Scottish Legal Jobs

In a consultation paper, Cathy Jamieson, justice minister, proposed changes which would remove ultimate control over the resolution of complaints about lawyers from the governing bodies, the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates.

The options include streng-thening the powers of the external watchdog, the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, or setting up a totally independent complaints-handling body with a non-lawyer majority.

The Scottish Parliament's Justice 1 Committee produced a string of recommendations for improving complaints-handling three years ago, while endorsing the regulatory role of the professional bodies.

Controversially, however, its suggestion that the powers of Linda Costelloe Baker, the ombudsman, be enhanced was ignored. The Scottish Executive also failed to act on the suggestion that her office could work as a "clearing house" for all complaints about lawyers and that she should monitor the progress of those complaints.

Yesterday's consultation paper suggests the ombudsman could conduct most complaints investigations. At present, the ombudsman, who is not a lawyer, can get involved only when a client's attempts at resolving their complaint with either the lawyer or professional body have failed. Even then, she has no power to force the society or faculty to comply with her recommendations on matters such as compensation. The two bodies can, and frequently do, ignore them.

Last November, Ms Costelloe Baker went so far as to castigate publicly the society in a rare press release for failing to implement her rulings. She also lambasted the Edinburgh-based body for failing to compensate lawyers' clients adequately for loss, inconvenience, and distress during the complaints process.

Ms Jamieson said the consultation paper set out ways to build "greater public confidence" in how complaints are handled. She referred to a range of possible reforms built around the central principle that users of legal services must be at the heart of the regulation of those services. She added: "We are inviting views on introducing more independence and oversight into the complaints-handling system to ensure that it is more representative of the public interest. An efficient, transparent and accountable complaints-handling system is essential. Substantial progress has undoubtedly been made since the Justice 1 committee report, but more needs to be done."

In her first annual report four years ago, the ombudsman urged the executive to radically rethink complaints handling. She has consistently argued for a greater degree of independence.

Yesterday, she said: "I am just so pleased that something has finally happened." She stressed the paper did not put forward the "status quo" as an option.

For Ms Costelloe Baker, a key sentence is the executive's endorsement for giving her the power to investigate the actual substance of complaints decisions made by the professional bodies, rather than simply the way complaints about lawyers were handled by them.

"As soon as this office has powers to determine complaints then that's the end of self-regulation," she said. If the Law Society loses the right to regulate its members altogether, then its status is reduced to that of a trade association, but Duncan Murray, its president, greeted the paper as an "opportunity to show how much progress has been made by the society in complaints handling".

However, Roy Martin QC, dean of the Faculty of Advocates, said he welcomed the opportunity "to demonstrate that our handling of complaints is robust and independent", but added: "I believe that it is vital to the preservation of an independent legal profession that it is permitted to regulate itself."