SCOTLAND’S most senior judge was claimed a bid to make the bench more transparent would help “paranoid” litigants wreak revenge after losing their cases.
Lord Carloway, the Lord President, also claimed that requiring judges to disclose their financial interests would deter lawyers from applying for the £180,000-a-year positions.
He told MSPs it would be a “powerful disincentive” for talented legal minds.
Lord Carloway was giving evidence to Holyrood's petitions committee, which is considering a petition from law blogger Peter Cherbi to create a public register of interests for judges.
Mr Cherbi argues it would aid transparency in public life, and bring judges into line with other public officials.
However the move has been fiercely resisted by the judiciary.
Lord Carloway told MSPs such a register might help vengeful litigants, especially those representing themselves, perpetrate online fraud against judges.
However he admitted he could not point to a single example of a judge or other public official being the victim of online fraud after declaring their financial interests.
He said: “Judges are in a peculiar position in relation to this matter. They make decisions which inevitably cause disappointment to one party to a litigation, and they can be resentful.
“The losing party can in some extreme cases blame the judge for the failure of their case and seek to find a reason beyond actual decision as to why the judge found against them.
“It is not unknown for persons to form a malicious or hostile intent towards a judge, or even judges in general, if they are disappointed with the outcome of their case.
“They can become paranoid or suspicious about the reasons for what is a simple finding of fact in law by the judge.”
After insisting the Scottish judiciary was “not corrupt”, Lord Carloway was asked why a register of interests should deter would-be judges, when it worked perfectly well for MSPs.
He said: "We have a relatively small pool of lawyers of excellence who are capable of taking on the job of being a member of our senior judiciary.
"We have particular difficulties with recruitment at the moment. If I were to say to senior members of the profession, 'By the way, if you wish to become a judge you will have to declare all your pecuniary interests and open them to public scrutiny', I have no doubt whatsoever that that would act as a powerful disincentive for lawyers of experience and skill becoming members of the judiciary.
"I can assure the committee, we need them more than they need us."
He went on: "Until such time as it's demonstrated that there is corruption within the Scottish judiciary, I'm entirely satisfied that there is no requirement for a register of interests and that it would be positively detrimental to the administration of justice, particularly in relation to the recruitment of judges and especially at the higher level of the judiciary."
Mr Cherbi told the Herald he thought the Lord President’s remarks had been “waffle”.
He said: “Transparency apparently stops at the doors of our courts. All other branches of public life have registers of interest and do just fine on recruitment.
“Lord Carloway doesn’t seem to consider the fact that the litigants he appears to hold in such disdain prop up his £220,000 a year job, and bring our courts exorbitant fees and hundreds of millions in publicly funded legal aid."
Moi Ali, a former Judicial Complaints Reviewer, added: “The judiciary can take away people’s assets, separate families, and lock people away in prison.
“ Given this position of power, it is essential not only that they have absolute integrity, but crucially that they are seen to be beyond reproach.
“A register of interests is a way of demonstrating that a judicial office holder is impartial and has no vested interest in a case. It is good for the judiciary and good for the public.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel