CYNICS who fear Scots law becoming a legal land fit for personal injury lawyers in the wake of the overweaning compensation culture which many observers feel is now rife in Scotland will not be reassured to read your report that compensation lawyers are advising the Scottish Government on legislation to reform fatal accident inquiries ("Widow of tug skipper hits out at inquiry delay", The Herald, December 20).
The current Scottish Government has been commendably robust in resisting siren calls from the personal injury solicitor lobby on matters such as necessary rises in civil court administrative fees and, some would say, in declining to fix or extend public or judicial inquiries willy nilly. In the view of many informed observers, private firms of lawyers should not in general be asked to draft or assist in the drafting of legislation in which they may have a stake for their clients but no more of a stake than many other bodies or varied interest groups or firms.
Gus Logan, WS,
24 Coates Gardens, Edinburgh.
THE Scottish Government's consultation paper reflecting proposals to abolish the not proven verdict and corroboration has breached the peace of the Scotland's legal fraternity ("Outcry forces ministers to look again at law reforms", The Herald, December 20). Apparently, the proposals are another example of the "anglicisation" of Scots law – thereby implying that any aspect of English law is, by definition, inherently inferior compared to the merits of Scots law. It is, of course, arguable that the not proven verdict and the principle of corroboration broaden the concept of justice but that is not an argument for the quaint notion that anything "English" is necessarily an affront to the integrity of Scotland's legal system.
That kind of parochial thinking directly contributed to the humiliation of the Scottish legal establishment after the judiciary marginalised human rights law to dismiss Peter Cadder's contention that his rights had been breached by the failure of the police to provide timeous access to a lawyer, subsequent to his arrest. A unanimous decision by the Supreme Court overturned the peculiar decision of Scotland's highest criminal court and thereby protected the human rights of the laity.
A hermetically sealed legal system might foil the "anglicisation" of Scotland's legal system but if such a system prevailed, the Cadder decision would not have been overturned, Scotland's legal system would be fundamentally tainted and the potential for miscarriages of justice would be significantly enhanced.
Thomas Crooks,
81 Dundas Street, Edinburgh.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article