A MORAL victory – that’s what my dad would’ve called it.
Two judges backed the Orkney Four on almost every point in their case against self-confessed liar Alistair Carmichael MP, but the suit narrowly failed to reach the threshold of near-certainty needed to prompt a by-election. Fiona MacInnes, who helped organise the People versus Carmichael crowd-funding appeal, was upbeat: “Look at the judgement. They’ve slammed Carmichael.” And Orkney Four member Tim Morrison was buoyant: “The ruling has vindicated everything we have done. Totally. Absolutely.”
And he’s right. Even if Radio Scotland unaccountably failed to cover their press conference live last night, most voters know that four Orcadians risked everything to question the cynical view that politics is just a game where lying and leaks are OK. That matters.
Against all the odds, and the smug conviction of most commentators, Lady Paton and Lord Matthews agreed Carmichael had a case to answer, legislation prohibiting false statements could apply to a candidate lying about himself, Carmichael did lie for the sole purpose of saving his own skin in Orkney and Shetland and told a “blatant lie” when he disavowed knowledge of leaks about Nicola Sturgeon before the General Election in a Channel Four interview.
All they couldn’t agree on – beyond reasonable doubt – was that Carmichael had lied as a person not a politician. This was always a bizarre distinction. It seems answering yes to a question like: “Mr Carmichael, did you leak the memo,” could leave the MP innocent but lying to: “Mr Carmichael, would you leak such a memo?” might leave him guilty.
In short, the innocence or guilt of Carmichael turned on the questions Channel Four happened to ask. Beyond bizarre.
Still, it’s a shame Alistair couldn’t have been more magnanimous in victory, talking of a politically motivated case “brought by nationalists”.
That’s rich. The complainants did indeed vote Yes in the indyref but come from a variety of party and no party backgrounds. And the only participant proven to have been politically motivated was Alistair Carmichael. That fine distinction is the only reason he isn’t facing a by-election tonight.
But sooner or later that moment may still come. Because have no doubt, Alistair Carmichael is an ex-politician. His career has ceased to be. If he wasn’t nailed to his perch as the LibDems’ Home Affairs spokesman he’d be counting the days till he can work again as a very special solicitor – one who has been called a “blatant liar” by two judges.
Never mind joining the bleedin’ choir invisible, Carmichael is already toast with no hope of a Monty Python-style comeback.
Because a small stack of questions now face the Carmichael camp.
Who will pay his costs? At one time it was suggested the LibDems would foot the bill, but the crowd-funder started by Carmichael’s friend and councillor Sheila Ritchie said the MP was personally liable.
Can he make his constituents pay, thus assuredly bankrupting them?
Much as he would doubtless like to, that also looks doubtful. In their transcript, the judges talked about Carmichael’s “unimpressive response to the inquiry” that “showed him in a bad light, resulting in his constituents being initially misled and then justifiably shocked and dismayed on discovering they had been so misled”.
Do these sound like judges likely to order four ordinary voters to finance Carmichael’s case?
Not really.
The Orkney Four’s own legal fees and their share of the court’s costs are likely to top £200,000.
But unbelievably, that represents a bare minimum. Apparently there were meetings where Carmichael was represented by a senior and junior QC and solicitors, while the Orkney Four’s case was made by a single solicitor.
Poor old Alastair may have gone on a legal spending spree he can’t afford. While the People versus Carmichael appeal is topping £175,000, his own has raised just £8,000 in three months. And there’s more.
The two judges were hearing the case on behalf of the UK Parliament. So their findings, judgement and a full transcript will be sent to the House of Commons, where they may interest the Standards Commissioner and her inquiry into Carmichael’s behaviour.
If her ruling prompts the Standards Committee to investigate and if they find him guilty of misconduct, the Speaker may suspend Carmichael as punishment.
And that opens up an interesting scenario. Under the recent Recall of MPs Act, the suspension of an MP for 21 days or more can trigger a by-election if 10 per cent of the electorate demand it by petition. Now of course, there are a stack of “ifs” in that sentence.
And according to the Cabinet Office the law is not yet active – nine months after its Royal Assent – but should be “enacted” in the new year, so Alistair might not be off the hook yet.
Meanwhile the Orkney Four have demonstrated that it takes nerves of steel, cussedness, courage, and friends to challenge lying MPs. And uphold the belief that MPs should give a toss about constituents beyond the short life of an election campaign.
Orkney Four claim ‘we won a defeat’ in Carmichael case
The National View: Pointless to expect this self-confessed liar to show shred of decency
Who are the Orkney Four?
The Orkney Four: Tim Morrison admits they're a rabble but not a political one ...
The Orkney Four: Cary Welling thought Carmichael implied he was above dirty tricks
The Orkney Four: Phaemie Matheson was fed up of MPS acting as if they were untouchable
The Orkney Four: Fiona Grahame cannot forgive Carmichael's continued deceit
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here