subject: Power of Scottish Police to Question Without Access to a Lawyer finally ended [print this page] Power of Scottish Police to Question Without Access to a Lawyer finally ended
It's taken two-and-a-half decades but finally detainees in Scotland now have the same protection under the law as the rest of the United kingdom (and the majority of legitimate democracies). The Supreme Court ruled this Tuesday that detained suspects have the right to access a lawyer, and denying them that right is in direct violation of the European Commission on Human Rights.
Scotland's legal system has many fine qualities; the ability of police to hold and question a suspect for up to 6 hours without allowing that person access to legal counsel not being one of them. Virtually everywhere else in The European Union have the authority to supply legal advice to their clients in questioning solicitors in West London, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, Rome, and pretty much everywhere else in Europe have the power to offer their clients legal counsel while being questioned. The case the Supreme Court ruled on is known as the Cadder case. It involved a Glasgow adolescent who was convicted of assault, and had been questioned without access to a lawyer.
The scope of the legal implications of the ruling has pressured the Scottish government to begin burning the midnight oil. The most apparent and detrimental side effect is that 1000's of prisoners, who have been convicted at least to some extent because of evidence gained through questioning without access to an attorney, might have the chance to have their convictions overturned as well.
The Scottish Parliament has started drafting legislation that will bring Scotland in line with the European Commission on Human Rights. The changes are estimated to cost Scotland around 4m a year.
While judges and lawyers in londoncheered, many Scots were less than pleased with the decision. The Scottish Justice Minister, Kenny MacAskill, said with regard to the Supreme Court decision: "a decision we did not seek but it is one to which we must respond". Agreeing with Mr Mac Askill for once, The Shadow Justice Secretary conveyed his displeasure that the Supreme Court would rule in a way that might invalidate numerous taped confessions.
The Scottish perception that the decision is yet another instance of the English sticking their nose where it doesn't, however, may be the underlying issue behind the opposition to the ruling. Regardless of the truth value of this viewpoint, basic human rights must be positioned above small minded national squabbling. It is well past time Scottish legal community embraced this attitude along with virtually every judge, lawmaker, Buckinghamshire solicitors and the continent.
welcome to Insurances.net (https://www.insurances.net)
