£10M Tax Cheat Voudouri fled Scotland while Crown Office & senior cops bickered over credit, promotions & bonuses for prosecution ‘result’

Convicted £10m tax cheat skipped £100m Lord Advocate after sentence deal collapsed. INFIGHTING between prosecutors, Police & tax officials over who could take public credit for jailing convicted tax cheat Michael Voudouri allowed the fraudster to easily flee Scotland after the collapse of a secret lighter sentencing deal done with Scotland’s £100m a year Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS).

The bizarre inter agency wrangling over bonuses, promotions, and even squabbles over the final wording of public statements after Voudouri was safely behind bars, came to light in a leak detailing the bitter recriminations being played out between the agencies who wanted to claim credit for putting Voudouri in jail.

In communications seen by journalists, several key players in the prosecution openly touted for promotions accompanied by higher salaries while others suggested they were “due bonuses for bringing the tax fraudster to justice”.

However, UK tax officials are said to have taken a dim view of the way the Crown Office handled the prosecution and poor presentation of evidence which led to prosecutors being forced to accept a guilty plea for much lesser amounts of fraud than had been alleged after thorough and hugely expensive investigations.

One tax insider branded the Crown Office handling prosecution as being so bad, that he felt such tax avoidance cases should be prosecuted in England & Wales by the Crown Prosecution Service, writing that the “Scottish Crown Office appeared to be riddled with strutting peacocks”.

Voudouri, who skipped bail after being found guilty, is thought to have fled to Cyprus, where newspapers tracked him down to various properties although he has since fled addresses in Cyprus attributed to him at the time.

At the heart of the case which led to the conviction of Voudouri was Q-Tech distribution, a company said to have made a fortune by claiming back VAT on false Europe-wide business transactions in a scam known as carousel fraud.

Prosecutors from the Crown Office said Voudouri was involved in funds being concealed and "removed from the jurisdiction of the Scottish Courts".

He set up bank accounts in Greece and Cyprus as well as limited companies across the globe to keep the cash away from the authorities.

Voudouri had been accused of laundering a total of £48.2m of money from Q-Tech. But the Crown accepted a guilty plea after the sum was reduced to £10.3m. He was bailed but failed to turn up for sentencing in November. Judge Lord Tyre immediately issued a warrant for his arrest after lawyer Vincent Belmonte said he had no way of contacting his client.

Voudouri was jailed for four years in 2004 when he admitted a £3m VAT scam although he was suspected of stealing 10 times that amount. He also admitted a separate charge of hiding £1.2m of dirty cash while he was serving a sentence in HMP Glenochil.

In June, a Proceeds of Crime recovery case against Voudouri had to be postponed for six months at the High Court in Edinburgh after the Crown admitted they had been unable to trace him. The court hearing relates to Voudouri’s Bridge of Allan home, which has been targeted under proceeds of crime laws.

Prosecutor Barry Divers told judge Lord Uist: “There are ongoing efforts being made to trace him and return him to this country for sentence and for completion of this confiscation.”

Earlier in March of this year, Voudouri’s lawyer Richard Housley and accountant Caroline Laing were jailed for six-and-a-half years for their part in an international money laundering network they set up for him.

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lindsey Miller, head of the Crown’s serious and organised crime division, said: “After an extremely complex investigation, today we have seen justice delivered to individuals who participated in money laundering and fraud on an industrial scale.

“The investigation into their crimes has spanned the globe, with our economic crime unit gathering evidence from companies and financial institutions in the UK, Greece, Cyprus, Switzerland, the US and the British Virgin Islands.

"This case powerfully demonstrates the ability of our specialist units to prosecute cases of the utmost scale and complexity and bring to justice all those who seek to benefit from crime.”

Recently the convicted tax cheat was put on HMRC’s list of most wanted list, becoming Scotland’s top target.

No one from the Crown Office or Police Scotland was available for comment.

Scotland in Crisis under Tory Union : Conditions so bad, Citizens Advice publish Survival Guide for Scots with no money & no food

Scotland ‘heading for Somalia conditions under David Cameron’ WELFARE & PUBLIC SERVICE CUTS forced on Scots by the London based Conservative Coalition Government of David Cameron are causing such hardship there are now tens of thousands of ordinary Scots who have no money, no food, no access to living space and little chance of help to overcome their circumstances.

The crisis in Scots personal living conditions has now become so bad that Citizens Advice Scotland along with the Citizens Advice Bureau in Stirling  have published a Survival Guide for Scots who have no money to buy food. Stirling CAB, a charity with volunteer workers, said it was forced to issue the document after being swamped by pleas for help from people left destitute and with no access to money or benefits after being hounded by DWP, ATOS and other Westminster based UK Government agencies.

The stark document is a response to growing numbers of people who are coming to the bureau in extreme poverty as a result of the ongoing recession and the UK government's welfare reforms. It gives clear advice on the number of foodbanks and other emergency services available in the area. Stirling CAB is the first in Scotland to launch such a guide, but Citizens Advice Scotland say that others may follow, as the same problems exist in all parts of the country.

Speaking at the event, Craig Anderson, Manager of Stirling District CAB said: “The increase in the number of people coming to CAB with emergency situations - no money, no food, no power has become a major problem in recent times and is rising sharply. It is indicative of a range of circumstances linked to the economic downturn and the reshaping of the Welfare system. The purpose of the research is to drill down into the root causes of the increase, explore user’s perspectives on the emergency situation and to provide a practical and useful response to help those in need.

"We are working here with a number of local agencies and charities to bring together all the emergency help that is available to people, and maximise the assistance we can give them."

Launching the ‘Survival Guide’, Margaret Burgess MSP, Minister for Housing and Welfare said: “I commend the excellent work of front line advice and support organisations, such as Citizens Advice Bureaux, in helping individuals and families in Scotland who are suffering the consequences of the UK Government’s cuts and changes to the welfare system.

“The rising number of people in crisis because of these reforms is utterly deplorable. That is why I am pleased to take part in the launch of Stirling CAB's Survival Guide for people who are in extreme poverty.

“The Scottish Government is doing all it can within our existing limited powers and resources - to mitigate the worst impacts, including providing an additional £7.9 million for advice and support organisations to help them cope with the increase in demand for their services as a direct result of these reforms.

“However, we can only do so much. Only with independence can we ensure that Scotland has a welfare system which reflects our values and beliefs and ensures fair and decent support for all.”

Stirling CAB’s Research Report reflects savage crisis across Scotland. CAS CEO, Margaret Lynch added: "Stirling is at the heart of Scotland, and the CAB service is at the heart of this community. The cases seen by Stirling CAB are typical of those seen by the CAB service across Scotland as a whole. Their work in putting together this guide is an example of the excellent service they provide - even if the fact it is necessary is a disgrace.

"Here in Stirling, as across Scotland, families are being pushed into poverty by the double whammy of the recession and the benefit cuts. The CAB sees people every day who haven't eaten, can't afford to feed or heat themselves, and are at risk of homelessness. In the past, the benefits system was a safety net for such people, to help them through those problems and make sure they didn't fall into total crisis. With the UK government's welfare reforms, that safety net is no longer there. That’s why this Survival Guide is necessary. It shows how the CAB is a vital service to this community, and quite literally a lifeline to those in need.”

"Sadly, I can report that other CAB offices across Scotland are reporting similar trends, and we expect that many of them will be publishing similar documents for their communities before too long."

Former Fife Constabulary criticised over delay in referral to Commissioner

The Police Investigations & Review Commissioner has criticised the former Fife Constabulary for the time it took to request an independent review of the way its officers handled complaints from a member of the public in relation to an allegation of theft.

The man had been subject to a police investigation over property he had that belonged to his former partner and whether it being held by him amounted to theft or if it was a civil matter. Between July and September last year this relatively straightforward ‘theft’ enquiry brought the man into contact with five different Inspectors, one sergeant, five police officers and the force’s own Professional Standards Department, something that the force itself acknowledged in its response was “completely disproportionate”.

It then took Fife Constabulary from November 2012 until February this year to ask the then Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland, (now the Police Investigations & Review Commissioner) to review the way they handled the man’s complaints. During that two and half month period there was no evidence of any work having been done to address the concerns expressed by the complainer in respect of Fife Constabulary’s response to the complaint. In his report published this week, the Commissioner observed that this ‘did not represent efficient complaints handing”.

The Commissioner’s full review report, found that three out of five of the man’s complaints had in fact been handled reasonably by the police. However, in a further  two, involving alleged incivility and disrespectful manner, the Commissioner found that the officers involved were not given sufficient information to allow them to understand precisely what was being alleged and as such it was not surprising that in both cases the information they provided was limited. The Commissioner has asked Police Scotland to carry out further enquiries and write to the man concerned with their findings.

Professor John McNeill said: “There are two learning points for the police arising from this case. First, when obtaining operational statements from officers who are the subject of complaints they must be fully informed of the nature of the allegations against them. Otherwise the officers cannot be expected to address the specific concerns expressed by the complainer.

“Secondly, any decision to refer complaints to me must be made timeously. In this case it took from November 2012 until February 2013 for Fife Constabulary to ask me to conduct a review, that does not represent efficient complaints handling.”

Feeling Presidential ? Law Society’s In-House Lawyers’ Group begins search for new ‘talent’, medal included

Being Law Society President was like.. IF you've ever wanted to know what it's like to be the president of the Law Society of Scotland, a new award for in-house lawyers is offering a chance to have a unique insight into the role. The new In-house Lawyers' Group Rising Star 2013 award In-house Lawyers' Group Rising Star 2013 award for in-house trainees and lawyers up to five years qualified, will recognise achievements by nominees who have made a positive contribution to their own organisation and beyond.

The In-House Lawyers' Group (ILG) of the Law Society of Scotland is searching for a newly qualified in-house lawyer who has added value and demonstrated innovation or legal process improvements in their organisation.

Sara Scott, the group's vice chair, said: "In-house lawyers work in a wide variety of organisations, local and national governments, but sometimes their talents are hidden as they are often behind the scenes. This is particularly true for more junior in-house lawyers.We believe there's a lot of unsung legal talent in the 25% of the Scottish legal profession that works in-house, and that's why we've launched this new award."

The nominations will be judged by a panel of leading lawyers, covering in-house, private practice, more recently qualified lawyers and independent lay people.

The winner will receive a trophy and two career development opportunities: spending time with Bruce Beveridge, to find out what life is like as president of the Society and get some insights from his career as a senior in-house lawyer; and, two free coaching for success sessions with a professional career coach.

Short-listed nominees will receive a free place at the dinner and a certificate.

To nominate a colleague or someone you know, complete the online form and send it with the nominee's CV to elainemacglone@lawscot.org.uk by close of business on 28 August 2013.

The award will be announced at the ILG annual dinner at the Balmoral Hotel, Edinburgh, following the group's annual conference at Murrayfield Stadium on 4 October.

Within this year's conference: "In-house in 2013 - innovative, in the know and in demand", sessions will look at:

Measuring and demonstrating in-house value in innovative ways
Navigating the changes within the dispute resolution process
Big data in a virtual world
The leadership roles of solicitors in business
Career development and the next generation

The conference will also explore what Scottish independence could mean for in-house lawyers and their organisations and what might need to be done to prepare for it.

The Society's Vice President, Alistair Morris, will address the conference, which incorporates the In-House Lawyers' Group (ILG) annual general meeting.

Law Society say consultation results on separate legal representation for buyers & mortgage lenders ‘to be close contest’

The Law Society of Scotland has announced that consultation results from the Survey on the issue of mandatory separate legal representation for buyers and their mortgage lender in property transactions show the jury is out on whether its members will vote for change at a special general meeting in September.

There were 279 responses from solicitors, consumer interest organisations such as Which?, and other interested parties including banks and building societies and the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML), on a proposed rule change which would mean that borrowers and lenders would each need to have their own solicitor. Currently the same solicitor can act for both buyer and lender.

The responses, which have been published today Monday, 19 August, showed 49% in favour and 51% against the proposed rule change as it was drafted in the consultation document.Alistair Morris

Alistair Morris, Vice President of the Law Society of Scotland, said: "Given the many changes that have happened in the property market, this has been an essential debate to have. For most of us buying a home is the biggest purchase we will ever make and it's important that people get the legal advice they need, that their interests are protected and that solicitors are not compromised in representing their clients."

At a Law Society annual general meeting in March 2013, solicitors voted in principle to remove the current exception to its conflict of interest rules and bring in mandatory separate representation in property transactions. As a result the Society must now bring forward a proposed rule change for its members to vote on at a special general meeting (SGM) on 23 September.

Morris said: "The high number of responses shows the level of interest in this issue and, while no clear consensus has emerged, the consultation has given us very useful feedback. This will allow solicitors to consider the issue further in advance of the SGM and take into account the views of their fellow practitioners and other stakeholders who have a key interest in this debate.

Mr Morris said that appetite for a change to the existing rules has grown in recent years.

He said: "There has been tremendous change within the property market since the financial downturn and as a result many lenders have introduced new requirements on solicitors representing the borrower, which has led to a significant move away from the 'execution only' approach of the past. Many solicitors now believe that the interests of the buyer client and their mortgage lender are no longer in alignment so, in order to represent their clients fairly and with true independence, there should be mandatory separate representation in both commercial and residential property transactions.

"It is the buyer who pays the fees and should be able to have absolute confidence and trust that their solicitor will put his or her interests first, rather than those of their mortgage lender who can have different requirements which need to be met."

Morris added: "We have actively sought the views of key stakeholders outwith the legal profession and are keen to engage with the lenders and their representative body to ensure that if there is a vote for change, this would be managed effectively to ensure that there would be minimal impact on Scotland's homebuyers.

"We were very pleased to get responses from Which? and the Council of Mortgage Lenders. Which? has stated that it believes the consumer should be better informed to  make the decision on whether they should have a separate solicitor from their lender and that there should be further discussion around solicitors only being able to act for banks on an 'execution only' basis, ie not providing legal advice to the bank. CML is opposed to the move, although some of their members are already practising separate representation.

"We are well aware of the fears that have been raised around potential for delay or possible increased costs for the borrower   While these issues have to be considered, we have calculated that any potential cost increase would be a small percentage at around 0.1% of the overall price of buying a new home* - if indeed the lenders do decide to pass on costs to their customers.  It's worth noting that, in the Republic of Ireland, where separate representation is mandatory, banks are legally prohibited from passing on their legal fees to purchasers.

"In response to the feedback we have received, the rule as currently drafted  is likely to be modified. However, prior to going before members at the SGM next month, it will be considered by the Society's Regulatory Committee and Council, before a recommendation is made.  Given the strong views that have been put forward during the consultation and the importance of the issue, it is vital that our members are as informed as possible and we would urge them to vote at the SGM ."

Solicitors voted at an AGM in March 2013 in favour of the principle of a change to the Law Society of Scotland's conflict of interest rules. Currently there is an exception to the conflict in interest rule, which prohibit a solicitor from acting for more than one client, to allow solicitors to represent lender and borrower clients in residential property transactions. If approved by the Law Society's regulatory Committee and Council, a draft rule removing this exception will be presented to solicitors at the Law Society's SGM on Monday, 23 September 2013.

The data was analysed in a number of different ways. Assessment of individual responses show 47.5% are in favour while 52.5% against. Responses from organisations showed 59.1% are for a change to the rule, while 40.9% are against.

* 0.1% is based on an average purchase price of ￡148,174 and the assumption that lenders' costs would be approximately ￡200, based on what some lenders already practising separate representation are charging.

For more information about separate representation and the proposed rule change see the website: http://www.lawscot.org.uk/seprep

Media, political & legal links drive deep in Rangers fiddle as Crown Office order Police investigation of Charlotte Fakeovers Twitter email leaks

A SERIES of leaks of private emails, documents & sound recordings between individuals involved in Rangers football club and the saga which ultimately led to the club’s demise into insolvency has prompted the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) to order Police Scotland to investigate the source of the damaging leaks - a Twitter account known as Charlotte Fakeovers (@charlotteFakes).

While Police Scotland are giving little away to media enquiries regarding the investigation, legal insiders have revealed the Crown Office became involved after lobbying from persons involved in the saga who have links to high profile political figures including First Minister Alex Salmond himself.

A legal insider called the content of the leaks “explosive”, and went on to describe the contents of one particular document which contained claims that knowledge of dirty secrets of newspaper editors could be used to block publication of stories relating to Rangers.

Other documents purport to relate to discussions about how to ‘go after’ and undermine journalists, bloggers, football fan forums and virtually anyone who may not see eye to eye with figures involved with Rangers football club and those around it.

While the Police Investigation into the leaks and their content has had little reporting in Scotland’s mass media, it has been revealed in the English media that a law firm acting for one of the parties identified in leaked documents now in the possession of Crown Office has forced the removal of some of the damning documents from the Scribd website.

The law firm involved is none other than Levy & McRae, who have among their clients, Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond, and his own personally appointed Ministerial complaints adviser & former Lord Advocate now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC (nee McPhilomy).

The Guardian :

Twitter email leaks about Rangers too hot for Scottish media to handle

An extraordinary story has broken in Scotland that has galvanised the country's media elite. Though it is the subject of much chatter among journalists, none of the mainstream outlets has reported it.

For months, a Twitter account known as Charlotte Fakeovers (@charlotteFakes) has been running a series of snippets from private emails between people involved in Rangers football club during the crisis that eventually led to its insolvency.

According to a well-placed Glaswegian media insider, the tweeter should be regarded as "the Julian Assange of Scotland". He said: "These revelations are explosive but I understand, in this post-Leveson atmosphere, why the papers are not publishing them.

"Though there is no proof either way, there is a feeling that the communications might have been obtained illegally."

In fact, according to a source familiar with the situation, there is no way the emails could have been obtained legally and the publication of them is a possible breach of the data protection act.

Scottish police are now investigating the Twitter account, a fact reported yesterday by one online news outlet that has dared to highlight the CharlotteFakeovers story, The Drum.

A police spokesman told The Drum's writer: "We can confirm that we did receive a complaint in connection with a Twitter account and police enquiries are ongoing to establish if there is any criminality involved."

Among people named in the correspondence are the club's former owner Craig Whyte, the man who masterminded its recreation, Charles Green, the club's PR, then and now, Jack Irvine, and even the political editor of the Sunday Times, Isabel Oakeshott.

The revelations have been acutely embarrassing for Irvine, who declined to comment. But a former colleague told me he believes the emails need to be seen in the context of Rangers problems and the consequent frenetic atmosphere at the time.

Irvine, who edited the Scottish Sun for three years from 1987, launched a PR company, Media House, some 20 years ago.

A legal firm acting for Irvine, Levy & McRae, did successfully request the removal of some documents from the website being used to host them, Scribd.

The Drum story quotes Channel 4 News's chief correspondent, Alex Thomson, as saying that the reluctance of mainstream media to report the story is related to the Leveson report.

Thomson was one of the very few reporters outside Scotland to cover the Rangers crisis in any depth. Indeed, mainstream newspapers in Scotland were slow to cover it too.

Instead, all the central revelations to emerge came from Phil Mac Giolla Bhain, who runs a blog and published a book, Downfall: how Rangers FC self-destructed.

The Drum :

Police Investigate Mysterious Charlottefakes Twitter Account Exposing Private Emails

Police are investigating a fake Twitter account which has been releasing a wave of private correspondences between some of the major players in the long-running crisis surrounding Rangers Football Club, including PR guru and Media House founder Jack Irvine.

For several months, the @CharlotteFakes account has been revealing private email and audio conversations between some of the key figures in the drama engulfing the club, including Irvine, former club owner Craig Whyte – who led the club’s descent into liquidation – and Charles Green, the chief executive of the entity created from the assets of the liquidated club. The account has acquired more than 13,000 followers.

A police spokesman confirmed to The Drum that a probe had been launched: “We can confirm that we did receive a complaint in connection with a Twitter account and police enquiries are ongoing to establish if there is any criminality involved. It would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”

It’s unclear how the information has been obtained but Scottish and national media outlets have steered clear of reporting it, while Scottish football fans have bombarded journalists with requests for coverage, claiming the information is in the public interest.

Media House executive chairman Irvine features heavily in the correspondence but declined to comment on the revelations when approached by The Drum.

Irvine founded Media House more than 20 years ago after a career spanning periods at Murray Media, the Scottish Sun, the Daily Record and the Glasgow Herald and the company has since expanded into London and New York. The PR man once described himself as “combative and aggressive”.

The PR firm was hired by Rangers in 2006 under Sir David Murray and kept on by Craig Whyte following his takeover of the club in 2011. Whyte bought the club for the sum of £1 and an agreement to pay off the club's banking debt.

It emerged some time later that Whyte had used future season ticket monies at the club to secure a loan from lender Ticketus and claims of Whyte’s billion pound wealth were without foundation. Months of crisis and a PR battle followed before the extent of the financial trouble at the club was revealed when it was placed in administration in February 2012, and liquidation four months later.

Although legal firm Levy & McRae successfully requested the removal of some documents from the website being used to host them, Scribd, the anonymous ‘Charlotte’ has continued to reveal streams of information despite the police investigation.

A spokesman for BBC Scotland said the broadcast of any information relating to Rangers must comply with guidelines: “Having aired two documentaries already you can probably imagine that we continue to receive a lot of information from various different sources on the Rangers story as we do with much of our newsgathering activity.

“The editorial criteria which is laid out in our editorial guidelines on verification of sources etc. would apply to any future news stories or docs that we proceed with.”

Channel 4 News chief correspondent Alex Thomson, who covered the Rangers tax story in some depth, indicated on Twitter that the reluctance to report was related to Leveson, leading to speculation the information may have been illegally obtained in the wake of the recent hacking scandal at the News of the World.

The Rangers story has taken a new twist with the emergence of ‘Charlotte’ and the recent revelations, although the account isn’t the first anonymous one to cover developments at Ibrox.

The Rangers Tax Case blog was a thorn in the side of the club during the first-tier tax tribunal over Rangers EBT tax avoidance scheme for paying staff. HMRC claims to be owed tens of millions from the club and the case is ongoing and under appeal after the tribunal ruled in favour of Rangers in a number of the disputed cases. The row led to an investigation by Scottish footballing authorities, which found the club guilty of breaching registration rules earlier this year. The Rangers Tax Case blog was awarded an Orwell Prize in 2011.

Openness for all : Decision makers including judges should declare Secret Society membership says new petition filed at Holyrood

A PETITION calling on decision makers from judges to tribunal members to declare their membership of all organisations including Freemasonry has been filed at the Scottish Parliament for consideration by MSPS. The petition, filed by transparency campaigner Thomas Minogue of Dunfermline, Fife, can be viewed online at the Scottish Parliament’s website HERE.

The Petition “calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to amend the law or codes of practice to make it compulsory for decision makers such as sheriffs, judges, and juries at their courts, arbiters, and all panel members of tribunals that are convened and held in Scotland and governed by devolved legislation, custom and practice, to declare if they have ever been members of organisations, such as the Masons, that demand fraternal preference to their brethren over non-brethren, or organisations which have constitutions or aims that are biased against any particular sect, religion or race.”

The petition further states : “That a register of such membership is held by the various bodies that supervise such judicial and quasi-judicial tribunals and that access to these registers is given on demand to the defendant, litigant, or plaintiff wishing to exercise their rights to a fair hearing in accordance with Article 6 of the ECHR.”

Further details given to MSPs by the petitioner, Mr Minogue, state : “In 2000 I petitioned the Scottish Parliament with PE 306 which was in a similar vein to this petition. Then, after having been under consideration for over three years with the parliament the petition was dismissed without reason.”

“The Public Petitions Committee summary of the petition showed that the committee had closed the petition in December 2002 when in fact the terms of the petition were considered by the Justice 2 Committee on 04 March and the Public Petitions Committee on 18 March 2003.”

“The latter anomaly has recently been corrected and the meeting of 04 March can be found here:http://archive.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/historic/justice1/mop-03/j2mop0304.htm”

“The meeting of the Justice 2 Committee, of 4th March, was  not insignificant. The Justice Minister Jim Wallace was questioned by the committee on my submissions regarding membership of the Speculative Society of Edinburgh and the Masons among the judiciary. The Minister said he had not had time to  read my submissions but he would do and revert to the committee. There is no record of this having happened.”

“Furthermore despite the fact that the committee had asked me to provide examples of cases where there was a perception that freemasonry had influenced a court or tribunal the committee did not publish the submissions I made in this regard. I believe that this censorship was draconian given that details of own case, Stott v Minogue 2000 SLT (Sh Ct) 25, & GWD 36-1386, - which spawned the petition – and the decision by the Social Security Commissioner, Ref: CSI/136/02. are in part matters of public record, or have been reported widely in the press and legal journals and are the two most important Scottish cases that deal with the influence of freemasonry in the justice system.”

“Having sought to determine my rights to challenge the existing law which allows nondisclosure of (secret) membership of fraternal organisations by decision makers by the courts, my elected representatives, and the previous government (which subverted the public petitions process), I am now attempting to resolve this anomaly with a new government, which claims to be open and accountable to the people of Scotland.”

The Closing Date for signatures supporting the aims of the Online Petition is 29 October 2013.

Law Society of Scotland demands policy say in indyref “or else Union will stay as we see it”

Unionists R’ Us - because its more profitable, says Law Society THAT crafty, old, and well known unionist institution, the Law Society of Scotland has set out what it sees as key questions for debate on Scotland's constitutional future. The questions, thinly disguised as a debate (something the Law Society is not good at, unless it is controlling it and any outcome), has set out a series of key questions on Scotland's constitutional future HERE in a discussion paper published today, Monday 5 August

The paper 'Scotland's Constitutional Future, views, opinions and questions' (or, Scotland as the Law Society wants it – Ed) aims to inform and add value to the current discussion on independence and constitutional reform.

It focuses on a number of critical areas including;

Scotland's membership of the European Union - including a call on both the Scottish and UK Governments to publish all Law Officers' legal advice on an independent Scotland's membership of the EU and other international organisations.

The impact of independence on the economy - including questions around currency, Scotland's share of assets and liabilities as well as taxation, financial regulation and consumer protection.

Judicial and parliamentary restructuring - including questions on whether an independent Scotland should have a written constitution and whether the current model and structure of the Scottish Parliament would work for an independent Scotland.

The Society's paper provides a detailed analysis of the potential impact of independence on specific areas of both devolved and reserved areas of law.

The paper also raises important questions about Scotland's future if the electorate choose to remain part of the United Kingdom, particularly around the process and timetable for agreeing possible further devolution of powers from Westminster to Holyrood.

Bruce Beveridge, President of the Law Society of Scotland, issued lengthy comments beginning with : "In just over a year we will each be asked to decide if Scotland should become an independent country. It is the biggest question for our nation in over 300 years but everyone, whether for or against independence, wants the same result - for people in Scotland to live in peace and prosperity.

"However there are many questions to be answered before September 2014, answers which would allow all of us to make a more informed decision about our future - from how our parliament should be structured, the currency we would use, what level of tax we would pay to cross border treaties and our relationship with other countries in Europe and around the globe.

"Membership of the European Union continues to be a vexed question. We think people should have more information about an independent Scotland's future membership of the EU and, while acknowledging the right of government not to disclose legal advice received, we think both the Scottish and UK Governments should publish the Law Officer legal advice they have been given to help provide clarity for voters."

The paper also raises the issue of whether the UK Government would support an independent Scotland's application to join the EU in the event of a 'yes' vote and asks what the Scottish Government would propose during a transition period, particularly if the negotiations for entry to the EU are not concluded in the time between a 'yes' vote and 'independence day'.

Separate from the issue of EU membership, the paper also raises questions around a written constitution for Scotland, whether the current Scottish Parliament would need reformed to take account of its new responsibilities and the possible powers of a Scottish Supreme Court.

Beveridge, again plying the Unionist agenda, said: "Any new constitution for Scotland would have to be by consent of the people and respect the principle of separation of powers between government and the judiciary to ensure stability. We are keen to see more detailed proposals about our parliament and government in the event of independence. For example, would there be a qualified majority for certain types of legislation or would we see the introduction of a second chamber at the Scottish Parliament to ensure a system of checks and balances?

"Among those we spoke to there was a clear preference to retain the existing court structure of the High Court of Judiciary, Court of Session and Sheriff Court. In addition, the Scottish Government has indicated there would also be a Supreme Court of Scotland. However there has been no definition of a Supreme Court's powers, how its independence would be guaranteed or whether the court would be able to strike down legislation - all things we believe we should know before we go to the polls."

The paper also presents questions for those who argue for Scotland remaining within the UK but with further powers devolved from Westminster to Holyrood.

Beveridge again, firmly on the Unionist side, said, "There will be many who want Scotland to remain part of the UK but are still keen to know if a 'no' vote means retaining the status quo or if there will be opportunity for change.  The pro-union parties should be providing information at this stage about the potential for further devolution of powers from Westminster and how the parties would form a consensus to allow these to be delivered. We want to know more about what other powers could be devolved to Scotland, in the areas of fiscal policy, welfare and constitutional rights, and the timescale for delivery."

Beveridge laughably added : "The Law Society is very firmly a non-partisan organisation so will not take a view either for or against independence - that is for people in Scotland to decide - but we want to contribute to the debate and to provide a platform for discussion outwith the political arena to help ensure a better understanding of the implications of either a 'yes' or 'no' vote.

"Such a debate has inevitably generated impassioned views - which will only intensify as we approach September 2014 - and it is essential that there is clarity on these and many other issues before we are asked to make our decision on Scotland's future. "I hope our paper helps inform the debate and stimulate further discussion on what becoming an independent state would involve as well as examine what it would mean to remain part of the UK as we move towards this historic vote.

Law Society of Scotland publishes guide on how to deal with disabled & vulnerable clients while avoiding complaints

Vulnerable clients should not be viewed as meal tickets THE client coming through the your office door seeking legal assistance may not always be 100% fit, as many solicitors are well aware. This is increasingly the case due to these times of increased financial hardship and lack of ability on the part of many clients to understand why a small issue ends up as a costly, and usually unsuccessful legal battle which drags on for years.

To address the rising numbers of complaints being made against Scottish solicitors by clients who have long term disabilities, mental health problems and other vulnerabilities, due in part to a common perception that some unscrupulous members of the legal profession are ‘taking vulnerable clients for a ride’, when they see them walk through the door, the Law Society of Scotland has today, 1 August, published three new guides, designed to support Scottish solicitors in meeting the needs of every single client.

The new guide Ensuring fairness and creating more accessible services will assist solicitors to comply with the Equality Act 2010 when providing services for people with a disability.

The new guide "Ensuring fairness and creating more accessible services" can be viewed HERE

Updated guidance on "Continuing and welfare powers of attorney" can be viewed HERE

New guidance on "Vulnerable clients" can be viewed HERE

According to Law Society research, around a third of households in Scotland (34%) contain at least one person with a long-standing illness, health problem or disability. In recognition of this important group, the Law Society asked Capability Scotland to develop a guide to assist solicitors who work with clients who have a disability. The guide is full of useful cases studies, based on real life experiences to remind solicitors that behind the legal need for compliance and the rules of the Society, it is also important to consider the particular circumstances of every single client.

The Society has also updated its guidance on "Continuing and welfare powers of attorney" following recommendations from the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland. In considering these recommendations, it quickly became apparent that the issues identified by the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland were relevant to a much wider range of matters. Accordingly, the Society has created entirely new "Vulnerable clients" guidance to help solicitors respond to clients who may be at risk of impaired capacity or possibly subject to undue influence.

Bruce Beveridge, President of the Law Society of Scotland, said: "We are committed to supporting Scottish solicitors in meeting the needs of every single client and providing the best service possible. These new guides will equip solicitors with the necessary information to advise clients, whatever their personal circumstances may be."