Challenge to Dunblane 100-year secrecy order
Sunday Herald, The , Feb 9, 2003 by Marcello Megaand Neil Mackay
MSPs are to demand access to the police report into Dunblane mass- murderer Thomas Hamilton, which has been placed under a public secrecy order for 100 years fuelling concerns that the unprecedented decision was taken to protect high-profile figures connected to the killer.
The Lord Advocate, Colin Boyd QC, is to be lobbied for public access to the report. Lawyers say the decision to suppress it for 100 years is "extraordinary" and open to legal challenge.
There has been long-running speculation that prominent Scots were closely connected to Hamilton. He is believed to have met a number of well-known individuals through his Freemasonry.
However, the Masons have always denied he was a member. Frank Cook, a former MP, has said that he received information that Hamilton joined a Glasgow lodge in 1977 and attended meetings until 1986.
Officials say the police report was closed to protect the identities of children Hamilton abused, named in the report. One of Scotland's leading lawyers, Paul McBride QC, said: "This explanation is unconvincing. If the position is to protect the identities of children then it is a very easy matter to remove their names from the report. A blanked-out version could then be released.
"If this behaviour was a matter of policy then we would never have seen the reports of investigations into infamous child-abuse cases like Orkney and Cleveland. This decision could be challenged in the courts through a judicial review."
The Hamilton police report was compiled by Central Scotland detective sergeant Paul Hughes in 1991, almost five years before Hamilton walked into the gym hall of Dunblane Primary School and murdered 16 primary one children and their teacher before turning the gun on himself. It was later submitted to the Dunblane inquiry chaired by Lord Cullen in summer 1996.
Hughes quit the force last year on medical grounds after reaching the rank of superintendent. He had asked his superiors to revoke Hamilton's gun licence five years before the shootings. He had also recommended Hamilton be prosecuted over his conduct at a children's camp.
After the report was compiled, Douglas McMurdo, the deputy chief constable of Central, marked it for no further action. The procurator fiscal also decided it would not serve the public interest to prosecute Hamilton. McMurdo was later criticised in Lord Cullen's report and resigned.
Hughes went on to give evidence before the Cullen inquiry. Some parts of his dossier on Hamilton were quoted by Cullen. However, the Hughes' dossier does not feature in the index or appendices of Cullen's final report.
In May 1998, the matter was raised in the Lords and demands were made for a copy of the Hughes' dossier to be placed in its library. Lord Sewel refused the request on behalf of the government.
The 100-year secrecy order was made following confidential talks between the Scottish Record Office and the secretary to the Cullen inquiry. Lord Cullen, now Scotland's most senior judge, approved the recommendation.
There are now serious concerns that those involved in the decision acted beyond their powers. There is no statutory basis for the closure of records created by Scottish public bodies. However, it is practice under archive legislation in England and Wales.
One freedom of information campaigner, William Scott, has been writing to the Crown Office for more than three years in an attempt to get access to the closed report.
He was told that he would be allowed to see it if he showed "just cause". Scott wrote to the Crown saying: "I should like to be able to confirm that the report does not shield others whose reputation may be damaged by disclosure. You may or may not be aware that accusations of cover-up have been made and the only way to silence these is access so that they can be proved to be unfounded."
Replying to Scott, deputy crown agent Frank Crowe, wrote: "I am not currently persuaded that the speculation of a cover-up to which you refer provides a sufficient foundation for me to set aside the closure order and grant access."
Scott said: "You cannot help but be suspicious. I do believe there might well have been an ulterior motive for the closure order, and if that motive was to protect the powerful then I think it is in all our interests that it becomes public knowledge."
The SNP's shadow deputy justice minister, Michael Matheson, said he will now write to the Lord Advocate to seek clarification.
He said: "If suspicions of a cover-up are ill-founded, I can see no reason why the Crown Office cannot put the report in strict confidence before a cross-party parliamentary committee for scrutiny."
Scotland's freedom of information bill, which could well assist campaigners in getting access to the secret report, has been enacted, but will not be fully in force until December 31, 2005.
Lord Cullen's private secretary refused to comment.
A Crown Office spokesperson said it was unlikely that access would be given to anyone when the identification of child victims was an issue.
Posts
