A temporary sheriff was ''sacked'' after he made a statement to police which led to allegations of criminal conduct, a court was told yesterday.
Although a decision was eventually taken not to prosecute, the sheriff was informed that because of his ''admitted conduct'' it was not appropriate for him to continue to sit on the bench.
The case of the unnamed temporary sheriff was revealed at the High Court in Edinburgh by Solicitor General Mr Colin Boyd, QC, who provided what is probably the most frank and full public explanation so far of how temporary sheriffs are appointed and removed.
Temporary sheriffs play an increasingly prominent part in the Scottish criminal justice system and their role is being challenged by two West Lothian men who have been charged at Linlithgow Sheriff Court with assault and breach of the peace.
They claim that a hearing before a temporary sheriff is a breach of their human rights under the European Convention to a fair trial before an independent tribunal.
The argument is that a temporary sheriff, whose appointment is renewed every year, cannot be seen as independent because the job is at the mercy of the Lord Advocate, who is also in charge of the prosecution system.
The Scottish Executive intends to consult on the process of judicial appointments (including sheriffs) but, for the time being, the situation is the same as it had been for some years.
Mr Boyd explained that ''temps'' were introduced in 1971, and their use and significance for the Scottish justice system had increased over the years.
In 1985, Scotland had 88 permanent sheriffs and 61 temps. Today the numbers were 110 and 129. Temps did all kinds of criminal and civil work, mainly less serious criminal cases. In 1989 to 1990 their proportion of work was about 18% of the total, last year it was just under 25%.
Jobs for temps were advertised in the Scots Law Times and the Lord Advocate drew up a list of candidates to be interviewed. These were carried out jointly by a sheriff principal and a sheriff.
Reports on the interviews were sent to officials of the Scottish Justice Department and forwarded to the Lord Advocate, who then discussed the names with the Lord President of the Court of Session.
Mr Boyd added: ''I am advised that the present Lord Advocate places great store on the advice of the Lord President. He has not made an appointment in the face of opposition from the Lord President.''
The current Lord Advocate had appointed 58 temps. They held a commission which was renewable every year until they reached the age of 65. In practice, reappointment each year was virtually automatic.
However, that might not happen if there were doubts about his or her fitness for office.
Mr Boyd said he had been instructed by the Lord Advocate to give some details of examples where a reappointment had not been made.
''There was one case where a person holding a temporary commission made statements to a police officer that raised allegations of criminal conduct by the temporary sheriff.
''Crown counsel decided not to prosecute but an official on behalf of the Lord Advocate wrote to the temporary sheriff to the effect that in view of his admitted conduct it was not thought appropriate to continue to use him as a temporary sheriff.''
The individual concerned had challenged that decision but was unsuccessful.
Mr Boyd added that two other temps had been removed because of proceedings against them by the Department of Trade and Industry over their disqualification as company directors.
The broad test applied by the Lord Advocate was whether the person was fit to continue as a temporary sheriff.
The case is expected to last at least three days, with a written decision by the court at a later date.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article