PROSECUTORS at the Crown Office have rejected calls from former first minister Humza Yousaf not to pursue charges against people accused of supporting Palestine Action.
Yousaf, who also previously served as Scottish justice secretary, had urged Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain to make a public statement “making it clear that there would be no public interest in prosecuting those [who] have peacefully supported Palestine Action”.
The group was proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the UK Government in July, and policing of the legislation has led the Scottish Human Rights Commission to warn of people’s right to freedom of expression being infringed.
Yousaf cited this, as well as concerns from United Nations High Commissioner Volker Turk, who warned that the proscription puts the UK Government “at odds” with international law.
Noting that the Lord Advocate has previously made clear that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute people at Glasgow’s safer drugs consumption unit for possession of illegal substances, Yousaf said this gave a “constructive precedent” for action.
“I believe a similarly framed prosecution statement making it clear that there would be no public interest in prosecuting those [who] have peacefully supported Palestine Action would be appropriate here,” Yousaf said.
Responding in place of the Lord Advocate, Scotland’s Solicitor General Ruth Charteris KC said it “would not be an appropriate use of the Lord Advocate’s authority to issue a statement of prosecution policy of the type you request”.
In a letter to the former SNP leader, Charteris went on: “I would consider such a statement to be contrary to the Lord Advocate’s obligation to independently enforce the criminal law.
“The prosecution policy for the drug consumption facility is a narrow and focused statement of the way that the public interest considerations is to be applied by prosecutors in a clearly defined context.”
She went on: “What you request is a statement of prosecution policy which is broader, less precise and may apply in a range of circumstances and contexts. I consider too that it would be understood as if I was permitting individuals to commit acts which the law treats as criminal.
“It is legitimate for individuals to debate the merits of proscription. To express an opinion or belief that is shared by a proscribed organisation is not necessarily a criminal offence.
“The distinction between expressing a view shared by a proscribed organisation and expressing support for a proscribed organisation is an important one. It will require prosecutors to pay careful attention to what was said and done or displayed, the circumstances in which that happened, and the meaning which the speaker intended to convey. Prosecutors in Scotland will consider these cases carefully.”
In August, the Lord Advocate responded to the Scottish Human Rights Commission concerns by saying: “Cases involving ‘Palestine Action’ reported to the Procurator Fiscal will be considered by a specialist prosecutor, overseen by senior prosecutors.
“The prosecutor will carefully examine whether there is sufficient evidence and determine what action, if any, should be taken in the public interest.”
