SCOTLAND’S most senior judge Lord Carloway, the Lord President, will give evidence in public to the Scottish Parliament’s petitions committee later this month.
Though previous Lord President, Lord Gill, gave evidence after he left office, Lord Carloway is believed to be the first Lord President to give evidence to the petitions committee while in office. He and Lord Gill have given evidence to the Justice Committee in the past.
Lord Carloway addresses the committee on June 29 and answer questions on the long-running issue of the proposed register of judicial interests which legal campaigner and blogger Peter Cherbi first submitted as a petition more than four years ago.
Cherbi’s petition seeks to have Scotland’s judges register interests such as shareholdings in the same way that MPs, MSPs, most councillors and senior police officers do.
Cherbi said: “I am pleased to hear Lord Carloway has agreed to appear at the Scottish Parliament’s public petitions committee to face what I trust will be a robust series of questions and substantive debate on why judges feel they are immune from the same laws and expectations of transparency by which the remainder of society must live.
“Initially I was concerned Lord Carloway would not appear, as the Lord President wrote to MSPs in early November stating he was of the opinion the debate on a register of judicial interests was closed, and then asked to be given sight of questions he may be asked before he would agree to meet the committee.
“Perhaps instead of delaying the proposal any further, Lord Carloway will reflect on his views, and those of his predecessor Lord Gill, do the right thing and create a publicly available register of interests for members of the judiciary.
He added: “Given the responsibility of the judiciary as the head of the justice system to uphold justice and adhere to so called ethics and principles we so often see lying broken by the roadside, it is now time to bring the most powerful branch of the justice system and the executive into line with public expectations of transparency and apply the same rules to them as apply to others in public life, by requiring judges to declare their interests in a publicly available register as occurs in many other jurisdictions around the world.”
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