottish Parliament during late December 2006, after some of the stormiest of Committee hearings ever relating to a new act of the Scottish Parliament - one such now famous televised meeting showing the Chief Executive of the Law Society of Scotland himself lying to all & sundry over not only his personal involvement but also Law Society policy on complaints and client claims against Scottish solicitors.

Law Society Chief Executive Douglas Mill telling a few lies to the Justice Committee & John Swinney at the Scottish Parliament.

We are therefore now in a 'new era' supposedly, with the looming start of duty for the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission on 1st October 2008, which is allegedly going to give Scottish consumers of legal services a new layer of consumer protection against the infamously poor levels of legal services in Scotland, which nowadays seemingly illustrate that most clients come undone at some stage in their dealings with the legal profession.

This 'new era' however, has already been dampened down by what appears to many as a Law Society 'take over' of the new 'independent' Scottish Legal Complaints Commission by way of not only transferring it's staff to the new body .. also transferring many of it's Committee members to key positions within the SLCC .. .positions which are likely to ensure there are no conflicts generated between the 'independent' regulator and the lawyers own version - the Law Society of Scotland, who will continue to regulate conduct complaints, while the SLCC it is claimed, will focus on 'service' complaints.

You can read some of the woes of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission on everything from appointments scandals to conflicts of interest here :

SLCC news stories

So, we will have two regulators of the legal profession on 1st October 2008, but only one of those regulators will be forced to comply with Freedom of Information laws - that being the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.

The Law Society of Scotland, will for now at least, until the Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill decides to do something, continue to be immune from FOI legislation, so it can carry on being as secretive and corrupt as it has been for all the decades poor members of the public have been forced to deal with it.

Since we are now in late July 2008, I would have thought by now, the Scottish Government would have done something on this matter - because there has been enough advance warning the two regulators will exist side by side, one FOI compliant, one not ..... so why the wait ? is it perhaps because the Law Society is bargaining hard with the Scottish Government to retain certain exemptions so it can go on giving consumers of legal services a raw deal, sanctioned by the Government itself ?

I recall as far back as January 2006, the then Justice Minister Cathy Jamieson was saying the Scottish Executive was looking into the matter of the Law Society’s FOI exempt status, after queries from myself & others .. as can be seen from her following letter :

Cathy Jamieson : Reviewing the FOI Act - we might do something ..

Here is an article I wrote at the time on this issue : Law Society of Scotland & Freedom Of Information - End the Exemption Now.

Now of course, with a change of Government, one meant to be better for the Scots public, and a new Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, surely the clock has spun round enough to actually do something for Scots consumers and bring the Law Society into compliance with Freedom of Information ? Well .. perhaps .. but Mr MacAskill almost repeats word for word, Cathy Jamieson's review of more than two years ago ...

Kenny MacAskill : To be or not to be ... Should we make lawyers FOI compliant or not ?

Two years is a long time to wait, and with there only just over two months before the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission takes up it's regulatory duties on complaints against solicitors, surely its time to make the Law Society FOI compliant, rather than continue to deny consumers the levels of protection they have in other 'required' services .. not to mention giving the public the right to inspect and question the way the legal profession regulates itself in a way which must be allowed to ensure much higher levels of honesty accountability and transparency which have never been seen before in Scotland's legal profession.

What could there be to gain from allowing the Law Society of Scotland to remain exempt from Freedom of Information legislation ? …. Nothing honest, that’s for sure !

Scotland's lawyers face being held to account under Freedom of Information Act after decades of secrecy & corruption

One of the key weapons employed by the Law Society of Scotland - and crooked lawyers, for that .. against, clients who complain when they find out their lawyer has gone bad .. is the management of information relating to that complaint, and the offences committed by the accused lawyer.

That might just be coming to an end though, with the results of a review on FOI now made public .. which will see "a host of organisations, including independent schools, charities and even the Faculty of Advocates " brought under the auspices of the Freedom of Information Act - reports the Scotsman.

I'm quite happy about this, of course .. and although the report in today's Scotsman only mentions the Faculty of Advocates, I had written to the Justice Minister in December 2006, asking for the FOI exemption of the Law Society of Scotland to be removed. I covered this here : Law Society of Scotland & Freedom Of Information - End the Exemption Now.

Here is the response I received from the Justice Department :

To quote the letter from the Justice Department on the issue of bringing the Law Society of Scotland under the compliance of Freedom of Information legislation :

"Under sections 4 and 5 of the Act, however, Ministers can bring other bodies within the scope of the legislation. Section 4 provides for a body which is part of the Scottish Administration, or a Scottish public authority, to be added to Schedule 1. Section 5 provides for bodies which are not part of the Scottish Administration or a Scottish public authority, to be designated as a Scottish public authority on the basis that they either exercise functions of a public nature or are providing a service under contract to a public authority. Any considerations about bringing the Law Society within the scope of the Act would require to fall within the terms of section 5, as described above. "

Quite clearly, in the public interest, and given the scope of the recently passed Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill, it would be wise to bring the Law Society of Scotland within the scope of Freedom of Information - as a further precaution against the legal profession being able to conduct the extensive fiddles of client complaints which lawyers, notoriously, have done for decades, to save their corrupt colleagues from punishment, hinder investigations into complaints, or stall proper compensation to ruined clients.

You can help on this issue of course, by emailing the Scottish Executive Justice Department to ensure the legal profession are brought into line with Freedom of Information.

Email the Justice Minister on removing the Law Society of Scotland's exemption from Freedom of Information. .

Forcing the legal profession to comply with FOI, would certainly assist clients of solicitors - whether they have occasion to complain against their lawyer or not .. as Freedom of Information would help clients keep a better track of what their lawyer is actually doing for them .. and how the lawyer's professional body is regulating them ... rather than the lawyer & the Law Society writing the rules or getting round them, when things go wrong ...

For an example of how the legal profession have used the weapon of information denial against the public, have a look at these two earlier articles I did on how the legal profession lobbied Government to withhold certain parts of legislation which would have opened up the rights of legal representation market to Court users, revealed in an FOI disclosure request from Bill Alexander :

Scottish Executive thought to be blameworthy for allowing restrictive practices in legal services & also see Scottish Executive fails to block FOI disclosure on records of restricted access to Courts

Information .. and the withholding of it, has been one of the prime tactics, and advantages of the legal profession in maintaining the silence and lack of general understanding of just how corrupt the legal profession has been in Scotland .. and who could expect anything else, when there are rules in the Law Society handbook which allow them to vary the rules when they so choose ... what kind of regulation is that ? Prejudiced & corrupt regulation .. that's what that is ... as many of us have experienced.

You can see an example from the Scotsman newspaper, of how information was manipulated in my complaint against Scotland's most famous crooked lawyer - Andrew Penman here :

Mr Penman's representative at the Committee, Mr James Ness, really went to town on me - just as he and his colleagues do on all those clients who dare complain against their solicitor - telling as many lies as possible, faking up the evidence, and making sure, as Ness did - that Penman and all those other crooked lawyers who go before Complaints Committees get off the hook with their frauds & scams, embezzlements, theft of clients properties, and raiding of dead clients wills ... and James Ness is the Chairman of "Law Care" - the organisation which gives "stressed out" excuses to crooked lawyers so they can get off the hook from just about anything !

So .. making the legal profession comply with Freedom of Information would be a good thing - and since we are about to have independent regulation of lawyers courtesy of the LPLA Bill, why not also give the public the right to know what their lawyers are up to and how they are regulated .. just to make sure things are really transparent.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=410972007

No hiding place as plans to extend Freedom of Information unveiled
HAMISH MACDONELL SCOTTISH POLITICAL EDITOR

A HOST of organisations, including independent schools, charities and even the Faculty of Advocates could be forced to conform to the rules of the Freedom of Information Act, it emerged yesterday.

The Scottish Executive intends to contact hundreds of organisations currently exempt from the FoI regime, and then decide whether to bring them under the provisions of the act.

Margaret Curran, the minister for parliament, announced the findings of a review into the Freedom of Information Act yesterday. She said she would look closely at the fee structure but stressed she saw no need to introduce the sort of restrictions being considered by the government at Westminster.

Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, wants a new charging regime for England, which would include the time spent by ministers and officials deciding whether to release the information requested as well as the cost of collating the information.

This could effectively give every official the go-ahead to delay and refuse any request that might prove embarrassing.

Lord Falconer also wants the cost cap of £600 - at which FoI requests can be rejected if they cost more than this to collate - to apply across all requests made by one individual or organisation in a particular period of time.

Ms Curran said she did not want to take this route, but would look at the detail of the fees regime before making a final decision.

Ms Curran did, however, announce that she would examine whether organisations currently exempt from the act might be forced to conform.

There has been controversy over the decision by Glasgow City Council to create a charitable trust, Culture and Sport Glasgow, to look after the council's leisure and sport facilities. As a charitable trust, it would not be covered by the FoI regime so nobody would have the right to demand information from it.

But sources close to Ms Curran indicated yesterday that she was prepared to change the law to include charitable trusts.

She will consult on a large list of organisations which were suggested by the public for inclusion in the FoI regime. Some - such as charities which receive public funds, private prisons, Network Rail, watchdogs and ombudsmen and Creative Scotland, the national arts body - are likely to be brought within the act.

But there are other organisations which have a strong case to remain outside the act, such as independent schools and even newspapers, both of which are on the list.

Independent schools are charities but do not receive much public money and most of that is in rates relief. Newspapers and broadcasters are private companies and it would set an extraordinary precedent if media companies were forced to conform to the act while other private companies were allowed to remain on the outside.

Ms Curran said: "FoI provides ministers with a power to bring other organisations which are not Scottish public authorities within the coverage of the act.

"It has always been our intention to use this power when appropriate and proportionate.

"The review did not provide conclusive evidence to underpin any decisions on changes to the fees system.

"It's important FoI strikes a balance between encouraging use of the act by the public while not imposing an unreasonable burden on authorities. We will be looking in more detail at how the fee regulations are working in practice across Scotland."

A spokesman for Kevin Dunion, the Scottish Information Commissioner, said he was pleased the Executive had not proposed any major changes to the fee regime, adding it "made sense" to keep the bodies covered by the act under review.

Law Society of Scotland & Freedom Of Information - End the Exemption Now.

A quiet week after the passing of the LPLA Bill ? Not likely .. but certainly time to spark new debates & campaigns on other aspects of the Scottish legal profession which need amending .. and reports in this week's press show the need for further reforms, from legal aid, to how the legal profession disciplines itself & interferes in legislation, and perhaps more importantly, throwing out the FOI exemption of our legal crooks at Drumsheugh Gardens, which allows the Law Society of Scotland to happily blank out the corruption of its members from public view.

What with reports of lawyers forming a new Union (in addition to all the other unions & nefarious organisations they have to protect their own interests) : Hundreds to join new lawyers' union ..and 'sing'a'long' Donald Findlay being named as top of .. (it was actually £361,800) ... its business as usual for Scotland's legal profession.

There's also Bill Alexander's FOI request to disclose information on why certain parts of Law were held back to protect business markets of the Scottish legal profession too : Scottish Executive thought to be blameworthy for allowing restrictive practices in legal services

Lawyers forming a new union to protect their interests .... what's wrong with the likes of the Legal Defence Union ? Law Care ? and all those other organs of the Law Society of Scotland which protect crooked lawyers from getting off the hook ? Why bother with yet another organisation, which will always play second fiddle to the Law Society of Scotland ?

Some quotes from the Scotsman article on the new lawyers union : :

Solicitors from across the country are drawing up a constitution for the new representative body, which they hope to launch next month.

They say there is growing frustration that their voices are not being heard amid the biggest reform of the legal professional and justice system that Scotland has seen. They insist a grass-roots organisation, provisionally to be named the Scottish Bar Association, is needed to aid communication among solicitors and to mobilise increasingly militant legal aid lawyers.

Ministerial reforms of the legal aid system have raised the threat of strikes and boycotts among both civil and criminal lawyers - action the Law Society of Scotland, which represents the country's solicitors, is unable to support due to its statutory obligation to represent the interests of the public as well as the profession.

The thought of gangs of crooked lawyers drawing up'constutitions' conjures up images of sacrificial ceremonies involving the odd goat or sheep (whichever is closer for grabbing, no doubt) ... for we can be sure their 'constitution' will include clauses to rip off the client & get away with it.

Frustration their voices are not being heard ? My goodness .. how loud do they want to be ?

The Law Society of Scotland just last week, threatened the Scottish Parliament with Court action if they didn't pass the amendments they wrote for Bill Aitken to pass (yes the Law Society wrote many of those amendments themselves .. because some are just too .. well .. you know ... D'oh ! to come up with such wording ...) I covered that one here : Scotland lobbies Scottish Parliament to pass anti consumer amendments on LPLA Bill threatening Court action if demands not met

Well, it's all a bit of a diversion .. and far from it being frustration with the Law Society of Scotland, it seems those at Drumsheugh Gardens are secretly supporting these new ideas .. if only to use such threats of the break up of the legal monopoly in Scotland as a political weapon & bargaining tool for professional interests.

The Law Society of Scotland are still the puppet master, you will all be pleased to hear.

Apart from 'sing-a-long' Donald taking the prize of legal aid top earner this week then, the only other thing I would like to raise would be the Law Society of Scotland's exemption from FOI.

I noticed, this week, there are posts from people claiming to have attended Complaints Committee hearings at the Law Society of Scotland, where one says one thing, and one says another. I don't know of many Complaints Committee members who have the guts or honesty to deviate from the Law Soceity line that all lawyers are honest .. so I will reserve judgement on the first anonymous post ... unless they choose to contact me & confirm their staus.

Well, in my own experience, and from what I have read on other cases, the Complaints Committee members selected by the Law Society of Scotland are simply 'Yes" people who won't rock the boat, and do exactly what they are told like puppy dogs when their legal thugs at the end of the table make their decision.

No doubt some of these people think they are doing a good thing and performing a valuable service to the community - dropping prosecutions against crooked lawyers, fiddling evidence, joking about clients complaints, laughing about clients personal misfortune & family members deaths, listening to the pleas of crooked lawyers before them of "oh .. I studied for so long to become a lawyer, it's not fair I should be kicked out just because I stole half a million from a client" ... and then of course, letting them off the hook because they are a nice well studied lawyer who shouldn't be thrown to the dogs just because they are crooked.

Well, drug users on a high also think they are performing the same valuable community service

I remember, once, this Priest, who was on one of the Law Society Complaints Committees when the Scotsman were running almost daily stories of crooked lawyers .. big headlines too, as you can see from some of the coverage I received against a lawyer I nominated for the position of Scotland's most famous crooked lawyer - Drew Penman of Stormonth Darling Solicitors, Kelso

Well, this Priest 'was motivated by external means' (no, not God), to write into the Scotsman's letters page and protest the valuable work he did as a Complaints Committee member .. and also condemn from on high, those of us (including myself) who doubted the words of the Law Society when it came to prosecuting crooked lawyers.

I think the Priest though, had become lost in the steak & wine dinners & socialising with all those crooked lawyers & other Committee members at Drumsheugh Gardens .. as he forgot to mention anywhere in his letter he was even a Priest - either that or he was too busy obeying his orders from the Law Society chiefs to get right in there and furiously write letters condemning Peter Cherbi, he had simply forgot his 'primary mission' in life ...

My goodness .. it seems the Law Society of Scotland can even make a Priest put his duty to let crooked lawyers off the hook before his 'vocation to God' .. which is one of the things required for the Priesthood, isn't it ? .. and such condemnation of clients by this Committee member led me to check out who else was on the Law Society Complaints Committees. It was then quite easy to understand why swathes of crooked lawyers were getting off the hook - the Committees were populated by 'Lay persons' the Law Society carefully selected to ensure their crooked colleagues were safe.

I've heard a lot more about other members of the Complaints Committees ... how they joke & ridicule many complaints that pass their eyes ... ridicule & laugh about the misfortune of clients who have lost everything due to a crooked lawyer ... and even joke about the deaths of clients members of family, in the hope it will get rid of them from sight .... a nasty bunch surely, if ever there was one... but certainly in line with their lawyer colleagues at the end of the table, who seemingly are never short of a sharp, vicious word or two against members of the public.

Of course, we would know all about this if the Law Society of Scotland didn't have an exemption from Freedom of Information legislation, wouldn't we.

We would know a lot more about the inner workings of the Law Society of Scotland if it had to adhere to FOI ... things like the Mackenzie memos' would have been released to the Mackenzie .. rather than having to be leaked ... but we now can clearly see why the Law Society demanded and got an exemption from FOI ... to cover up their own corruption & control of the legal system.

Time to end that exemption then... after all .. we now have the Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill passed at the Scottish Parliament ... surely any exemption from Freedom of Information legislation which the legal profession enjoys is now incompatible with the spirit & terms of the LPLA Bill, which is designed to regulate & oversee all those crooked lawyers we keep having to complain about.

Oh ... we will get arguments such as .. 'but if we have to obey FOI, then pursuers & defenders will be asking for FOi requests on each others affairs & worse ..." .. nothing of the sort of course ... we are talking about the Law Society of Scotland here - not the Law. The Law Society of Scotland is a regulatory body .. and classed as a public body at that ... therefore making it compliant with FOI will certainly be a benefit to the consumer.

After all - why on earth should the likes of Douglas Mill & his crooked band of lawyers enjoy an exemption status from Freedom of Information ? .. when we have all this corruption going on around them ? fiddling evidence against negligent & crooked lawyers, meddling in client complaints, even, threatening the Parliament on the passing of legislation ? ... why on earth should such an organisation have an exemption from FOI ?

Who can end that exemption ? Cathy Jamieson, the Justice Minster can do something about it - so get writing to her everyone - and make sure the legal profession in Scotland don't hold onto the exemption from FOI, just as a pretence to maintain confidentiality of business & affairs ... it's nothing to do with that at all .. as we all know .. it's to maintain the secrecy on the disgraceful conduct of the legal profession over all these years, to keep its business monopoly and to keep from the public, the huge regulatory problems of armies of crooked lawyers ripping off clients throughout Scotland. Ripping off - YOU.

Lastly, for today - may I wish you all a Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.

I hope 2007 brings happiness, good health & good fortune for all of you, wherever you are in the world, and particularly for those of you who have suffered an unresolved injustice.