Letter: Time to retract

AS AN association, we wrote recently on our concerns over remarks made by the justice minister, Kenny MacAskill.

It is a matter of some regret, we consider that the First Minister, Alex Salmond, has entered into and conducted openly a debate relevant to the Supreme Court in a manner displaying equally as boorish conduct as that of the justice secretary.

We applaud Cameron Ritchie, president of the Law Society of Scotland, and Richard Keen, QC, Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, for issuing a joint statement on this matter. Their comments are appropriate and, in particular, we agree that there is a need for the First Minister, and the justice secretary, to "carefully reflect" on the consequences of what are perceived as, and what are in fact, highly personal attacks on respected members of the legal profession.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Political mudslinging and name calling may be commonplace in Holyrood, but add nothing to intellectual or legal debate on constitutional matters, the judiciary, courts, lawyers roles or the law generally.

Perhaps it is now time for the First Minister, after mature reflection, to retract the unacceptable personal attacks and to heed the very wise "advice" proffered to him by both the Law Society of Scotland the Faculty of Advocates.

Kenneth J Waddell

Glasgow Bar Association

Glasgow

John Scott Roy (Letters, 18 June) correctly notes that Article XIX of the Treaty of Union prohibits any court in Westminster Hall from reviewing sentences of Scottish courts.

My letter (14 June) speculated about the identity of the third flower on the UK Supreme Court logo, wondering if it could be a kind of convolvulus. Appropriately, the common name for convolvulus is "bindweed" - a garden pest which is very difficult to get rid of and which tangles itself around useful plants.

Another possibility is flax, for Northern Ireland. That still leaves out Wales. But maybe under English law Wales, having been annexed, is part of England.

David Stevenson

Blacket Place

Edinburgh