The Supreme Court vindicated a judicial review of the Scottish Government’s controversial Named Person scheme on 28 July, ruling the plans unlawful.
The five judges, including two from Scotland, unanimously struck down the central provisions of the scheme and the Scottish Government has no opportunity to appeal.
But Deputy First Minister John Swinney has presented the result as a victory for the Scottish Government and claimed that existing legislation simply needed to be ‘clarified’.
They have begun talks with public sector leaders and charities to change the Named Person scheme. It is the first time the Supreme Court has prevented a major piece of legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament from coming into force.
Breach of rights
Under the proposals, from 31 August every child in Scotland was to be assigned a state guardian to monitor their ‘wellbeing’. The Court stated that the data-sharing provisions of the legislation breach the right to a private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). These provisions, central to the scheme, have been struck down.
One line of the judgment said: ‘The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get at the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world.’
The Christian Institute co-ordinated the successful legal action. Its director, Colin Hart, said the ruling was a ‘vindication’ of what the Institute and others had been saying for years. He said: ‘This is a devastating blow for the Scottish Government, which sought to brush off all criticism of its Named Person scheme as “scaremongering” ’.
Other parties to the action included the Family Education Trust, The Young ME Sufferers (‘Tymes’) Trust, CARE (Christian Action Research & Education) and three concerned parents.
