The UK Human Rights Blog from 1 Crown Office Row continues to provide good analysis of human rights law with their recent round up: Even the judges are getting angry
A very comprehensive review of recent caselaw and discussion in blogs, podcasts and the press.
“I hear the QC appointments are due out at the beginning of March,” said TheCreep at chambers tea yesterday.
“Do you think they’ll finally take sympathy on UpTights?” said OldSmoothie.
“It’s about time,” said BusyBody. “She’s been applying for years.”
BabyBarista wonders about Abolishing QCs on this day when the new QCs are announced. The Lawyer reports: Clifford Chance’s Popham becomes honorary QC as 120 take silk
The judges are worried…. “Queen’s Counsel experienced in criminal law diminish and ultimately disappear, it will have serious implications at both ends of the profession. Those with ambition and talent who are seeking to enter the profession are likely to avoid criminal work and to look to specialise in other areas.”
Exclusive: Secret attempt to end appeals in Scots courts
The HeraldScotland reports: ” THE Scottish Government has expressed concern after Advocate General Lord Wallace secretly tabled clauses to the Scotland Bill to move appeals for Scottish criminal cases to the UK Supreme Court. The move could end centuries of tradition of appeals being held in Edinburgh.”
While civil matters in Scotland may be heard by way of final appeal in the UK Supreme Court, criminal appeals have been heard in Scotland and the UK Supreme Court does not deal with these appeals. The HeraldScotland notes: “The Coalition Government is expected to unveil plans that may usurp the High Court of Justiciary as the ultimate court of appeal in criminal cases.”
Scots judges, of course, sit as Justices of The UK Supreme Court and many Scots judges, Lord Reid, to name but one, made a significant contribution to the law of the United Kingdom in The House of Lords. I have fond memories of Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office  AC 1004 from my days as a law student. The Wikipedia entry notes…”He was one of very few men to be appointed a Law Lord straight from the Bar, without any intervening judicial experience.”
The Scots won’t like this idea…but is it such a bad idea? Perhaps my Scots lawyer friends and fellow bloggers and tweeters can cast light to my English law based darkness on this matter?
The HeraldScotland reports: Former High Court judge Lord McCluskey said: “This is a substantial constitutional issue. Generations of lawyers have practised Scots law in the belief that Scottish courts were the final court of appeal.”
However, Paul McBride QC, a member of the working group that examined the proposals, said: “It is a very sensible move. If people do not want appeals being heard outside Scotland, then they should not support the European Convention on Human Rights. It is also important to note that Scottish judges sit on the UK Supreme Court.”
Lallands Peat Worrier is on the money with this observation on the ‘issue’…
There are a number of stratagems which the villainous might devise to trample over the integrity of ancient Scottish institutions and impose Union-uniformity where once flourished independence and diversity. Making those plans generally available by publishing them freely online does not, I dare say, cut a particularly Machiavellian caper when it comes to the sensitive art of Union statecraft. It robs the mischief of all finesse. It suspends suspense.
And another one… Eighth resignation in day of turmoil: McGovern resigns over Society “gagging”
While English lawyers question the value of The Law Society of England & Wales (I shall return to this issue at another time) members of The Scottish Law Society Council appear to be resigning on a regular basis….
The Firm has the story.
AND finally… The Guardian…
While Cameron, using prose more suited to an American politician, called for Gaddafi to go…and threatens military action – action which may well not be supported by his Lib-Dem chums? – I cannot help but wonder why we don’t take the same stance, for example, with the Chinese in Tibet, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, The Iranians….. and quite a few more regimes around the world……
The Americans, of course, are not keen for the mercenaries killing people in Libya to be indicted and sent to the ICC. That would set a very awkward precedent.