Arrests in England over Police payments, Scotland to follow? We reveal Crooked Scots Cops, Prosecutors ALSO sold info & services for CASH BUNGS

Cash for hacking - Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland in need of someone to arrest, just as long as it’s not a colleague, a lawyer or a Police Officer WHILE arrests have finally been made today in England & Wales after investigations into payments to Police Officers by journalists, campaigners for openness in Scotland are now beginning to question why no substantive investigations have taken place into similar actions north of the border where corrupt Police Officers working in various Scottish Police Forces and it is alleged, employees of the Scottish Courts Service and Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) have taken CASH BUNGS or “other forms of payments” from journalists, private investigators & high profile lawyers for information on individuals which includes private financial details, personal & medical files and much more.

In one bizarre case brought to the attention of Scottish Law Reporter by a journalist, even a senior detective in Lothian & Borders Police appears to have fallen victim to creepy backhander-cash-for-info scandals where a lesser rank detective in his team “grassed up” his Detective Chief Inspector boss to Scottish tabloids over an ‘extra-marital affair love tryst with a crime victim’ saga. The DCI was forced to retire in humiliation after the ‘love affair’ scandal hit the headlines. The lesser ranking detective who sold the story to the tabloid appears to have received “a substantial sum of money” although the episode apparently did little for his career prospects.

The case of the senior detective sold-out-for-cash appears to have taken some strange turns, made all the worse after evidence emerged that a bizarre “turf war” between detectives including the one who sold out his boss, & local uniformed officers within the division of Lothian & Borders Police ended up destroying a costly year long drugs surveillance operation in a small Borders town, where one family was known to have been dealing in & selling large quantities of drugs to all age groups including school children. A more in-depth report on this case is to follow.

Another case being looked into by an independent journalist has revealed more payments to cops on where material gathered on “target individuals” such as lists of phone calls, council & medical records & other information was handed over to a lawyer from a well known law firm which is known to have represented now former senior law officers in the Crown Office. The information, which was exchanged for a substantial sum of money, appears to have been gained by serving Police Officers and officials working at Scotland’s Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS).

In another instance, at least one Police Officer is alleged to be on the payroll of a private law firm which has a senior partner who is also a serving Sheriff. In a case previously reported by Scottish Law Reporter, one particular firm used a Police Officer to threaten tradesmen who were seeking to recover debts from a serving advocate who is a client & friend of the serving sheriff. The Police Officer, who threatened a tradesman with arrest “if he didn't shut up about the debts” is suspected of receiving payment for his actions on behalf of the sheriff.

In a case which appears to implicate staff working for the Scottish Court Service, information on a private individual including personal statements appears to have been shared by SCS staff with a law firm, again on a cash for access basis.

No action appears to have been taken in any of the above examples, even though the cases, in which money has changed hands on each occasion, are now well known to senior officers and senior figures in Scotland’s judiciary.

While BBC News reports on the arrests in England & Wales, insiders say expect no arrests in Scotland …

Operation Elveden: Five held in police payment probe

Four former and current Sun journalists and a police officer have been arrested by detectives investigating payments made to police by journalists. Scotland Yard said the men, aged 29 to 56, were arrested at addresses in London and Essex earlier. The 29-year-old, a serving officer in the Metropolitan Police's Territorial Policing Command, was arrested at his work - a central London police station.

News Corporation said it would continue to pursue "legitimate journalism". Offices at News International in Wapping are currently being searched. The BBC understands the arrested journalists are ex-deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, ex-managing editor Graham Dudman, crime editor Mike Sullivan and head of news Chris Pharo.

The Met said the arrests, part of Operation Elveden, were prompted by information given to police by News Corporation. A BBC source said this was an effort aimed at "draining the swamp" so as to restore journalistic integrity at News International titles.

News Corporation and its Management and Standards Committee (MSC) issued a statement following the arrests saying it had made a commitment last summer that unacceptable news gathering practices by individuals in the past would not be repeated. "It commissioned the management and standards committee to undertake a review of all News International titles, regardless of cost, and to proactively co-operate with law enforcement and other authorities if potentially relevant information arose at those titles. "As a result of that review, which is ongoing, the MSC provided information to the Elveden investigation which led to today's arrests."

News Corporation also said it would "continue to give its total support to the continued work of the MSC and to ensure that legitimate journalism is vigorously pursued in both the public interest and in full compliance with the law".

Operation Elveden is supervised by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and is being run in conjunction with Operation Weeting, Scotland Yard's inquiry into phone hacking by the now-closed News of the World. A spokesman said Saturday's arrests and searches related to suspected payments to officers and was not about seeking journalists to reveal their sources regarding information obtained legitimately.

The police have said that two men, aged 48 and 56, were arrested at their homes in Essex. A second 48-year-old man was detained at his home in north London. Officers are searching their homes. A fourth man, aged 42, was arrested at 11am when he attended an east London police station. All were being questioned on suspicion of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906, aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office and conspiracy in relation to both offences.

The fifth man to be arrested, a 42-year-old man attended an east London police station on Saturday morning. He was arrested on suspicion of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906, aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office and conspiracy in relation to both these offences. The officer was being held on suspicion of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906, misconduct in a public office, as well as conspiracy in relation to both offences. His home was also being searched. Scotland Yard said the searches were expected to continue into Saturday afternoon.

The officer was the second serving officer to be arrested as part of Operation Elveden. The first, a 52-year-old woman, was arrested last month and bailed, police said. A total of 13 people have now been arrested as part of the inquiry. Twelve were arrested by the Met and the thirteenth by the IPCC.

IPCC deputy chair Deborah Glass said she was satisfied with the "strenuous efforts being made by this investigation to identify police officers who may have taken corrupt payments".

She said she had considered the IPCC's role and whether to use its powers directly in relation to the latest suspects, but said "given the interlocking nature of the investigation and arrests which do not just involve police officers, I believe the priority is not around whose powers should be used, but for an effective investigation that brings wrongdoers to justice. "While we continue to provide a supervisory role across Operation Elveden, I will consider each referral on its own merit and we will investigate independently if appropriate."

Among those questioned during the inquiries were former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks, ex-Downing Street communications chief Andy Coulson, former News of the World managing editor Stuart Kuttner, the paper's former royal editor Clive Goodman, and its former crime editor Lucy Panton.

The total number of people arrested in the inquiries now stands at 27. Two were released without further action, and 21 remain on police bail.

Holyrood delays e-petitions over fears football supporters will use discussion forums to launch & debate petitions against anti sectarian laws

EU, we have a problem : Holyrood’s e-petitions website offline over sectarian debate fears A FORMER Scottish Parliament employee had admitted his colleagues were secretly ordered to delay the re-launch of Holyrood’s E-Petitions website amid fears Celtic & Rangers football supporters and others opposed to the Scottish Government’s Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill would use the e-petitions system to launch counter petitions against each other and the Scottish Government’s anti-sectarian laws, thus “weighing down” the Scottish Parliament’s website with discussions about sectarianism legislation & crimes in Scotland, something Holyrood’s bosses were and still are keen to avoid in an effort to curtail any feeling Scotland has a significant sectarian crime problem.

The information has come to light after a now former member of staff at Holyrood who has registered a grievance against his employers came forward to offer information on the long running absence of the e-petitions system, which allowed members of the public to post their petitions to the Scottish Parliament's website in order to attract discussion on their petition’s topic, and gather signatures to support a petition’s progress through the Petitions Committee.

Scottish Parliament officials had promised a re-launch of the e-petitions system “sometime in December 2011” however the planned date of re-launch was considered too close to the vote on the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill which was passed at the Scottish Parliament on December 14 2011, in a 64 to 57 vote, covered by Scottish Law Reporter HERE.

The Holyrood insider, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has revealed he has in his possession, a series of emails between Scottish Parliament officials who discussed their concerns about “unwanted elements using the e-petitions system to discuss or oppose the anti sectarian bill currently going through the Justice Committee”.

The insider goes on to allege a senior member of the Scottish Parliament branded members of one particular online forum as “******** *******”, a claim already passed to a national newspaper by the insider. The exact words used by the msp which are highly inflammatory, cannot be printed for legal reasons due to the law as it now stands.

Members of the particular forum named in the discussions, which is also not being identified by SLR for legal reasons, apparently stood accused of inciting hatred and making death threats against personalities from the football world & other walks of public life in Scotland. In another instance mentioned in the discussions between Holyrood officials, Celtic supporters also came in for criticism, for their websites organising protests against the Scottish Government's anti-sectarian bill which has now received Royal Assent.

The e-petitions website currently remains offline with an official explanation there have been “design changes & problems encountered along the way of its re-launch” however it has now been confirmed msps and staff at Holyrood are still concerned that opposing sides in the sectarian debate will utilise the e-petitions system to raise petitions & amendments against the Scottish Government’s much criticised anti-sectarian legislation. It can be revealed today a contingency plan has been put in place by officials to withhold any e-petition which touches on sectarian issues. A member of staff has also confirmed in off the record comments that any discussions on sectarianism “will be deleted” from the Scottish Parliament’s website.

The Scottish Parliament’s move to censor any debate on sectarianism follows a pattern of other public bodies in Scotland who have either censored, denied, or destroyed information relating to sectarian incidents.

Scottish Law Reporter featured an account of how Crown Office officials were ordered to prevent data on sectarian crimes falling into public hands, here : ‘Hate Data’ destroyed as Salmond’s SNP fear Independent Scotland viewed as ‘Too Sectarian’ to join predominantly Catholic European Union

A campaigner speaking to Scottish Law Reporter earlier today branded Holyrood’s decision to hold the e-petitions system offline over fears of discussions about sectarianism as an attempt at censorship. He went further, saying he felt the Scottish Parliament was continuing what appears to be an “anti-catholic” policy on the debate about sectarianism in Scotland.

He said : “Censoring debate is not the way to combat sectarianism in Scotland. If as many feel the Scottish Government's law is unjust it is surely our right as citizens to file a petition on the Scottish Parliament’s website and be able to discuss the issue just like everyone else.”

A Scottish Parliament spokesperson was not available to answer any questions on the allegations relating to the e-petitions website, which has now been held offline by Holyrood officials for nearly TEN MONTHS.

Credibility of EIS teachers union on the line : Investigation reveals trail of abandoned members as union boss ‘talked up’ £650K out-of-court payments

Abandoning teachers at court : Investigation into union funded court cases ridicule Scotland’s main teaching union’s claims it stands by its members. AN INVESTIGATION into damages claims made by a union on behalf of teachers in the Court of Session against their employers has raised serious questions about public statements made by Ronnie Smith, the General Secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) who claimed the EIS “will pursue employers relentlessly on behalf of members for compensation”. However, it now transpires that even while the EIS union leader made the claims on national television, Mr Smith’s words are very far from a shocking reality, now revealed in documents handed over to law journalists & the media which show the EIS union have SECRETLY WALKED AWAY from a string of member’s damages claims at the last minute, leaving them to face court appearances without legal representation. The documents also show the union sought to cover up any information which revealed the union had abandoned its own members on the steps of the court.

Speaking on Scottish Television during a news report into figures revealing a massive SIX HUNDRED & FIFTY THOUSAND POUND settlement awarded to teachers in the past year, the bulk of which was awarded to a single teacher for an occupational stress case, Ronnie Smith, the soon-to-retire General Secretary of the EIS, Scotland’s main teacher’s union claimed : “..Most employers are demanding more from their employees with less resource to deliver on the service that’s provided so prospects are not very good but we are very clear that if employers don't pay attention to the mental health as well as the physical health of their employees, we will pursue them relentlessly on behalf of members for compensation”

However, documents relating to a series of EIS backed court actions now disclosed to the media which include terse exchanges between some of Scotland’s top law firms reveal a catalogue of cases where the EIS union have ABANDONED members damages claims, even after supporting some of the cases for years and employing multiple law firms & expert witnesses to prepare for court appearances cancelled at the last minute.

In some of the cases, the abrupt, unexplained termination of the union’s funding & support for its members court litigation, despite promises of ‘relentlessly pursuing employers on behalf of members’ have left some ill teachers facing FINANCIAL RUIN after being left with massive bills for legal fees reaching into HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS, fees which were accumulated by EIS instructed law firms who in some instances, appear to made a complete mess of members damages claims, taking years in some of the cases to file any court papers.

Papers from some of the damages claims also appears to implicate current senior figures in the EIS who appear to have become personally involved, leading to situations where the progress of member’s damages claims have been obstructed, ultimately leading to secret decisions taken to axe the union’s support for a string of member’s court actions. There are also hints of evidence within the now disclosed paperwork that some of the law firms involved in representing EIS members and paid for by the union, have concealed and deliberately withheld paperwork relating to court litigation so it could not be handed over to the affected EIS member to carry on themselves.

Speaking to Scottish Law Reporter, a legal insider who looked at the papers disclosed to journalists said : “There appears to be no doubt the EIS deliberately removed correspondence and reports from members case files who were involved in court litigation against their employers. The removal of the material will have had a profound effect on the members and their damages claims, leaving them without proof of EIS instructions & evidence necessary for them to continue their claims alone.”

He continued : “Without doubt, the EIS actions in these cases have led to the members involved being denied access to justice”

Claims made by EIS Union General Secretary that his union relentlessly pursue employers on behalf of members claims are now in question (click to watch video)

The investigation into the EIS’ union’s claims over how it pursues litigation conducted on behalf of members comes after its General Secretary issued a detailed Press Release reporting the union’s efforts to ensure its members received compensation payouts for accidents or injuries at work.

The Press Release, which can be viewed on the EIS’ own website here Record award highlights the need to tackle teacher stress, or alternatively, online HERE, stated :

An EIS member has received a record six figure settlement as a result of an occupational stress case. The settlement, which was agreed out of court, was a consequence of an employer’s failure to act upon repeated reports of excessive workload which led to the member suffering from stress related psychiatric injury. This award is the largest single ever paid to an EIS member as a result of occupational stress. The figure was revealed as part of almost £650,000 in compensation – another record figure - for work-related injuries secured by the EIS for its members over the past year.

Commenting, EIS General Secretary Ronnie Smith said : "Occupational stress is a major problem facing teachers and lecturers. The growth in the number of cases involving psychiatric injury and stress-related illness must be a warning to employers that they need to take account of their employees’ mental, as well as physical, wellbeing. The fact that this record compensation award arose from a work-load related case, which was compounded by a lack of management support, is no coincidence. This clearly illustrates just how serious such injuries can be, and the heavy price that employers will have to pay if they fail in their obligations to protect their staff.”

Mr Smith added : "Employers should be using the Health and Safety Executive’s stress management standards and trying to reduce and control the levels of stress caused by work activities. Stress-related illnesses are extremely serious and can take a huge toll on the individual concerned. The long-term effects can be significant, and recovery can take a long period of time. While the EIS supports members in stress-related claims, our preference would always be for such cases to be avoided completely. Employers must tackle the causes of stress, for example by controlling work-load, and they must also provide appropriate support for teaching staff who are experiencing stress.”

However, an insider said the EIS’ press release and the union’s effort in the media to push the story out regarding the £650,000 payout and the six figure out of court settlement was little more than a play to hold onto its dwindling membership numbers, which are now being hit by redundancies in the public sector cuts. The claims of spin appear to back up rumours the EIS are worried over teacher sackings across Scotland which could reduce its membership & political influence.

A solicitor commenting on the ‘out of court’ settlement case criticised the EIS over the lack of accurate detail published about the settlement in spite of the General Secretary’s apparent willingness to mention it on television news. He went onto question why such a large out of court settlement was taken if the EIS believed it had a strong case and could go for more.

He said : "With regard to the case the EIS are happy to mention in passing but unwilling to mention in detail, the little we are offered in Mr Smith’s statement leaves me wondering if the client was told, take the settlement or we will walk away from your case.”

The EIS Press Office were asked for comment on why the teaching union had abandoned members damages claims it had apparently been supporting & funding for years. No response was given.

A number of questions were put to the EIS via Freedom of Information laws by a journalist, asking :

How many cases have the EIS taken on and funded for members in terms of legal actions against their employers for damages claims, medical injury claims and other types of claims in the past three years.

How many legal actions, damages claims or court cases on behalf of EIS members & funded by the EIS have the EIS dropped from proceeding to court before the case was heard in court in the past three years

How many legal actions, damages claims or court cases on behalf of EIS members & funded by the EIS have been dropped by the EIS while litigation was in progress in the past three years.

What is the total amount spent by the EIS on representing members legal actions, damages claims or court cases against their employers in the last three years.

In response to the questions, the EIS replied to the journalists via its media office, saying the union is not covered by Freedom of Information legislation and would not be answering any of the questions put to it.

The EIS union’s reaction to the revelations of how a little-discussed-in-public policy of abandoning member’s damages claims during the litigation process has raised suspicions among some members & legal observers that the teachers union is not all it has portrayed itself to be in the media.

Scottish Law Reporter's investigations into the papers disclosed to journalists are continuing.

Lord President asks Westminster to amend Scotland Bill, closing Criminal Appeals route to UK Supreme Court on Human Rights issues

Lord President asks for amendment to Scotland Bill allowing Scottish Courts to bury handle Human Rights appeals. IN a move seen by many legal observers as an indication the retiring Lord President, Lord Hamilton may not be so retiring from the legal scene as some may have expected, the Lord President has written to the UK Parliament to ask its MPs to add a restriction on criminal appeals to the UK Supreme Court to the Scotland Bill provisions dealing with devolution issues, thus ensuring the Court of Session can ‘take care of’ any Human Rights infringements, and bury the chance of any appeal from Scotland being heard at the UK’s Supreme Court, a move welcomed (even if it was arranged) by the SNP. The move brings the Lord President into line with the wishes of the Scottish Government, who fell over themselves to castigate the UK’s Supreme Court and even it’s Scottish judges after rulings in the Cadder v HMA case and Nat Fraser appeal.

The Lord President’s representations to Westminster can be read online HERE

Now that the Lord President has ‘rolled over’ to make a judicial request to back up the harsh words from Scottish Ministers, who did not enjoy the impression which was created that Scotland’s justice system and its courts simply couldn't be trusted with appeals, particularly on ECHR issues, the way is now clear for Lord Hamilton to return to a few appointments at the behest of Scottish Ministers as soon as is practicably possible (String pulling comes to mind – Ed)

The Press Release from the Judiciary of Scotland : Lord President Makes Written Representations to Parliament

Click image to read Lord Hamilton’s representation to Westminster. Utilising the powers conferred on him by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 the Lord President is laying before the United Kingdom Parliament written representations regarding the Scotland Bill presently before it. Section 5 of the Act provides that the Lord President may lay written representations before Parliament on matters relating to the judiciary or the administration of justice in Scotland. Equivalent powers are available to the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales and the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland.

The Lord President is urging Parliament to do two things:

(1) to extend the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Scottish criminal appeals and references to the remedying of infringements by the courts below as well as by the prosecutor; but

(2) to restrict those cases in which leave may be granted to appeal to the Supreme Court from the High Court of Justiciary to cases in which the High Court has certified that a point of law of general public importance is involved in the decision.

As to (2), the Court of Criminal Appeal in England and Wales and the equivalent court in Northern Ireland have long had a certification procedure which has proved to be valuable. The Lord President wishes to secure a similar provision for the High Court in Scotland.

The Lord President seeks, in the Scotland Bill, an amendment to the Scotland Act 1998 to the above effect.

Constitutional Reform Act 2005

Part 2

Section 5 Representations to Parliament.

(1)The chief justice of any part of the United Kingdom may lay before Parliament written representations on matters that appear to him to be matters of importance relating to the judiciary, or otherwise to the administration of justice, in that part of the United Kingdom.

(2)In relation to Scotland those matters do not include matters within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, unless they are matters to which a Bill for an Act of Parliament relates.

(3)In relation to Northern Ireland those matters do not include transferred matters within the legislative competence of the Northern Ireland Assembly, unless they are matters to which a Bill for an Act of Parliament relates.

(4)In subsection (3) the reference to transferred matters has the meaning given by section 4(1) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 (c. 47).

(5)In this section “chief justice” means—

(a)in relation to England and Wales or Northern Ireland, the Lord Chief Justice of that part of the United Kingdom;

(b)in relation to Scotland, the Lord President of the Court of Session.

Explanatory Notes

Section 5: Representations to Parliament

Section 5 provides that the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland and the Lord President of the Court of Session may table written representations to Parliament on matters relating to the judiciary or the administration of justice. In respect of the Lord President of the Court of Session and the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, this function is qualified by subsections (2) and (3) in order to respect the devolution settlements with Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively.

Constitutional Reform Act 2005

£1/2 Million Breach of the Peace trial of anti-abuse campaigner Robert Green continues for second week at Stonehaven Sheriff Court, Aberdeen

A breach of the Peace trial against anti-abuse campaigner Robert Green is expected to last another week. Daily updates for readers seeking the very latest information on Scotland’s most expensive ever Breach of the Peace trial against ant-abuse campaigner Robert Green, can be viewed at Hollie Demands Justice.org. Mr Green, as is now widely known, was charged in February 2010 by officers from Grampian Police, apparently on the orders of the Crown Office in Edinburgh after he attempted to hand out leaflets documenting the claims surrounding the case of Hollie Greig, a downs syndrome victim who is alleged to have been abused by an Aberdeen based paedophile gang.

Little has apparently been done about the abuse claims, and the case against Mr Green appears to have become little more than the now usual Crown Office vendetta to protect its own image, turning into yet another rather costly case for taxpayers to fund, simply to beef up a few egos in undeserving high places.

Hard questions have been asked of Grampian Police & others, more of which can be read on the Hollie Demands Justice.org website.

A reminder of past events can be viewed in earlier coverage by Scottish Law Reporter HERE

Former Lord Advocate now Dame Elish Angiolini employed Cayman Islands hopping lawyers from Glasgow. Reporting on the background of the case, Robert Green was arrested by Police on 12th February 2010 in relation to a breach of the peace alleged to have been committed in Aberdeen when Mr Green attempted to hand out leaflets regarding the anti-abuse campaign. It was also revealed the then Lord Advocate, now Dame Elish Angiolini had employed private law firm Levy McRae to serve interdicts on Mr Green in connection with his campaign to ‘out’ alleged abusers of downs syndrome victim Hollie Greig. Glasogw law firm Levy McRae who later represented shamed former Glasgow City Council Boss & Cocaine addict Steven Purcell, proceeded to threaten several media outlets & journalists over their reporting of the case, covered by Scottish Law Reporter HERE & HERE. The Purcell scandal caused some newspapers to ‘evaluate’ their relationship with Levy McRae, details of which were featured in a report here : HERE

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill worked at, has ties to same law firm used by then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in interdict case. As details of the case began to be reported in the wider press, it emerged the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill had links to LEVY MCRAE, the law firm employed by the then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in legal action against Mr Green. Mr MacAskill has made no comment on the fact he served his apprenticeship at Levy McRae and also worked at the firm for a considerable time during his years as a solicitor before he entered politics, while he is thought to have backed Dame Angiolini in her actions at the time. The revelations were reported by Scottish Law Reporter at the time, HERE.

Police Reform Bill : Scotland to have ONE ‘easier to manipulate, politicise & control’ Police Force with one ‘handpicked’ Chief Constable

One force is easier to politicise, manipulate than eight : MacAskill launches Police reform bill in bid to control all of Scotland’s regional Police needs. AS promised by the Scottish Government, today saw the launch of the Police and Fire Reform Bill, bringing all of Scotland’s current EIGHT Police forces into a convenient, centralised, one Police Service, which, claim critics, will be much easier to politicise & manipulate than the current regional structure. In today’s announcement, the Scottish Government claim the move will “bring local services to the heart of communities” however most see the move as a bid to control Scotland’s eight at-times ‘unruly’ Police forces who do not always get on well with whoever is in power.

While the Justice Secretary’s statement claims the single force will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, many point out it will not, and even if it were, Holyrood msps have one of the worst track records in Europe for scrutinising public services, often acting as little more than a rubber stamp for policy making on the hoof.

The Police & Fire Reform Bill can be found HERE :

Bill (as introduced) (509KB pdf posted 17 January 2012)

Explanatory Notes (415KB pdf posted 17 January 2012)

Policy Memorandum (280KB pdf posted 17 January 2012)

It should be noted the above links are subject to change, due to the Scottish Parliament’s annoyance about the media & members of the public having access to too much information.

The Scottish Government’s Press Release : Police and Fire Reform Bill

Single police and fire and rescue services in Scotland will bring local services to the heart of communities, the Justice Secretary said today. There will be designated local senior officers at the centre of a new, strong relationship between councils and the services, and a statutory duty to provide adequate local police and fire services.

Local authorities will approve plans for their area and many more councillors will have a say than under the current arrangements. The services will be independent, with no operational control by Ministers, but subject to Parliamentary scrutiny.

Kenny MacAskill was speaking at an event in Galashiels to mark the publication of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Bill which will establish the Police Service of Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service.

Key aspects of the Bill include:

- Regular, formal opportunities for the Scottish Parliament to scrutinise policing and fire and rescue services.

- Establishing the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) and Scottish Fire and Rescue Service board to hold the Chief Constable and Chief Officer to account.

- Establishing 'the Police Service of Scotland', comprising a Chief Constable, other officers and police staff. The Chief Constable and other senior officers will be appointed by the SPA. All constables and police staff will transfer to the new service.

- Transferring the current functions of fire and rescue authorities to the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. All staff employed by the current eight fire and rescue authorities will transfer to the new service.

- A statutory duty for the Police Service of Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service to provide adequate local services.

- A designated local policing commander and local senior fire officer for each local authority area, responsible for involving the local authority in determining priorities and objectives for policing and fire and rescue services in the local area.

- A local plan for policing and a local plan for fire and rescue services for each local authority area, agreed between the relevant local commander or local senior officer and the local authority, setting out priorities, objectives and arrangements for local service delivery.

- Complaint reviews and investigation of serious incidents and criminal offences involving the police to be handled by one independent body, the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner.

- The creation of an Inspectorate of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said in a rambling statement : “Scotland enjoys world-class police and fire and rescue services – they are the lifeblood of every single community they serve. We know crime is now at a 35 year low, helped by 1,000 extra officers on the streets, while fire deaths are going down year-on-year. The stark reality is that budget cuts from Westminster will devastate our excellent frontline services if we don’t act now. This Government will not be complacent, we will not compromise on public safety and we will make sure that every community is served and served well.

“The reasons for reform are clear. We need to make a virtue of necessity. Make no mistake – this is the only way to make sure that we don’t lose the major improvements made to police and fire and rescue services in recent years. We have devised the strongest possible plans for the future of police and fire services in Scotland which reduce duplication, not the quality of vital services, and deliver estimated efficiency savings of £1.7 billion over 15 years. Today’s publication of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Bill follows two consultations and many months of sustained, regular engagement with police, fire and rescue services, boards, authorities and other interested parties.

“There will be a stronger connection between communities and their local police and fire and rescue services, with designated local senior officers and a statutory duty on both services to provide proper local provision. Local authorities will approve plans for their area and, rather than a handful of councillors attending a regional board, many more councillors will have a say in what happens in their area. I expect to see the Local Commander and Local Senior officer coming before the council to explain and answer questions about police and fire services in the area. Our services will be independent, with no operational control from Ministers but subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. And our new services will be nothing without the skills and talents of the workforce. Staff will transfer to the new services on the same terms and conditions.

“I am delighted to launch the Bill in Galashiels. The Scottish Borders Council is working with police and fire and rescue services on the new local arrangements ahead of their formal introduction. There has been strong interest from local authorities, police forces and fire and rescue services in trialling these new arrangements. A number have said they want to become involved – and one project, in Grampian, has already been formally submitted to us. I welcome this enthusiasm as a the mark of the way forward. I would encourage all parties to get behind this legislation to secure the future of our police and fire and rescue services.”

However, not all Chief Constables or local authorities or even the Scottish public agree with the proposals, as was reported HERE even though Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill claimed the centralisation of Policing and control of it would save Scotland around £130m a year and £1.7bn over 15 years, claims thought by some to be ludicrous & absolute nonsense. The Police Federation also voted against the plans, covered by the Herald newspaper HERE. Local authorities voiced their concerns & opposition, reported by the Daily Record newspaper HERE and by LocalGov.co.uk HERE

Ex-Lord Advocate Dame Elish Angiolini ‘being cited to appear’ in ‘Vendetta’ TWO YEAR £1/2 million breach of the peace trial of anti-abuse campaigner

Former Lord Advocate Dame Elish Angiolini is now being called to appear in trial of anti abuse campaigner Robert Green SCOTTISH LAW REPORTER has been told this evening by legal insiders that former Lord Advocate now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC is to be cited as a witness in Scotland’s most expensive ever Breach of the Peace trial against the now well known anti-abuse campaigner Robert Green, who has campaigned for an investigation into claims Hollie Greig, a downs syndrome victim was abused by an Aberdeen based paedophile gang. The case which has so far cost taxpayers a staggering HALF A MILLION POUNDS, having already seen FOURTEEN COURT HEARINGS, 16,000 travel miles for the accused, trips by Grampian Police Officers to England to search & raid homes & seize property including computers & documents, Crown Office staff being flown into Aberdeen especially for the case, and a witness list which has varied in numbers and currently totals SIXTY ONE persons is set to begin at Stonehaven Sheriff Court next week 16 January 2012 in front of Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen and is scheduled to last up to TWO WEEKS.

If the former Lord Advocate does appear in court to answer questions over the arrest of Mr Green and account for her role in the Hollie Greig case, it will be a first. However, insiders are predicting there will be an intense effort to block any difficult questions being asked of the former Lord Advocate.

Earlier this week, Scottish Law Reporter featured further reports on the long running case HERE revealing a series of problems with Mr Green’s legal representatives who had suspiciously backed away from calling Angiolini in the case, in spite of her seemingly obvious position as a key player in the arrest of Mr Green. Dame Angiolini was Lord Advocate at the time of Mr Green’s arrest in Aberdeen during February 2010, and was linked by several Scots law publications to the Hollie Greig case when the allegations of abuse were initially reported to Grampian Police several years ago.

Reporting on the background of the case, Robert Green was arrested by Police on 12th February 2010 in relation to a breach of the peace alleged to have been committed in Aberdeen when Mr Green attempted to hand out leaflets regarding the anti-abuse campaign. It was also revealed the then Lord Advocate, now Dame Elish Angiolini had employed private law firm Levy McRae to serve interdicts on Mr Green in connection with his campaign to ‘out’ alleged abusers of downs syndrome victim Hollie Greig. Glasgow law firm Levy McRae who later represented shamed former Glasgow City Council Boss & Cocaine addict Steven Purcell, proceeded to threaten several media outlets & journalists over their reporting of the case, covered by Scottish Law Reporter HERE & HERE. The Purcell scandal caused some newspapers to ‘evaluate’ their relationship with Levy McRae, details of which were featured in a report here : HERE

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill worked at same law firm used by then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in interdict case. As details of the case began to be reported in the wider press, it emerged the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill has personal links to LEVY MCRAE, the law firm employed by the then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in legal action against Mr Green. Mr MacAskill has made no comment on the fact he served his apprenticeship at Levy McRae and also worked at the firm for a considerable time during his years as a solicitor before he entered politics, while he is thought to have backed Dame Angiolini in her actions at the time. The revelations were reported by Scottish Law Reporter at the time, HERE.

The now record costs of the Crown Office’ prosecution of Robert Green for a single Breach of the Peace, dubbed by legal insiders a “Three year private vendetta bankrolled by taxpayers against Robert Green & abuse victims” were revealed when Scottish Law Reporter earlier reported pre-trial costs had already risen to around HALF A MILLION POUNDS, after factoring in the expenses of all previous hearings and work by the Crown Office, Police, several other public bodies & legal aid.

Dame Angiolini was unable to be reached for comment.

Six HBJ Gateley partners ‘go over the side’ at law firm raided by Police over stolen Leonardo Davinci Madonna with Yarnwinder painting

Law firm where stolen Davinci painting was found experiences a series of resignations. The Herald newspaper reports today that up to six Glasgow based partners from the law firm HBJ Gateley have resigned, including Alan Stewart, the former head of the office, Douglas Blyth, Gordon Cunningham, Sara Matheson, Shona Templeton, and Robert King. HBJ Gateley Wareing rebranded itself as HBJ Gateley after being caught up in a case of art theft after a Police raid at its Glasgow offices discovered the stolen Madonna with the Yarnwinder in a safe, reported in an earlier article HERE

The latest resignations at the law firm add to the recent departures from the Edinburgh office of partners Kath Karlin and Kate Dewar, who have joined other firms. The firm's senior partner, Malcolm McPherson, said in response that a number of non-equity partners were scheduled to leave in the first half of the year for a variety of reasons, but the firm was "in excellent shape" and would be announcing a number of new people soon[ish].

If London, the Tories & LibDems don’t give ATOSS about Scotland & Scots in need, is the Union ultimately A SICK JOKE ?

THERE is little doubt a few hundred scare stories about the break up of the union are about to be thrown at the Scots electorate. Most of the stories will have as much credibility as as a paper bag can hold a gallon of water, however, some of the stories, such as Margaret Thatcher’s Poll Tax which ripped Scotland apart in the 1980’s and leaves a horrific legacy of inescapable personal debt even to this day, are worth considering in the context of whether Westminster really gives A-TOSS about retaining the Union with Scotland.

Given we are in the deepest recession the world has ever seen, a recession caused by bankers & regulations made by national Governments in the nation’s capitals rather than devolved assemblies such as the Scottish Parliament, perhaps one of the most important subjects on everyone’s mind in Scotland should be the CONDEM Coalition Government’s dreaded Welfare Reform Bill, parts of which are already being implemented with a Concentration Camp zeal upon the long term sick, patients with debilitating illnesses & benefits claimants across the UK, particularly in Scotland.

Every day there are stories about the weak and the sick in Scotland being treated like cattle off to the slaughter by a Westminster appointed company receiving at least £100 million and doubtless all the hidden extras we will never get to hear about. The Tories it seems, may give A-TOSS about keeping the union but they certainly don’t give A-TOSS about caring for Scots in need.

So, simply, Scots may well have to consider, if the UK Government in London don't give A-TOSS for Scotland, and feel that £100 million is a good price to pay for torturing the long term sick, disabled and near death up and down the length of the country, then wouldn't it be better Scots looking after their own?

Its not as if we Scots don't have our own resources to deal with the population on a more fairer basis. After all, we are the only country in the world who discovered oil, and then lost it to another country, a resource which may come back to Scotland if the independence referendum swings in favour of a nation status. Isn’t it therefore time to take a hard look at whether Scots are safer with, and may expect fairer treatment in the hands of an independent Scotland?

Considering we are supposedly all in this recession together, yet like in the rest of the UK we Scots watch as our safety nets are gradually being stripped away from us, with who knows, the NHS next in the firing line as the block grant from London decreases to cover up the banker’s billions, Do YOU give A-TOSS for a Fairer Scotland with a stronger voice within the union or a stronger and more caring for Scots voice as an independent nation ?

* Scottish Law Reporter agreed to run this article after a GP working in the South of Scotland reported to one of our journalists she had been offered a substantial cash sum [by an unnamed party] as an incentive to withdraw her backing for a disability benefits claimant who is suffering from cancer.

Readers can find out more about ATOS Healthcare by using GOOGLE .

The Sunday Mail newspaper reports on how the UK Government is treating Scots in need :

A SICK JOKE : Benefits clawback firm promise 'brighter future' but victim speaks out

Jul 17 2011 Mark Aitken, Sunday Mail

A PRIVATE firm hired to slash benefits are promising "a brighter future" to claimants whose payouts are stopped. Atos Healthcare are being paid £100million a year by the Tories to reassess people on disability and sickness benefits and drive them back to work.

They pay doctors up to £60,000 a year to assess whether claimants are fit to work. In a job advert for doctors, they claim: "You could make the difference that gives someone on incapacity benefit a brighter future." The advert, published on the British Medical Journal website, adds: "It's a vitally important role that aims to change lives for the better."

Labour MP Tom Greatrex, who has campaigned on the issue, branded the ad as "insulting". The Rutherglen and Hamilton West MP said: "The Tory-led government need to get a grip on Atos as a matter of urgency. "This advert is an insult to the thousands of people across the country who have been let down by the shambolic way Atos conduct their assessments.

"The idea that Atos are giving people on incapacity benefit a brighter future would be laughable were it not causing so much distress and pain to those who have been unfortunate enough to go through the process of their assessments."Rather than advertising for more highly paid staff, the Tory-led government should demand Atos sort themselves out, so their assessments are fair and reasonable."

Last week, the Sunday Mail revealed bungled rulings were costing taxpayers £50million. Around 30,000 people appealed against their decisions, with 40 per cent of them successful, which has cost the government around £50million. But UK employment minister Chris Grayling has admitted no money has been claimed back from the firm for poor medical advice.

An Atos spokeswoman said: "We have no comment on the advert."

Chemo patient's despair at ruling : Maggie Mackay was assessed by Atos as "fit to work" when she was still recovering from chemotherapy. The 51-year-old, from Glengarnock, Ayrshire, was a furniture restorer before breast cancer stopped her in her tracks.

She had radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery but was then assessed as being to fit to work by Atos and taken off disability benefit. Maggie, who bravely took part in our Breast Cancer Care Fashion Show last year, has launched an appeal.

She said: "Two weeks ago I had more surgery as my scar was not healing properly. My side effects include fatigue, not being able to sleep, very sore bones and memory loss. "The young woman didn't seem interested. I can't squat because I have two slipped discs."But she wrote in her report that I could squat. She made out I was perfectly fit and healthy. "Everything you say is twisted to make out that you are fit for work. I now have £8 a day to live on."

Enough to make you sick: Government urged to claw back millions from contractors after they wrongly assessed thousands on disability benefits

Jul 10 2011 Mark Aitken, Sunday Mail

BUNGLED rulings by the private firm deciding whether benefit claimants are fit to work are costing taxpayers £50million, we can reveal. The Government have been urged to claw back millions from the contractors after they wrongly assessed thousands on disability benefits.

Atos Healthcare is being paid £100million a year by the Tories to reassess people claiming disability and sickness benefits. But around 30,000 people appealed against their decisions, with 40 per cent of them successful, which has cost the government around s50million.

The Department for Work and Pensions' contract with Atos allows it to recoup money from the firm for poor medical advice. But UK employment minister Chris Grayling has admitted not a single penny has been claimed back.

Quizzed by Labour's Tom Greatrex, he said Atos "have met all of their targets for medical advice". Greatrex, MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West, said: "The Toryled Government's failure to provide the taxpayer value for money is disgraceful and the attitude of the minister responsible for this defies belief.

"To suggest Atos has met its targets when it is needlessly costing the taxpayer millions is unacceptable. "It is astonishing that the Government did not recoup a single penny of taxpayer money from Atos, despite its obvious failings.

"At a time when the welfare budget is being slashed by billions, many people will be surprised that the government is not demanding repayment from a multi million pound international organisation. "The Government is very quick to demand money back from welfare recipients who don't live up to their responsibilities. They should do likewise with Atos."

DWP's contract with French owned Atos allows the government to "apply financial remedies" where the firm has "failed to meet contractual targets". A dwp spokeswoman said: "If a decision is overturned at appeal, it does not necessarily mean that the original decision was inaccurate. "Often, customers produce new evidence at their appeal." Atos said it had nothing to add to the DWP's statement.

We revealed in March how Glasgow GP Margaret McCartney went undercover at an Atos recruitment evening. She was told: "You are not in a typical caring role. This isn't about diagnosing. We don't call them patients. We call them claimants."

Campaigners attack drive to block benefits appeals as decisions get overturned

Jan 1 2012 By Mark Aitken, Sunday Mail

A FIRM employed by the Government to weed outbenefit cheats are losing more than two thirds ofthe appeals against their decisions. Controversial French company Atos are paid £100million a year to get people off disability and sickness benefit.

But Citizens Advice Scotland (CAS) have revealed that 69 per cent of people they represented at tribunals have won their appeals. Heart attack and lung disease victims are among those Atos have assessed as being well enough to look for jobs.And figures from parliament records show appeals will cost the taxpayer £60million this financial year alone. Incredibly, Atos will not be penalised for their abysmal performance.

CAS head of policy Susan McPhee said: “If the Government want to cut down on fraud and help people into work, we support that. “But with this system, they aretargeting many people who aregenuinely sick and unable to work. They are removing their income and plunging them into poverty. “Our advisers are overwhelmed by people who have been found ‘fit for work’ by the Employment Support Allowance (ESA) assessment when they are not. “Almost 70 per cent of these people who are helped by CAS have their assessment overturned at appeal – which shows how poor the system is and how many people are wrongly caught out by it.”

The figure is based on a sample of 269 ESA tribunals in 2010-11 – with 185successful. Figures obtained by Rutherglen and Hamilton West MP Tom Greatrex show there were more than 166,000 appeals against ESA decisions in 2010-11, costing the taxpayer £40million. And from April to August this year, there were almost 80,000 appeals,costing £19.1million. This means the bill for 2011-12 could be £60million.

Greatrex said: “I know from the Citizens Advice centres in my constituency the amount of time and resources taken up by helping some of the most vulnerable people navigate their way through this tortuous system. “These aren’t people trying to fiddle the system – they are constituents who suffer from serious illnesses such as Parkinson’s and cancer. “The rapid rise in cases Citizens Advice dealt with in the last year clearly shows there is a problem.

“The way to save money, reduce the backlog of appeals and lessen the huge burden on Citizens Advice is not to hire more judges or move to a six-day week at the Tribunal Service, as the Government are doing. “They must reform the Work Capability Assessment so it is fair and gets decisions right first time round.”

A Department for Work and Pensions spokeswoman said: “The reassessment of incapacity benefit claimants is pressing ahead on time and as expected.” Atos declined to comment.

Record £1/2million Breach of the Peace ‘VENDETTA’ trial of anti-abuse campaigner set for next week, Angiolini to appear as witness ?

Former Lord Advocate Dame Elish Angiolini set to appear in trial of anti abuse campaigner Robert Green SCOTLAND’S most expensive ever Breach of the Peace trial against the well known anti-abuse campaigner Robert Green, a case which has so far cost taxpayers a staggering HALF A MILLION POUNDS, having already seen FOURTEEN COURT HEARINGS, 16,000 travel miles for the accused, trips by Grampian Police Officers to England to search & raid homes & seize property including computers & documents, Crown Office staff being flown into Aberdeen especially for the case, and a witness list which has varied in numbers and currently totals SIXTY ONE persons is set to begin at Stonehaven Sheriff Court next week 16 January 2012 in front of Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen

However, it is still unclear at this late stage whether the person described as the central witness to the entire case, former Lord Advocate and now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC will be called to appear to answer questions about the peculiar circumstances of the charges against Mr Green, arising from an incident where the anti-abuse campaigner visited Aberdeen in February 2010 to hand out leaflets detailing the allegations in the case of Hollie Greig, a downs syndrome girl who is alleged to have been abused by an Aberdeen based paedophile gang.

While it has been reported Mr Green is insistent on calling the former Lord Advocate in his defence, a move described by legal insiders as “a must, given her role in the affair”, it has now become clear that defence QCs acting for Robert Green have on each occasion refused to add Angiolini to the witness list, and when instructed to do so, they had immediately withdrawn from acting for Green, leaving him without legal representation for the trial.

Writing on his blog in an article last week, Robert Green said in relation to a meeting with his defence QC : “I had made it clear that Elish Angiolini is probably the most important witness for the defence and must be called. However, after deliberations, Senior Counsel Gary Allen QC felt that Angiolini`s appearance in the witness box would prove damaging to the defence, on the grounds that she would refuse to answer questions that may incriminate her and in that, her position would be supported by the sheriff.”

“I stated that whilst I had never held any great expectation of Angiolini breaking down under cross-examination and confessing, I considered it valuable both to the defence and in the public interest for her to be seen in court, failing to answer pertinent questions about her conduct in public office in connection with both my case and that of Hollie. It has been her failings and private interventions with the media, using public funds, that led to me taking the course that has resulted in the prosecution that she in fact personally authorised. Thus I regard her as a key witness. I also failed to see how Angiolini being cross-examined could possibly harm the defence.”

“As a result of our difference of opinion, we have mutually agreed that I would be best served by instructing another Senior Counsel to represent me. I accept that Mr Allen and Junior Counsel, who supported his view, were acting professionally in what they deemed to be my best interests and there is hence no ill will of any kind. It is just that an impasse was reached on a single important issue that could not be resolved. My solicitor will try to find a new team to represent me in the future, but it must be on the fundamental basis that Elish Angiolini is called as witness for the defence. I will not accept any deviation from that position.”

Commenting on the debacle over calling Angiolini as a witness, a key Scots legal figure today branded the saga as outrageous, saying “..there should be no reluctance on anyone’s part to call an individual as a witness, no matter what position they previously occupied in the justice system”. He said the former Lord Advocate “had no immunity from justice and should appear if called as a witness”.

Meanwhile a note prepared by Sheriff Principal Bowen over his refusal to grant the defence its request to call Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan as a witness has emerged, and can be viewed online here : Sheriff Principal Bowen note - PF Stephen McGowan excused from witness testimony. The decision to excuse Mr McGowan from being cross examined by Mr Green’s defence team has raised eyebrows in legal circles, with some expressing their opinion the decision violates Mr Green’s right to a fair hearing under Article 6 of ECHR.

Serious questions also remain about the fairness of any prosecution against Mr Green after it emerged Crown Office officials had privately briefed a tabloid journalist to expect Mr Green to plead guilty at an earlier hearing, a matter reported by Scottish Law Reporter in an earlier article HERE.

The journalist reported he had attended a November hearing of the case at Stonehaven Sheriff Court on the basis he had been told by Crown Office officials Mr Green was to plead guilty to the Breach of the Peace Charge. The journalist indicated he had been assured “a deal had been worked out for the accused to plead guilty”. However, when the hearing took place in November at Stonehaven, Mr Green rejected the prosecution’s efforts to force a guilty plea which then suspiciously resulted in the withdrawal of Green’s legal team which included Francis McMenamin QC.

The tabloid journalist has confirmed to colleagues he spoke to individuals who attended the November hearing before it began. However after it became clear there was to be no guilty plea the journalist left the court as soon as possible without speaking to anyone else. A legal insider verified the journalist’s account of matters to Scottish Law Reporter. Alarmingly, the insider also claimed a transcript of a draft Press Release to be issued if Mr Green had entered a guilty plea has now been destroyed.

Reporting on the background of the case, Robert Green was arrested by Police on 12th February 2010 in relation to a breach of the peace alleged to have been committed in Aberdeen when Mr Green attempted to hand out leaflets regarding the anti-abuse campaign. It was also revealed the then Lord Advocate, now Dame Elish Angiolini had employed private law firm Levy McRae to serve interdicts on Mr Green in connection with his campaign to ‘out’ alleged abusers of downs syndrome victim Hollie Greig. Glasgow law firm Levy McRae who later represented shamed former Glasgow City Council Boss & Cocaine addict Steven Purcell, proceeded to threaten several media outlets & journalists over their reporting of the case, covered by Scottish Law Reporter HERE & HERE. The Purcell scandal caused some newspapers to ‘evaluate’ their relationship with Levy McRae, details of which were featured in a report here : HERE

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill worked at same law firm used by then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in interdict case. As details of the case began to be reported in the wider press, it emerged the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill has personal links to LEVY MCRAE, the law firm employed by the then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in legal action against Mr Green. Mr MacAskill has made no comment on the fact he served his apprenticeship at Levy McRae and also worked at the firm for a considerable time during his years as a solicitor before he entered politics, while he is thought to have backed Dame Angiolini in her actions at the time. The revelations were reported by Scottish Law Reporter at the time, HERE.

The now record costs of the Crown Office’ prosecution of Robert Green for a single Breach of the Peace, dubbed by legal insiders a “Three year private vendetta bankrolled by taxpayers against Robert Green & abuse victims” were revealed when Scottish Law Reporter earlier reported pre-trial costs had already risen to around HALF A MILLION POUNDS, after factoring in the expenses of all previous hearings and work by the Crown Office, Police, several other public bodies & legal aid.

SHAMELESS : Scottish Legal Complaints Commission’s Chief Exec Rosemary Agnew in running for Freedom of Information Commissioner post

Scotland’s new Information Commissioner for the next EIGHT YEARS ? SLCC Chief Exec Rosemary Agnew is tipped by some to replace Kevin Dunion, yet others question her openness credentials after SLCC widely abused FOI REVELATIONS in the media this week report Rosemary Agnew, the current Chief Executive of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC), who is one of the candidates favoured to replace the outgoing Kevin Dunion for the position of Scottish Information Commissioner, has been ‘rebuked’ on at least FIVE OCCASIONS by the Information Commissioner for withholding information to the extent the SLCC has been named in a league of shame of public bodies which openly flout Freedom of Information laws.

From further reports it transpires Ms Agnew had also shockingly used FOI exemptions refuse the release of key data on how much compensation was paid to clients of solicitors, while Scottish Parliament officials conducted interviews for the key FOI post which will give the candidate a position in protecting information rights in Scotland for the next EIGHT YEARS.

The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission has not issued any statement so far on what effect Ms Agnew’s decision to stand for the FOI role will have on the SLCC, which has already lost an earlier Chief Executive, Eileen Masterman in mysterious circumstances which where also covered up from Freedom of Information requests made by journalists after revelations Ms Masterman had negotiated a large PAY OFF which was personally sanctioned by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill.

If Ms Agnew gets the post, the SLCC will have to recruit its THIRD CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN THREE YEARS, an issue which has raised concerns among consumer groups & the legal profession about the ability of the law complaints regulator to do its job properly.

During Ms Agnew’s term at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, firstly as Head of Investigations and then taking over the role of Chief Executive upon the demise of Eileen Masterman, the SLCC has been the subject of multiple investigations by the Scottish Information Commissioner, most of which have gone against the SLCC who frequently sought to cover up its workings and information which identified massive failings within the quango, along with bitter personal feuds between its board members who openly turned on members of the public & journalists in secret email exchanges which also featured in the media. Ms Agnew was also reported to have refused to monitor individual claims against the Law Society of Scotland’s Master Policy, a matter reported by Scots law blog Diary of Injustice, HERE.

Reported in the Daily Record newspaper earlier this week :

STOP SECRET : Revealed: Government, police & local councils all among public bodies who flouted anti-secrecy laws

Jan 9 2012 Exclusive by Chris Musson

TIP FORCED TO DISCLOSE

A WOMAN tipped to be Scotland's new anti-secrecy tsar has had a string of rulings made against her by the man she could replace.

Rosemary Agnew, who heads the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, is one of six people interviewed to be the next Information Commissioner. But Kevin Dunion has slapped down the SLCC eight times - five since Agnew took over as Chief Executive in October 2010.

Legal Reform campaigner Peter Cherbi, who had several requests knocked back by the SLCC, cast doubt over her suitability. He said : "How someone like that could be put in charge of openness is beyond me, unless they want to shut down openness and accountability."

Agnew did not respond to requests for a comment.

THE public bodies who fought tooth-and-nail to keep secrets from you are today exposed by the Record. The Government, police forces, councils and taxpayer-funded quangos all flouted anti-secrecy laws by knocking back legitimate Freedom of Information requests. They were forced to back down by Kevin Dunion, Scotland’s first Information Commissioner, who ruled in favour of the public 359 times since the new rules came into force in January 2005.

The worst offenders were the Scottish Government, who wrongly refused to disclose ­information 78 times over the last seven years. However, they also received the highest number of requests of any public body. Second on the league of shame were Edinburgh City Council, with 22 decisions against them. Third were Glasgow City Council with 17 decisions fully in favour of applicants, and fourth were Scottish Water with 15.

Among legitimate requests knocked back were details on the numbers of sex offenders in various areas – with Strathclyde Police, Grampian Police and Northern Constabulary all falling foul. Surgical mortality rates were also wrongly withheld by the NHS, as were details of public payments to firms of private consultants.

Dunion and his office made 1336 decisions to December 14, 2011. As well as the 359 fully in favour of the person appealing a refusal, 450 were partly in their favour.

A person who gets knocked back for an FoI request must first appeal to the public body before going to the Information Commissioner. It is time-consuming, meaning many members of the public give up, even if they have a good case.

But public bodies often fight to the bitter end, despite decisions being overturned by the ­Information Commissioner. Public bodies’ disregard for the laws is still widespread seven years on – and even appears to be growing. Last year saw the highest total for successful appeals by the public – on 85 occasions.

Dunion, who grew up in Fife and Clackmannanshire and was the rector of St Andrews University until 2011, steps down next month from the post of ­Information Commissioner he has held since 2003. Tomorrow, he will present a special report to the Scottish ­Parliament on his time in the job, and will urge the Government to “safeguard and strengthen” openness from public bodies.

Yesterday, he told the Record he was confident Scotland had “made a success” of freedom of information since 2005. He added said: “Public awareness of Freedom of Information is at an all-time high. Public authorities are responding to requests and information is being disclosed which would otherwise have remained secret. “We know much more about contracts and expenses, deaths in hospitals and local crime rates because of FoI. “Of course, there are disputes and failings which is why the free right of appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner is so important.”

He said most appeals were from members of the public, adding: “In the majority of my decisions I have found, at least in part, that the appeal was justified.”

Outgoing Information Commissioner Kevin Dunion urges Scottish Parliament to “Safeguard Freedom of Information Rights”

Outgoing Information Commissioner Kevin Dunion urges Holyrood to safeguard information rights. THE outgoing Scottish Information Commissioner, Kevin Dunion, who was appointed to the post in 2003 and reappointed for a second term in 2008, will lay a Special Report before the Scottish Parliament entitled Informing the Future -The State of Freedom of Information in Scotland. Afterwards he will address the Justice Committee on the measures which he believes should be taken to safeguard and strengthen rights to information in Scotland. The full report by Mr Dunion to the Parliament can be downloaded here : Special Report to the Scottish Parliament 2012 (pdf - 724 kB)

This is the first time that a departing Parliamentary officeholder has formally made a submission to Parliament reflecting on their full term in office.In his final report, the Commissioner recommends that:

Additional bodies should be designated under FOISA to ensure rights follow the public pound.

Charges which deter or exclude requesters must be avoided.

The Commissioner should be empowered to take evidence under oath.

The Commissioner should have discretion over considering late submissions to his investigations by public authorities.

Timescales for bringing prosecutions under section 65 (offence of destroying information after a request) should be extended.

FOISA should be altered to expressly exclude environmental information so it can be dealt with solely under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (the EIRs).

Provisions relating to charging for information under publication schemes should be clarified.

The Commissioner concludes that, overall, the state of freedom of information in Scotland is still strong. Public awareness of FOI rights is at an all time high and public authorities are generally complying with their obligations. However he warns that appeals against authorities are rising sharply, with appeals for 2011/12 projected to be 25% up on 2010/11. Increasingly, the Commissioner's decisions are finding that authorities have failed to deal with requests correctly.

The Commissioner also makes a final call for action to Ministers to use their powers to designate arm's length organisations, such as local authority trusts and private contractors, which now increasingly provide public services and facilities such as education, health, sports and leisure.

Mr Dunion said: "It is testimony to the effect of FOI that information on important matters such as public sector contracts, hospital acquired infections and school closures has not only been disclosed but proactively published. This success may be undermined if the right to information is lost when service delivery changes. It is nearly ten years since Parliament was told that powers to designate additional bodies such as local authority trusts and private contractors would be used. Disappointingly, successive administrations have failed to make good on this despite opinion polls showing that the public is strongly in favour of such action."

The Commissioner rejects suggestions that FOI is a burden and points out that Scotland is in danger of falling behind other countries, including the rest of the UK, saying: "The view that FOI is an intolerable regulatory burden on authorities turns the clock back 20 years and is not supported by evidence. Alternative measures such as codes of practice and voluntary charters have been shown not to work effectively – often because there is no capacity for a Commissioner to enforce compliance and hear appeals. Designation is not just about extending the reach of FOISA, but safeguarding vital rights to information."

The UK Government has already made its first designation order and is consulting with nearly 400 other bodies.The Commissioner's report recommends that Ministers should proceed with designation of those bodies already consulted in Scotland and a rolling review of designation be instituted to ensure rights to information keep pace with changes in the delivery of public services.

The Special Report sets out a number of other recommendations to clarify and strengthen FOISA, only one of which is being addressed by the Freedom of Information (Amendment)(Scotland) Bill which was announced by Ministers on 16 December 2011.

Mr Dunion said : "I believe my Special Report is particularly timely given the current consultation by the Scottish Government on a Freedom of Information (Amendment)(Scotland) Bill, and as an early contribution to the Government's intended consultation on a Transparency Agenda for Scotland in 2012."

One expensive ‘Tap on the Shoulder’ as Scottish judiciary chooses its new £214K a year plus expenses Lord President to replace retiring Lord Hamilton

Hunt is on to find replacement for Lord Hamilton who retires in June 2012. AS reflected in the current Lord President’s previous explanation of recruitment of members of the judiciary, where a friendly tap on the shoulder appeared to suffice, the Scottish justice system is again to tap someone else on the shoulder to fill the Lord President’s post upon the retirement of Lord Hamilton, the current Lord President in June 2012. An announcement from the Scottish Government reflects the position that bit-part-justice-player, “The First Minister”, has convened a selection panel, to choose the new Lord President, but only after the members of the selection panel were ordered to fill recommended for the post by the legal establishment.

Choosing a new Lord President (and 49 other ways to make potato waffles – Ed)

Following notification of the current Lord President, Lord Hamilton's, intention to retire in June 2012, the First Minister has established a selection panel to make recommendations for a new Lord President. That appointment process has begun today, 4 January 2012, with the office being advertised and applications being invited by 31 January 2012. The selection panel will interview shortlisted candidates and make a report to the First Minister with their recommendations shortly after that.

The selection panel consists of:

Sir Muir Russell (Chair), Chair of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland;
Professor Andrew Coyle, Lay member of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland;
Rt. Hon Lord Hardie, Senator (Inner House), and
Hon Lady Dorrian, Senator (Outer House)

The office of Lord President is the most senior judicial office in Scotland and the office holder is responsible for leadership of the entire Scottish judiciary, in addition to chairing the Board of the Scottish Court Service. The salary is £214,165.

The procedure for appointing the Lord President is governed by sections 19 and 20 and Schedule 2 of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008 and section 95 of the Scotland Act 1998. The 2008 Act requires the First Minister to establish a panel to recommend individuals who are suitable for appointment. The First Minister must have regard to the panel's recommendation but is not bound by it. Once the panel makes its recommendation, it is for the First Minister to make his nomination to the Prime Minister, after consultation with both the Lord President and the Lord Justice Clerk. The Prime Minister has responsibility for recommending to Her Majesty the appointment of a person as Lord President, but may not recommend any person who has not been nominated by the First Minister.

Sir Muir Russell was appointed as lay Chairing Member of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland in October 2008 for a period of three years and re-appointed in October 2011 for a further three years. He was educated at the High School of Glasgow and Glasgow University, where he took a first class honours degree in Natural Philosophy. He was Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Office and then the Scottish Executive from 1998 to 2003 and Principal of the University of Glasgow from 2003 to 2009.

Professor Andrew Coyle was appointed as a lay Member of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland in November 2008 for a period of three years and re-appointed in 2011 for a further three years. He is Emeritus Professor of Prison Studies in the University of London and Visiting Professor in the University of Essex. He was the founding Director of the International Centre for Prison Studies (1997-2005) and a former prison governor. Professor Coyle has a PhD from the University of Edinburgh and is a Fellow of King's College London. He is a member of the Foreign Secretary's Advisory Group on Torture Prevention.

The Rt Hon Lord Hardie was appointed as a Senator of the College of Justice in March 2000 and was promoted to the Inner House of the Court of Session in December 2009. Lord Hardie is a graduate of Edinburgh University (MA, LLB Hons) and qualified as a solicitor in 1971. In 1973 he was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates and he served as an Advocate Depute from 1979 to 1983 and Dean of Faculty from 1994 to 1997. He served as Lord Advocate from 1997-2000.

Hon Lady Dorrian was appointed as a Senator of the College of Justice in 2005, having served as a Temporary Judge since 2002. Lady Dorrian is a graduate of the University of Aberdeen (LLB). She was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1981 and was Standing Junior Counsel to the Health and Safety Executive and Commission between 1987 and 1994. She served as Advocate Depute between 1988 and 1991, and as Standing Junior to the Department of Energy between 1991 and 1994. Lady Dorrian was appointed Queen's Counsel in 1994 and between 1997 and 2001 she was a member of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.

Eligibility for appointment as Lord President is open to:

Serving Court of Session Judges
Sheriffs principal and sheriffs who have held continuous office for at least five years
Solicitors who have had rights of audience in both the Court of Session and the High Court of Justiciary for a continuous period for at least five years
Advocates of at least five years standing
Writers of the Signet of 10 years standing who have passed an examination in civil law set by the Faculty of Advocates two years before appointment

Lord Hamilton was first appointed as a Senator of the College of Justice in 1995 and was promoted to the Inner House of the Court of Session in 2002. He was appointed to the offices of Lord President and Lord Justice General in 2005. Lord Hamilton is a graduate of the universities of Oxford (BA, Worcester College) and Edinburgh (LLB). He was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1968 and was Standing Junior Counsel to the Scottish Development Department (1975-78) and the Inland Revenue (1978-82) He served as an Advocate Depute from 1982 to 1985.