Independence of solicitors under threat, MSPs warn

CONCERNS about the independence of solicitors under new legal reforms have been highlighted by MSPs, stoking a growing rebellion of lawyers that could split the Law Society of Scotland.

In its report on the Scottish Government's Legal Services Bill, the Holyrood justice committee warned that ministerial involvement in the regulation of lawyers could result in a "potential lack of independence" for the Scottish legal profession.

That is a fear held by a growing band of lawyers who are unhappy at the Law Society's handling of the reforms and have forced a referendum on whether it should continue as the representative body for solicitors.

Non-lawyers will be permitted to own law firms for the first time in "alternative business structures" (ABS) that will be subject to a new regulatory regime yet to be confirmed. The Legal Services Bill will allow ministers to approve the regulator, issue guidance on its functions and step in should no suitable organisation be found.

It will also permit the government to decide on the make-up of the society's ruling council, by installing lay members and allowing it to intervene should an "adequate number" not be included.

Those changes are already the subject of a dispute within the profession that will see a vote held on the society's representative function after 50 members signed a formal requisition.

The committee report, published yesterday, gave a "guarded" welcome to the reforms, but noted the divide in the legal profession and recommended a greater role for the Lord President, Scotland's most senior judge, in approving the new regulator to ensure independence from ministers.

But critics indicated the MSPs' report did little to allay their fears. John McGovern, president of the Glasgow Bar Association said MSPs were "realising too much government control of the Law Society". He said: "The report doesn't change our stance on the referendum. The principles of ministers being able to set the proportion of non-solicitor members to council and being able to set the criteria means the government retains control of the council."

And Robert Pirrie, chief executive of the WS Society, who remains neutral on ABS but has backed the referendum, said independence was still "of real concern": "That concern has been growing within the profession as the debate progresses. The representation of solicitors is being recognised as one of the bulwarks protecting the independent ethos and culture of solicitors."

Bill Aitken MSP, convener of the justice committee, told The Scotsman: "In legal matters, it is essential that insofar as is possible there should be a detachment from government and the administration of justice. Sometimes of course this cannot be possible, but the involvement of Scottish ministers must be at a minimum. I am sure that the justice committee and the parliament will do everything possible to ensure that Scots law remains independent."

Meanwhile, Law Society president Ian Smart welcomed the greater role of the Lord President, adding: "Throughout the ABS debate the society has maintained that independence of the profession is essential.

"Regulation is absolutely key to how these new business entities might operate and the Society is consulting all 10,500 members to be able to give their input into what types of business models could be permitted and also how they should be regulated."

Elsewhere, the committee raised fears opening up the legal market to banks and supermarkets could hit the consumers the reforms were intended to help. Mr Aitken said the potential loss of high street firms that could occur could be "detrimental" to those seeking legal services.