A challenge to Scotland's temporary sheriffs could herald copycat actionsagainst the
judiciary elsewhere in the UK when the Human Rights Act isintroduced, a constitutional
expert claims.Barrister Neil Addison predicted in The Lawyer (23 March) that the
actcould invalidate 90 per cent of the judiciary in England and Wales sincethe way in
which the Lord Chancellor can remove circuit judges, recordersand magistrates, means
they cannot satisfy the Article 6 requirement of an"independent and impartial
tribunal".He warns that Article 6 threatens the validity of the Lord Chancellorsitting
as a judge because he is a Government minister and also thevalidity of the House of
Lords because theoretically, any member can hearLords cases."Although convention
dictates that only Law Lords hear cases, conventionsare not legally binding and human
rights legislation looks at theory notpractice," he says.He says the only answer is for
the Government to set up a judicial councilto hire and fire the judiciary.The
introduction of the act into Scottish law last month promptedLivingston law firm, Keegan
Smith to challenge the validity of Scotland's130 temporary sheriffs.Keegan Smith
partner, Iain Smith, says: "This is a landmark case. If weare successful it will have
a huge impact on Scotland's judicial system.Courts will grind to a halt."The issue is
due to be decided on Friday.Roseanna Cunningham, SNP legal affairs spokesperson, says:
"This will setthe cat among the pigeons if it is upheld. The Scottish system has come
torely heavily on temporary sheriffs and this may skew the way justice isdelivered in
Scotland."A Lord Chancellor's Department spokesman says: "We don't see any parallelwith
our situation. In our system, all judicial appointments are madestrictly on merit. There
is no political element to that, only that theLord Chancellor is a politician as well
as being the head of thejudiciary."He says the Government has not ruled out a Judicial
AppointmentsCommission, although it is not a priority.