Scots law should be ‘simpler and cheaper’
Cameron Ritchie: Scots law should be 'simpler and cheaper.'
SCOTLAND’S adversarial legal system is “time-consuming, complex and expensive” and justice should be quicker, simpler and cheaper, according to the president of the Law Society.
In an interview for The Scotsman’s law pages today, Cameron Ritchie said it is time to examine how courts can best answer the important questions – not get caught up in a “ding-dong battle” that does not always serve the interests of justice.
Mr Ritchie, who worked as a senior procurator fiscal, suggests that a move away from adversarial justice to a more inquisitorial approach could help in specific areas – such as complex cases involving fraud, health and safety or tax issues.
“In some complex cases, juries are being asked to take in masses of information and apply it to very often complex charges,” Mr Ritchie said. “It’s not condescending to say they must find it difficult.
“Real issues can get lost in masses of evidence. It’s incredibly difficult for a jury and it is capable of leading to a miscarriage of justice in either direction. A jury could cut through it [complex charges and evidence] and say ‘guilty’ ”
He suggested giving juries a tighter, more focused role: “There are jury trials in inquisitorial systems, where juries decide a series of [specific] issues. I would prefer this to juries having the whole of the evidence dumped in their lap, being given an exposition according to the law and asked to come back with a verdict. From a procedural point of view, it’s a total lottery. I think we could take things a step further by presenting a jury with a number of very clearly set-out issues.”
Mr Ritchie also questioned the overwhelming use of oral evidence.
He said: “It is a nonsense everything is done orally. We need to start thinking what we are trying to achieve. I don’t pretend to have all the solutions but I’d like to see us not get so tied up in nostalgia for what a wonderful system we have that we forget to progress.
“Courts should be designed to focus on the key questions and how we answer those questions – not get involved in what can be a ding-dong battle.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Alan Pattullo: Dignity, not sanctimony, is required at Parkhead
- 300 jobs at risk as Ryanair axes five Edinburgh routes
- Suzanne Pilley trial: I kissed her goodbye then never saw her again, says would-be lover
- Rangers administration: Craig Whyte’s promise to step aside and hand Rangers over to fans ‘ludicrous’
- David Cameron is playing into the SNP’s hands, says Michael Forsyth
- Scottish independence: Spectre of border controls raised by top Tory
- David Cameron is playing into the SNP’s hands, says Michael Forsyth
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond hits back at Tory ‘Bourbons’ in battle over devo-max
- Scottish independence: Anti-Scottish jibes boost separation, Michael Gove warns Right
- Scottish independence: Let Scotland vote on independence in 19 months, says Michael Moore
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Thursday 23 February 2012
Today
Light rain
Temperature: 7 C to 14 C
Wind Speed: 26 mph
Wind direction: South west
Tomorrow
Sunny spells
Temperature: 5 C to 10 C
Wind Speed: 29 mph
Wind direction: West
Comments
There are 24 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
tartantt
Tuesday, January 24, 2012 at 12:19 AMWell done Mr Ritchie for having the courage to say what most of us think, & your voice may carry some weight, unlike the man in the street. Others have made the point that the law & justice do not equate. It is a game that lawyers play, & justice is denied to those who do not have substantial funds. The Procurator Fiscal Office is an utter disgrace, & anyone who has had the misfortune to be involved with them, will know what a shambles they are. Where are you, Mr Justice Secretary? Keep going Mr Ritchie, you speak for the vast majority, & I wish you well with all my heart.
vistaero
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 10:34 PM12 Strict Ivan Jellicoe Excellent truthful and factual comment about the Corrupt Legal System and Judiciary in Scotland. Most Sheriffs and Judges make up laws as they go along in cases, Judges and Sheriffs do not make up Laws, it is Parliament that makes Laws, Judges and Sheriffs enforce the Laws Parliament make, not make up corrupt Laws which they think they should do to defeat the People of Scotland.
Russell M
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 09:15 PMA benevolent dictatorship or monarchy would be the simplest and cheapest of all. What the supreme leader says goes. All they would need is a team of mandarins to implement policy and we've already got plenty of those. Except we've already tried something similar and this generation's benevolence can just as easily turn into the next generation's despotism. Maybe we could afford justice if the oligarchy wasn't skimming all the profits. Burns said it best, "bought and sold for English gold-Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!" And maybe Bertrand Barère de Vieuzac adds something worthwhile as well, "The tree of liberty grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants." As the reorganization of the United Kingdom approaches we will see all kinds of rats.
vistaero
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 05:02 PM5 Kon That is what the Corrupt Law Society of Scotland has been telling everyone for the last 40 years, but an American Law Professor a few years ago did an in depth report into the Scottish Legal System and the Law Society of Scotland and its members, and it was described as the worst and most corrupt Legal System in the WORLD.
vistaero
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 04:55 PM19 Simonsaid I do not want you to read my lengthy postings, if that Crook who alleges he is the President of the Law Society does not know how to reform the Legal Profession, perhaps he can do the honourable thing and resign, and pay me to reform the system, or pay me as a Consultant to reform it. He does not want anything reformed, the Legal Profession is screwing everyone for all they can, does anyone think he is going to reform the Legal Profession Gravy Train, like the Bankers they have a monopoly and a licence to screw us all. And recently our Corrupt Lord Advocate refused to prosecute 13 Solicitors that defrauded the Scottish Legal Aid Board of hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money, now wasn't that another surprise.
Simonsaid
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 02:42 PM#18- vistaero – So you have told us at length what everyone already knows, that our legal eagles are a bunch of Overpaid and underworked scam merchants. Perhaps you could tell us how you would make them less overpaid and less underworked – and this may be more difficult for you – could you do it in a couple of short paragraphs please as I haven’t got all day to wade through another of your lengthy posts
vistaero
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 02:06 PMIs this some sort of a SICK JOKE from this Baboon. SCOTLAND’S adversarial legal system is “time-consuming, complex and expensive” and justice should be quicker, simpler and cheaper, according to the president of the Law Society. Well let me give this windbag some advice which he will not like or take on board. He is allegedly the President of the Law Society of Scotland, and obviously has no influence or power over the Policy and Practice of this corrupt organisation. He is trying to make the Public think he is interested in them getting justice and affordable Legal Representation, when nothing could be further from the truth. How could he achieve this even if he was remotely interested in doing so. 1. Order his 10.000 Solicitor members to reduce the exorbitant hourly fees which are between £150.00. per hour to the unlimited fees of the most corrupt of its members to £40.00. per hour, so that everyone can afford Legal Representation. But he has no powers to do that, how can someone on the minimum wage afford up to £500 or £600 per hour plus VAT. 2. He will say that those that cannot afford Legal Representation can get Civil & Criminal Legal Aid, that would be a lie. 3. Even if they qualified or got Legal Aid that is no guarantee that a Solicitor will take any case for someone, if it is against another Solicitor they will not take the case, or if it is against the Police, Procurator Fiscal, Lord Advocate, Government, MSP, Local Authority, Doctor, Hospital and the list goes on and on, it does not matter is they have a cast iron case, they have a memorandum of understanding with 100s of organisations that they will not take any action against them for anything for anyone. 4. So his statement that SCOTLAND’S adversarial legal system is “time-consuming, complex and expensive” and justice should be quicker, simpler and cheaper, according to the president of the Law Society. That happened because of the Law Society of Scotland, being dishonest, incompetent and corrupt, protecting dishonest, incompetent and corrupt Solicitors that defraud clients of money, homes, businesses and savings. (ie KENNEDY FOSTER) who the same Law Society of Scotland protected for over 10 years. 5. Why do the Law Society not have a record of all Solicitors that have had complaints lodged against them with the Law Society of Scotland, or that other Criminal Protecting Organisation SLCC. Because if they kept a record and made it public you would have no Solicitor in Scotland that did not have a complaint made against them. 6. When you want to take out Insurance for your car, home, contents or anything else you have to give details of the claims you have had in the past so many years, why do Solicitors not have to give the same details to any client that requests it, and that he can go to a register to verify if the information is correct, but this register could and not be kept by the Law Society or SLCC, as they are dishonest organisations. This is just a joke from this President of the Law Society, if he really wants this for the Public, then tell him to put his mouth into practice in the interest of the Public he is allegedly stating he wishes to help. The Law Society of Scotland will be in contact with the Scotsman's in-house Solicitor immediately this comment is posted, instructing them to have this comment immediately removed, as the Law Society of Scotland is not interested in anything that will bring the Legal Profession in Scotland into any type of TRANSPARENCY OR ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PUBLIC, He allegedly states he is concerned about.
Simonsaid
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 01:19 PM"Scots law should be ‘simpler and cheaper" Not to worry come independence it will become obsolete as oor Great Leader is a great admirer o the ECHR
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 01:08 PM"It’s incredibly difficult for a jury and it is capable of leading to a miscarriage of justice in either direction. A jury could cut through it [complex charges and evidence] and say ‘guilty’ ” ....... Anyone who says something like that doesn't understand what the process is all about. This man should know that the fact that making decisions can be difficult is one of the reasons why juries have more than one member. Why does he have to assume that everyone is an idiot who is incapable of rational thought? Perhaps it is time for him to retire.
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 01:04 PM"I would prefer this to juries having the whole of the evidence dumped in their lap, being given an exposition according to the law and asked to come back with a verdict." I totally, completely and utterly disagree. The process of trial by jury is one of the last bastions where the facts are fully considered and weighed up as opposed to applying daft "rules of thumb" that are pitched at nursery school level. We already have the situation in some courts whereby those presiding are prepared to listen to some of the most outrageous cr@p and treat it as true just because someone with a white coat and a string of letters after their name says so. In many courts the decisions are also politically influenced. .... I have served on a jury I wouldn't have been informed enough to make a decision had I not been presented with all the facts. Dumbing down trial by jury should be avaoided at all costs. The suggestion is ridiculous.
Jossman
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 11:12 AMAs a Management Services Practitioner of over 40 years standing, I am always amazed when, at the start of a trial, it can be stated how long it will last. Who does this fantastic piece of work measurement? Have they counted how many words a lawyer speaks in a minute and then calculate a total time for the job? How do they know how long the Defence will speak? How do they know how long the summing up will take? I’d really like to know how they get a time for this piece of work and with such accuracy. Invariably when they say I trial will last 6 weeks, that’s exactly how long it takes. I must admit that I am inclined to think that the science is based on how much the lawyers’ next holiday or new house will cost and the Job Time calculated from there.
samcoldstream
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 10:02 AMIn 2003 - 2010 the cost of Criminal Legal Aid in England and Wales soared to £1.4 billion, although by 2009 - 2010 it fell back to £1.2 billion! The English Justice Minister Kenneth Clarke, has already submitted proposals to parliament to reduce this Criminal Legal Aid sum. Clarke, himself a barrister, has found great resistance from the English and Welsh legal profession. (Source: www.parliament.uk website and The Guardian Datablog))
Strict Ivan Jellicoe
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 09:35 AMhttp:www.bbc.co.uknewsuk-scotland-tayside-central-16654504 A 45 years old man who raped a 14-month-old girl and posted the images on the internet has been jailed for four years. On 3 May 2000, the trial of the two Libyans, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah, accused of the downing of Pan Am Flight 103, began in The Hague. Megrahi was convicted of murder on 31 January 2001. Scottish law was hailed as a triumph throughout the world. Luke Mitchell was convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment for the murder of Jodi Jones. He is about to launch his 7th appeal – all paid for from legal aid ; the tax payer – you and me -now costing millions of pounds. The law is an ass. Our justice system is the best in the world! Crap! Are you having a laugh? Our justice system is the laughing stock of the world. In our justice system, criminals are victims and victims are criminals. There is a cosy club in the professional judiciary of getting professional criminals off at whatever cost, or getting them lenient sentences, so that they can get out quickly, re-offend and keep the extremely well paid legal profession in their secure and well-paid jobs. It makes perfect sense. Most of the extremely well paid members of the judiciary are able to live in nice houses in nice areas and send their children to nice school well away from where much of the trouble occurs. They are laughing all the way to Sir Fred Goodwin’s bank.
AndrewJohnYounger
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 08:44 AMLaw Society claim their membership is too expensive? And the laws that they interpretate are filled with complexity? Obvious we require soviet Scotland, and all court rooms to be moved to purpose build concrete buildings, each with offices available for those legal practitioners. Offices shall double as a home, thus saving the client a fortune, food from a set menu and should be centrally cooked and the economy of scale, feeding all, heating all, problem no more. All that beautiful architecture that houses many a solicitors office now empty ready for demolition and given to the peoples pension fund holders and room for a new supermarket. Complexity, only for those whom are unwilling to learn law. Perhaps if you could medicate - the problem of complexity, we all could be cured. Would that without choice be lawful, and who needs law, take a pill and watch the surgeon's television channel - funny how they refuse to drug themselves to enable complex tasks while at work.
paulr
Monday, January 23, 2012 at 08:33 AM"serve the interests of justice" Why do people constantly make nonsense statement about justice? The law has nothing to do with justice, justice is a fantasy, an unreachable ideal which is totally separate from the law and the courts. The laws in this country were created to protect property and land owners. To protect them from the unwashed masses who had this ridiculous idea that they were human and had a right to live.
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.