Your quote is partial and omits (I hope accidentally) the definition of the purview of the SC.
The full text is:
Preliminary
1
In this Schedule “devolution issue” means—
.
(a)
a question whether an Act of the Scottish Parliament or any provision of an Act of the Scottish Parliament is within the legislative competence of the Parliament,
.
(b)
a question whether any function (being a function which any person has purported, or is proposing, to exercise) is a function of the Scottish Ministers, the First Minister or the Lord Advocate,
.
(c)
a question whether the purported or proposed exercise of a function by a member of the Scottish Executive is, or would be, within devolved competence,
.
(d)
a question whether a purported or proposed exercise of a function by a member of the Scottish Executive is, or would be, incompatible with any of the Convention rights or with [F1EU] law,
.
(e)
a question whether a failure to act by a member of the Scottish Executive is incompatible with any of the Convention rights or with [F1EU] law,
.
(f)
any other question about whether a function is exercisable within devolved competence or in or as regards Scotland and any other question arising by virtue of this Act about reserved matters.
Saying “it’s not the highest criminal court in Scotland” doesn’t negate the statement “it is the highest court in Scotland”. No-one here is confused about the role of the UK Supreme Court in Scotland.
You have, repeatedly, provided cites that under certain circumstances, one can appeal to the Supreme Court if convicted under an illegal Scottish law, and if successful, that law must be changed, and a new trial held under the corrected law.
If you wish to claim that doesn’t constitute an appeal in the criminal justice system, fine. That doesn’t change the fact that the Supreme Court is the highest court in the UK, with jurisdiction over the Scottish Government.
You are correct that it isn’t the highest criminal court in Scotland. But then, no-one has been claiming otherwise, so your constant, increasingly shrill, repetition of that statement and cites to that effect is pointless.
Oh, look, a PDF issued by the Supreme Court which details its purview in Scottish Law:
“In Scottish criminal cases, the High Court of Justiciary sitting as an appeal court is the final court of appeal. Its decisions are not subject to review by the Supreme Court, which reflects Scotland’s distinctive tradition of criminal law and procedure. However, there is one limited exception to this rule: the Supreme Court may consider ‘devolution issues’ arising in Scottish criminal cases. Some devolution issues arising in criminal cases have now become ‘compatibility issues’ under the 2012 Act. However, it remains the case that the Supreme Court may not review the decisions of the High Court simply on matters of Scots criminal law.”
You have provided nothing which says that there’s a higher court in Scotland which can overturn Supreme Court decisions, or force the UK government to change laws.
Please either a) concede that the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land or b) show a court in the UK that can overturn its decisions, or require a change to the laws on which it bases those decisions.
Yes, we know. What part of that do you think we don’t understand? You are simply posting further cites which say precisely what AK84 and I have been saying all along, and contrary to what you are saying.
Considering that AK84 is trained in British law, called to the bar in England, and has practised criminal law as a barrister in the UK, I’m going to give much more weight to his interpretation of British law than pjen’s.
My original statement was carefully worded as an elephant trap for you. As confirmed by the Supreme Court site, the SC is NOT the final court of criminal appeal in Scotland; the SC plays no part in the process of Scottish criminal law, only in deciding administrative issue regarding devolution.
I repeat the exact wording of the Original Post:
"Criminal Court Procedure in Scotland
Let us start by the final court of appeal in Scottish Criminal cases. Steophan erroneously holds that there is a criminal appeal process from the Scottish courts to the Supreme Court.
I maintain that the Supreme Court is the final court of appeal for Scottish Civil and Administrative Law, but that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over Criminal trials- and that one cannot appeal to the Supreme Court on a matter of verdict or sentence from the Court system in Scotland.
The Supreme Court only trumps Scottish Law over Administrative and Civil matters. Otherwise the High Court of the Justiciary is the final criminal appeal court in Scotland and the Supreme Court in London cannot hear purely criminal appeals."
It looks like you are now agreeing with the OP!
Probably a good idea as you are now aware of the Supreme court statements on the matter which are in exact accord with my original post.
“In Scottish criminal cases, the High Court of Justiciary sitting as an appeal court is the final court of appeal. Its decisions are not subject to review by the Supreme Court, which reflects Scotland’s distinctive tradition of criminal law and procedure. However, there is one limited exception to this rule: the Supreme Court may consider ‘devolution issues’ arising in Scottish criminal cases. Some devolution issues arising in criminal cases have now become ‘compatibility issues’ under the 2012 Act. However, it remains the case that the Supreme Court may not review the decisions of the High Court simply on matters of Scots criminal law.”
Except that the whole point at issue is one of Scottish Criminal Law which is not taught in England, is very different from English and Continental law.
The Supreme Court itself states clearly that it is not the final criminal appeal court for criminal matters in Scotland. Before 1998 since time immemorial, the House of Lords had no remit in Scottish Criminal Law. Only after 1998 did it take over from the Privy Council the role of deciding issues of administration between the four nations.
Not a single cite for the SC being part of Scottish Criminal Law has been adduced, whereas the UKSC website specifically states that it is not the court of appeal for Scottish criminal law.
Studying English Law is very different from studying Scottish Law which is of its own nature and differs in multiple ways from English Common and Statute law.
No, I do not. I have never held that view, nor have I expressed that on this board, and I’ve repeatedly posted my agreement with your statements to that effect.
Meanwhile, you have repeatedly ignored my question as to which Scottish court is higher than the UK Supreme Court, which court the Scottish government should appeal its decisions to. I maintain that there is no such court within the UK, hence the Supreme Court is the highest court in the UK.
Do you intend to answer that question, or simply ignore it and continue to produce cites for a position everyone here agrees with?
Do you maintain that anyone can appeal from the Scottish Court system to the Supreme Court if they believe that the decision of the highest Scottish Court is disputed by them, as is possible from the English Appeals Court?
No court is higher in the Scottish criminal justice system than the Scottish Appeal court of the High Court of the Justiciary. The SC has no jurisdiction over criminal matters in Scotland.
What the 1998 act does give the SC is the power inherited from the PC to decide on devolution and administrative issues between the home nations and under UK wide treaties.
There is no right of appeal to the SC over Criminal Decisions, only over compliance issues with devolution matters or external treaties. This is NOT part of criminal law, but to do with the administration of law and government.
To give you a clear example, a person convicted under Scottish Law has no general appeal beyond the Scottish Courts unless he can raise a matter regarding devolution or external treaties. That is administrative law, not criminal justice.
I would point out that the very concept of British Law is an oddity. Scottish civil law is separate in many aspects from English law but the final court of appeal in civil cases is the Supreme Court. However, Scottish and English Criminal law have never been integrated. No part of English criminal law has effect in Scotland and no part of Scottish criminal law has effect in England. There is no “British” criminal law, save for those Statutes adopted in both nations. Trials and Appeals from these parallel laws go to their appropriate final criminal courts- the Appeal Court in Scotland and the Supreme Court for the rest of the UK.
So you agree that (as per their website) the SC is not part of the Scottish Criminal Justice system, but that they do have limited powers in making decisions about administrative and devolution issues as a successor to the PC.
Very true. I have no qualification in Scots law. However, this is not a matter of Scots law. This is a matter of constitutional law, which is a UK wide subject and one which I certainly do have training in.
Firstly, the UKSC was formed in 2009, pursuant to the Constitutuonal Reform Axt 2005.
(Your start dates, are all over the place, from 1994, 2005, 1998, all incidentally wrong).
Secondly, you have no idea what “Administrative” law is. As is clear from your posts. It appears you have read a couple of article, picked up a few terms and now emply them with scant regard to the technical meaning and usage. (Another example, calling a statute “treaty obligation” which it is not, and calling the JCPC, a body which decided “administrative” disputed between home nations, which it most certainly is not). Administrative Law is a matter brought before a Court challenging decisions of public bodies. It is a distinct part of law from criminal law and procedure (to illustrate an example of how wrong your claims are, Administrative actions brought in Scotland before the Court of Session, NOT the HCJ), and is no more like criminal law than maritime law is the same as family law.
Finally, you are adamant about your point, but unfortunately for you, the cites you bring up , expressly state that there is an exception to the general rule. Comparability and devolution issues.
The UK SC is superior to Scottish courts on civil and administrative matters but not on criminal matters. Administration of Criminal Justice is administrative law, not criminal law. The SC has no remit over Scottish Criminal cases, merely over Scottish legislation and government procedures. It can find that Scottish Criminal law conflicts with internal or external legal requirements but it cannot change or order change in the verdicts or sentences passed by Scottish Criminal courts.
In all that irrelevant nonsense, you still haven’t actually answered the question at hand - what court in Scotland do you maintain is higher than the Supreme Court?
Literally everything you’ve posted in the last 6 posts since I posted is stuff that everyone in this thread is agreed upon. The only point that still needs answering, since you maintain that the SC is not the highest court, is what court is higher? You are still dodging that question.
I have already, repeatedly answered those questions, even though they are irrelevant to the question that started this thread. You falsely claimed that the Supreme Court was not the highest court in the UK, and bring up irrelevant cites about the nature of criminal justice in Scotland as though it has any relevance. The answers, once again, to your questions are A) because it isn’t and B) no. One cannot appeal to the SC, except when they can.
Now answer my question. To what UK court can the Scottish government appeal a ruling by the Supreme
Court? There must be one, as you claim it is not the highest court.
Look, no-one here is confused about the fact that Scottish criminal law and criminal justice are separate. But that has literally nothing to do with the question here - that question being “is the Supreme Court the highest court in the UK”? And the answer being, pending a cite otherwise, an emphatic YES. Every single one of your cites clearly states that it is.