A major
apology to all blog readers that I have not been posting recently. The reason
is simple: I have been in the final stages of completing my book about the
Scottish judges, called The Justice Factory, and subtitled: “Show me the judge
and I’ll tell you the law”.
Naturally I
commend this fascinating book to all blog readers! It is available both in print form from Amazon and in electronic form on Kindle. Readers interested in the English language might find
something useful in it too because I have devoted quite a bit of space to considering
the language of law.
As you will see from Lord Denning’s quotation below (see 5
December post), law in one sense is nothing more than language. But few people
understand how it can be that the phrase “all men” can have had so many totally
different meanings in the United States courts from time it was used in the Declaration of Independence
until today. This is just one example, and it is explored in depth in Chapter 7.
Below I
give a very brief outline of the contents of the book. To the right, is a
picture of the cover.
I hope some
of you will think it worth reading. If so, I look forward to hearing your
reaction by email.
The Justice
Factory: Content Guide
The
Introduction explains the purpose of the book, which is to present a picture of
the personality and character of the senior judges in Scotland while comparing
them to judges in England and the United States. Where judges have scope for
making independent decisions, the character of the judge is both important and,
in a democracy, a subject of legitimate public concern.
Also
explained is the attempt by the most senior judge in Scotland, the Lord
President of the Court of Session, to prevent the author getting access to
judges. He failed, with the result that this is the first book to be published
in English which describers the business of judging, from both a practical and
a jurisprudential point of view, in the words of the judges themselves.
Chapter
One (“The Law as Guardian”) describes the best of judging, US v Nixon (1974) the “Watergate” case,
in which a body of judges managed to defeat an attempt to frustrate the rule of
law by the assertion of unlimited executive privilege on the part of the then
President, Richard Nixon.
Chapter
Two (“The Law as Theatre”) describes the worst of judging, telling the story of the Engineers’
Trial in Moscow in 1933, which was controlled by the Stalin in order to defeat
the ends of justice and play politics with the liberty of six Britons and
twenty Russians accused of “wrecking”.
Chapter
Three (“The Law as Codified Custom”) tells the story of two Scottish cases of
interest to the theme of the character of judges being relevant to the way in
which judicial power is exercised in a humane jurisdiction. The first case
concerns a disputed flower garden on a croft in Shetland, and the second one
the presence of a lamb which was alleged to be infringing the rights of the
millionaire owner of a 200,000-acre estate in the Highlands by nibbling the
grass which he required for the deer he wanted to be able to hunt.
Chapter
Four (“Judging as it Was”) tells the story of four interesting Scottish judges, Lord Braxfield in
the eighteenth century (Scotland’s “hanging judge”), Lord Cockburn in the
nineteenth (the first architectural conservator of Edinburgh), and, in the
twentieth, Sheriff Bill Hook (how he reacted to being called “a fucking
bastard” in his court) and Lord Murray (who believes that Britain’s nuclear
deterrent is deployed unlawfully).
Chapter
Five (“The Business of Judging”) describes in the words of the judges themselves what life is like on a
day-to-day basis for judges in Scotland, the pressures they are under, both
from the heavy work-load and a civil service which seems uncomfortable with an
independent judiciary, and raises the fashionable cry of “accountability”,
which would be in direct conflict with judicial independence.
Chapter
Six (“Perception of Judging”) examines some common but inaccurate ideas of how the judiciary
operates, taking one of Ian Rankin’s “Rebus” novels as the source for the
popular attitude. This is set next to an author interview with Mr Rankin in which
these prejudices are discussed, and more interviews with judges in which
Inspector Rebus’s allegations are answered, and some questions raised about the
honesty of the police.
Chapter
Seven (“Judging and the Letter of the Law”) explores public misconceptions about legal
certainty. Words mean what we take them to mean, and that must change over time
otherwise life in an evolving world would grind to a halt. The example used is
the shifting definition of “all men” in the US Declaration of Independence and
Constitution over two centuries of social and political change.
Chapter
Eight (“The Future of Judging”) explores the vexed question of how we choose our judges. If they are
genuinely independent they cannot be controlled, so the choice of candidate is
vital. How is this done in Scotland and the United States? What does the
fu8ture hold for the Scottish Bench?
Chapter
Nine (“Passing Sentence”) describes what happens to criminals when they go to jail, and wraps up
the argument that it is the judges who, in practice, define the law—which is
why the character of the men and women on the Bench is such an important issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment