The UK’s top law adviser has launched an unprecedented attack on the Scottish Government as the row over the UK Supreme Court escalated.
Advocate general Jim Wallace accused the SNP of potentially “telling the courts what to do” amid continued controversy about the impact of the court’s rulings on the independence of Scots law.
His comments came the day after First Minister Alex Salmond announced a new expert group is to consider ways of addressing the perceived problem.
Mr Salmond was highly critical of the court when it ruled on May 25 that Nat Fraser’s conviction for murdering his estranged wife Arlene is unsafe.
The Supreme Court previously sparked controversy when it determined the Scottish system allowing people to be held without access to a lawyer for six hours was in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Supreme Court can only rule on human rights matters in relation to Scottish law, but Mr Salmond has argued Scotland should be like other European countries and be able to deal with Strasbourg directly.
It emerged on Wednesday that justice secretary Kenny MacAskill is considering withholding funding from the court to make his point.
“He who pays the piper, as they say, calls the tune,” he said.
However, in an unusually politicised response on Wednesday night, Lord Wallace, a former Scottish Liberal Democrat leader and deputy first minister, questioned why Scots should not have the same human rights protection as the rest of the UK.Unhelpful rhetoric”I don’t think some of the rhetoric over the past few days has been very helpful,” he said.
“As a lawyer I feel strongly that a fundamental pillar of our society is the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary is central to that.
“Surely Scottish ministers are not telling the courts what to do when they talk about pipers and tunes?
“I certainly hope not.”
He added that going to a court in Strasbourg for a human rights ruling would take longer and cost more money.
“Why is that preferable to a UK court that has two of the foremost Scottish judges of their generation?”
Lord Wallace also pointed out that he had already had an expert group look at how the Supreme Court functions with respect to Scotland.
That group, which included Paul McBride QC and a former lord advocate, concluded the Supreme Court should be maintained to “ensure that fundamental rights” are secured for everyone in the UK.’Disservice’Lord Wallace said, “This group received evidence from eminent bodies such as the Faculty of Advocates, the Law Society and the Commission on Human Rights, who all wanted to retain this right of appeal to the Supreme Court.
“The Supreme Court has made clear as recently as last week in the Fraser ruling that the High Court in Scotland remains the court of last resort on criminal matters. I sometimes wonder if those who are the most vociferous have read these rulings.
“I will be interested in what the Scottish Government and their new expert group have to say, but I imagine that if they take evidence from the same people they will hear the same argument.”
A Scottish Government spokesman said the expert group would consider “all possible solutions.”
Tory leader Annabel Goldie said, “Alex Salmond does a disservice to the real underlying issue of how ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) appeals in Scotland should be heard.”
Labour justice spokeswoman Johann Lamont added, “It is increasingly clear this is driven by the SNP’s hostility to the United Kingdom, not by the interests of justice.”
Photo used under Creative Commons licence courtesy Flickr user umjanedoan.