FM broke ministerial code, thread
FMs foreword to code: "guidelines for living up to seven principles of public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty & leadership...All Scottish ministers, including myself, are bound by its terms." [1/10]
FMs foreword to code: "guidelines for living up to seven principles of public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty & leadership...All Scottish ministers, including myself, are bound by its terms." [1/10]
Under the section 'Ministers & Government' the code states, unambiguously, the obligation 'to ensure that the Government acts lawfully at all times'.
It is sub-section 'Taking Legal Advice', 2.30. [2/10]
It is sub-section 'Taking Legal Advice', 2.30. [2/10]
What did we learn from legal advice ScotGov received relating to the Judicial Review? We learn that First Minister is in clear breach of the obligation to 'ensure gov't acts lawfully at all times' & is 'informed by appropriate legal considerations at earliest opportunity'. [3/10]
How do we know this?
1. ScotGov knew by Oct 31st that their harassment procedure had been unlawfully applied. The Investigating Officer (IO) should have had NO PRIOR CONTACT with a complainant as per their procedure. But this was revealed as not being case. [4/10]
1. ScotGov knew by Oct 31st that their harassment procedure had been unlawfully applied. The Investigating Officer (IO) should have had NO PRIOR CONTACT with a complainant as per their procedure. But this was revealed as not being case. [4/10]
Yet ScotGov & the FM pressed ahead, despite having clear legal advice they were seriously at risk of being in breach of their obligation to act lawfully at all times. [5/10]
By December 17th, the FM & ScotGov were *still* persisting in contesting the Judicial Review. Their own legal team were warning them *as a matter of law* the IO choice was *indefensible*. Roddy Dunlop QC wrote: [6/10]
But, what is utterly remarkable, is in Dec 17th we learn the First Minister was insisting they 'plough on regardless notwithstanding the concerns' their legal advice was telling them. [7/10]
The case was not conceded by ScotGov until January. After running up huge expenses for taxpayers by having courts, lawyers etc working on runup to Xmas. [8/10]
This shows the FM knew her gov't had acted unlawfully; by misapplying their procedure relating to the IO choice; as early as October. But had persisted all the way until January. [9/10]
'To ensure the government acts lawfully at all times'.
'decisions informed by the appropriate analysis of legal considerations'
'legal implications of any course of action are considered *at the earliest opportunity*'
Conclusion: the FM broke the ministerial code. [10/10]
'decisions informed by the appropriate analysis of legal considerations'
'legal implications of any course of action are considered *at the earliest opportunity*'
Conclusion: the FM broke the ministerial code. [10/10]
Addendum: By Oct 31st FM knew her govt had misapplied their own harassment procedures regarding their choice of IO. By Dec17th the FM knew it was a fundamental problem for Judicial Review.
She ignored all of this until collapsing the case in Jan. *"at the earliest opportunity"*
She ignored all of this until collapsing the case in Jan. *"at the earliest opportunity"*
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
