Opposition politicians have also stepped up the pressure on First Minister Alex Salmond, with Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray accusing him of misleading parliament by failing to disclose Brown's escape while answering several questions on the issue of absconders from the open prison estate during Thursday's FMQs, despite becoming aware of the killer's disappearance the previous evening.
Of course, the Scottish Government claims that ministers were not at liberty to disclose the information because this was an "operational matter" for Tayside Police. But doubt over the precise meaning of this is clearly heightened by the fact that Mr MacAskill signed the order which ultimately led to John Brown's disappearance.
And while there may be good reasons for information of this type to be withheld from public disclosure, the precise rationale in this case hasn't emerged. Last night's Dundee Evening Telegraph outlined the procedure when a prisoner absconds:
The SPS said that, in the case of prisoners failing to return to Castle Huntly, Tayside Police is usually notified within an hour of their non-appearance.However, in the present case no specific information has been made public as to why Mr Salmond felt required to withhold the facts of the abscondence from MSPs and the public. Indeed, the Scotsman's report states that both government officials and Tayside Police admit no discussion took place over what could be said by ministers - since the First Minister would have known the issue would be raised in parliament and that the disclosure of Brown's abscondence would fuel the political debate, it seems damning that he did not ascertain whether and to what extent the facts of the case could be made public.
Responsibility for tracking down the abscondee then lies with the force. The two bodies consult before deciding whether or not the public should be notified about absconders.
This process takes into account the risk posed by the individual, current information about their whereabouts and the wider public safety.
Thus all this underlines the impression outlined here yesterday that the veil of secrecy over these matters seems born of reasons other than issues of criminal justice and the public interest.
5 comments:
Our man has a good teacher here. Remember Paxo stuffing Michael Howard? I sure Wee Eck and Kenny will be paying appropriate tribute.
Are you suggesting that every time a prisoner absconds that Kenny Mackaskill comes to Parliament to make a statement?
Or is it only required when Labour have it on their agenda.
The hypocrisy on display is breathtaking, Cathy Jamieson is squirming in her seat.
Actually Wardog I think that is exactly what Kenny should do from now on, using labour's debating time.
Wardog
Well clearly there's always at least a sniff of political hypocrisy on such matters, but surely there are legitimate issues to be examined here?
Cleary questions had to be asked on the Robert Foye affair, and more recently it seems self-evident that 'Hawk' Martin should never have been in the open estate, and I think Kenny MacAskill more or less admitted that and also misled parliament to boot.
As regards the latest case, the absconder looks very like another case that was prima facie unsuitable for an open prison. And Alex Salmond would have known that he would be asked about open prisons at FMQs and that the issue of the latest case would come out eventually and therefore would exacerbate the issue, and thus he clearly adopted a stance on disclosure to parliament based on this.
But since there seems no clear rationale for non-disclosure at FMQs then it looks suspiciously like Mr Salmond thought it more politically expedient to let the facts come out after the event.
That's not to say that "every time a prisoner absconds that Kenny Mackaskill comes to Parliament to make a statement", but surely you're not trying to suggest that he shouldn't answer to legitimate concerns on the issue?
Granted, we're seeing the usual synthetic huffng and puffing and righteous indignation from the opposition, but it's surely equally disengenuous to suggest that nothing at all should be said?
Richard, thanks for that; I wonder if we'll see a Brewer/MacAskill equivalent :0)
Cannae wait!!
Post a Comment