FORMER diplomat Craig Murray has been given permission to appeal against his conviction for breaching a court order protecting the identities of women who alleged they were sexually assaulted by Alex Salmond.
Lord Carloway, Lord Matthews and Lord Pentland told a lawyer acting for the pro-independence blogger that they can make legal submissions on the matter next month.
Their decision came after they were addressed by Murray’s advocate Roddy Dunlop QC.
Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, was given an eight-month jail sentence in May last year after he was convicted of an offence which judge Lady Dorrian described as striking at “the heart of the administration of justice”.
He had covered the former first minister’s trial from the public benches and wrote about it on his blog.
READ MORE: Craig Murray: What I've learned from a 'hard four months' in prison
However, the court decided information he published about four women who gave evidence against Salmond – who was later cleared of all charges – could lead to their “jigsaw” identification.
A court order had earlier been imposed prohibiting journalists from publishing such information.
Murray told The National he was delighted that the High Court had agreed he had a right to appeal.
He said: “While it will no longer help me personally, it is essential that Scottish courts row back some of the very worrying precedents this has set.
“In particular, we hope that the court will disavow the judgement that mainstream media journalists and bloggers should be treated differently before the law, and the notion that journalists can be sentenced to long terms of imprisonment for ‘jigsaw identification’, occasioned simply from fair reporting of the defence case as stated in open court before the public.”
Mainstream media journalists in Scotland follow a long-standing practice of not publishing personal details about complainers in sexual assault trials to protect their privacy and prevent them from being stigmatised.
Murray’s lawyers believe his conviction and sentence breached Article 10 and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – the right to freedom of expression and a fair trial.
At a virtual hearing, Scotland’s most senior judge Lord Carloway said it was “competent” for the appeal to be heard.
“It would be impractical not to hear all the arguments in an appeal which is conceded is competent,” he said.
“Therefore we will allow the petition to proceed on all the grounds of appeal. Now that means from a practical point of view that we will convene a bench of five judges which would normally be this bench plus two – so we will organise that.
“We will plan to hear this on the 23rd [of February].”
Lady Dorrian, Scotland’s second most senior judge, last year told the 63-year-old blogger that his actions were so grave they could only be dealt with by a prison sentence.
“The European Court of Human Rights noted that criminal proceedings concerning sexual offences are often conceived of as an ordeal by the victim,” she said.
“The historical reluctance of complainers in coming forward with their complaints as a result of a concern about how they will be treated is at the heart which anonymity is given.
“Anonymity provides complainers with the security they ought to have of the certainty that their identity will be protected.
READ MORE: Alex Salmond says the jailing of Craig Murray has 'shamed' Scotland
“Actions such as those of the respondent which are likely to erode that security taken in the face of a clear order of the court designed to enhance the protection thereof and designed to prevent the prohibited information from becoming known to the public – even in a coded way – require to be treated as contempt of considerable gravity.
“These actions create a real risk of complainers may be reluctant to come forward in future cases – particularly in those cases where the case maybe a high profile or one likely to attract significant publicity.
“The actions strike at the heart of the fair administration of justice. Notwithstanding the previous good character of the respondent and his health issues we do not think we can dispose of this case other than by way of a sentence of imprisonment.”
Murray’s political blog if often critical of the mainstream media and established politicians.
His previous lawyer John Scott QC told the judges earlier this year that Murray had a passionate interest in “open justice” and “whistle blowing”.
He said his client also saw the Alex Salmond trial as part of “a bigger picture”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article