Are SCCRC Independent Enough

It is bad enough that SCCRC work hand in hand with J Clark Pearson of Justice department and the Police when they sit together and discuss policies etc, but to have the Justice Minister"Recommend" who should be appointed is Ludicrous and not compliant with section 6 of human Right to a fair hearing.
It is also worthwhile to note the people she is recommending are all from the Justice department side of Justiciary with Ex Judges and PFs etc being the norm.
Lets hope that with the SNP ousting Labour we will have a new Justice Minister who will investigate complaints against SCCRC and the likes.
http://www.sccrc.org.uk/news/19%20Mar%2007%20-%20Members%20appointed%20to%20SCCRC.pdf

See BBC.CO.UK Action Network Linked below for all names who sit with SCCRC to discuss their Policies

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/F1601472?thread=3872587?s_returnto=c1501

See SCCRC own annual reports suggesting they sit with High Couurt, Police and members of Justice Department, This is not compliant with section 6. of Human Right to a fair and independent hearing
http://www.flickr.com/photos/big-wullie/493032396/
This is obtained from their annual report 2005

http://www.sccrc.org.uk/Freedom%20of%20Information%20Publication%20Scheme/Corporate%20Information/Press%20releases/-b-z%20July%20JUDICIAL%20REVIEW%20-%20CASE%20OUTCOME.pdf

Lastly i would suggest that at SCCRC their reasons for not investigating complaints of Anderson V HMA Defective representation are as follows.
Firstly the Chief Exec Of SCCRC is a Lawyer. Therefore is not willing to investigate Lawyers.
Secondly, if they are seen to be acting incompetently this will not enhance public confidence in Solicitors in Scotland. Couldn't have that, could we?
Their biggest ground of appeal to them is Defective representation, Yet they have never found in any of their favours. Surely there is questions to be answered here alone

Please take time to read the following Judicial Review of SCCRC in ref to Edinburgh Three

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2006CSOH112.html