Michael Kelly: Unjust condemnation from the mean-spirited SNP

Rejecting plans for an international centre of justice in Scotland on political grounds exposes the party's insular nature, writes Michael Kelly

This is a proposal to export Scotland's legal skills and enhance our reputation for excellent jurisprudence

How many Little Englanders do we have in the SNP? Former Labour defence secretary Des Browne reveals plans to set up a centre for international conflict resolution in Scotland. This is a thoughtful idea that in future will help countries such as Rwanda, Iraq, Afghanistan, Columbia and Cambodia establish domestic systems of justice in the aftermath of conflict. It will also enhance Scotland's international reputation for its efficient and speedy judicial process.

Yet the duty thug of the Scottish Government - this weekend it just happened to be Bruce Crawford - played the man and not the ball by condemning the idea because it came from a former member of Tony Blair's government.

But the concept has intrinsic value. Those who watched Naomi Campbell's performances at the Charles Taylor trial will be convinced that this long, expensive process needs eventually to be replaced by systems based in the country where the crimes were said to have been committed. If a British citizen were to be accused of genocide he wouldn't be sent to The Hague. He would be tried here. In many post-conflict countries that is impossible because the systems of justice in such desperate places are not sufficiently robust. How much more satisfying for the victims and their relatives in Sierra Leone if Charles Taylor could be tried in Freetown where some of them could be present.

The International Court has brought a measure of retribution to tyrants. But it must surely be seen as an interim measure. Our aspirations for justice should be higher than the remote deterrent of a laborious trial in Europe in a court with linguistic problems, poorish judges and overpaid counsel. Cambodia has taken a step forward by agreeing "internationalised domestic tribunals" where local and foreign judges will sit within the Cambodian justice system to hear war crimes of the Khymer Rouge dating back to 1975.

Mr Browne argued in the James Wood Lecture at Glasgow University (so no need to guess where the centre is likely to be set) for the developing of like systems. He points out most insurgencies are based on perceived unfairness. When the physical conflict has been resolved the nation has to rebuild fairness. The West, when it suits to interfere, is good at training armies and can often produce a workable civil service.

What it finds difficult to do is establish local justice systems, partly because western jurists do not understand local needs and, trained in Judeo-Christian concepts of law are suspicious of other forms - thus the deep distrust of Sharia Law. Yet the domestic successes of al-Qaeda and the Taleban were based on their introducing justice that was accepted as fair to areas where none had existed before. And sometimes the efforts of the West have a touch of comic opera about them. Thus the Italians have been handed the task of building a system of justice in Afghanistan when their own isn't yet fit for purpose.

The most effective systems of justice are those which produce outcomes which are accepted as fair in the local community. Systems based on fairness rather than on preconceived notions of justice have worked well in many post-conflict situations when faith in the nation's former system has collapsed. In South Africa the Truth and Reconciliation Commission allowed the nation to move on without meteing out "just" penalties for the widespread abuses of the rule of law perpetrated by the white minority racist regime or by the necklace gangs of the ANC. The freeing of Northern Irish terrorists if they had served two years was controversial at the time. But it was an essential part of the successful peace process which has established stability and seen very few of these criminals resort to their old behaviour.

The Rwandan genocide of 1994 saw 800,000 people massacred. Now 120,000 of the alleged perpetrators languish in jail. The recent successful elections show a country well on the road to recovery. The government is now strong enough to allow traditional community courts, called gacaca, to speed up the trial process which western-style courts would take years to process. Suspects are taken to the village where the crime was said to have taken place and confronted directly by their accusers. A key part of the gacaca process is that released prisoners must ask forgiveness for their crimes. The trials are not overseen by legally qualified judges but local people respected for their integrity- the village elders.

An effective justice system is essential to nation-building. You cannot build a police force without it. Without accountability the police officers interfacing with criminals are easily corrupted. And it is not just criminal justice that must be administered. The economy will not work without effective civil courts. No international investment will be attracted to countries lacking independent systems to resolve commercial disputes.

While Rwanada offers an excellent example, most post-conflict countries simply do not have the infra-structure to develop such systems. This is where Mr Browne's proposal comes in - to establish a centre for research, post-graduate degrees and, eventually, under-graduate degrees in the subject where the international student will learn lessons to be applied at home.

But why Scotland? First, because our ten years of devolution are seen internationally as a just way for solving regional difficulties peacefully. Thus it has been suggested as a model for dealing with similar problems in the Turkish part of Kurdistan.

Secondly, our justice system is small-scale and non-threatening unlike that of England or the US. Thirdly, Scotland is not seen as a colonial power. Finally, speaking English, rather than Dutch, for example, always helps.

This is a proposal to export Scotland's legal skills and enhance Scotland's reputation as a country of excellent jurisprudence. It should coincide precisely with the ideals of the Nationalists improving Scotland's internationally standing while establishing an educational growth area. It was welcomed on its merits by Unionist Sir Menzies Campbell. Yet by their dismissal of it on personal grounds, the SNP once again give us a hint of how insular and mean-spirited their version of Scotland is.