Meeting of the Parliament 17 June 2026 [Last updated 18:21]
The First Minister seeks Parliament’s agreement to recommend to His Majesty the King the appointment of Ruth Charteris KC to the role of Lord Advocate and Brian Gill KC to the role of Solicitor General.
The Lord Advocate has a unique position as both the chief legal adviser to the Government and the head of the prosecution system, which has understandably led to ongoing speculation and concerns about potential conflicts of interest and accountability.
Some serious doubts were raised about the dual role of the Lord Advocate when it emerged that the First Minister was informed of criminal charges against Peter Murrell nearly a year before they were made public. That raises concerns. The public need to know that all criminal cases are handled impartially and without political interference. Public concerns should be addressed, and a parliamentary inquiry into the Murrell embezzlement scandal would address them. However, I understand that the Scottish Government has ruled out splitting the Lord Advocate’s dual role, and has ruled out a parliamentary inquiry into the Peter Murrell embezzlement scandal. In England, the role of attorney general and the post of director of public prosecutions are held by two different people, which seems logical and avoids any conflict of interest.
Subject to Parliament’s agreeing to the motion at decision time, will the Scottish Government confirm what criteria were used when selecting a candidate for the position of Lord Advocate? Were alternative governance models considered before recommending Ruth Charteris KC for the role? Finally, Reform UK Scotland seeks to separate the Lord Advocate’s responsibilities as chief adviser to the Government and head of the prosecution service, therefore we do not support the motion.