Looking north over boats at anchor in La Grande Greve Bay towards Brecqhou and the Gouliot Passage from La Coupe in Sark.

THE Barclay brothers failed yesterday in a legal bid to force a rethink on Sark’s constitutional reforms.

They claimed in the High Court that the changes, which were designed to drag the island out of feudalism and into the 21st century, were not good enough.

Mr Justice Wyn Williams refused Sir David and Sir Frederick’s application for a judicial review.

But that will not be the end of the matter, the brothers’ solicitor, Jennifer McDermott, said outside the court that they would appeal through the English courts and if necessary take the matter to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

A third claimant, Sark resident Tomaz Slivnik, a Slovenian who is seeking election to Chief Pleas, complained that he was barred because he was classed as an ‘alien’.

The Barclays’ lawyers told the judge that although most members of Chief Pleas would now be elected, the holder of the inherited title of Seigneur and the island’s judge, the Seneschal, remained as an unelected member of the Chief Pleas and its president.

But Mr Justice Wyn Williams said neither had the right to vote. The Seigneur’s right of veto was strictly limited and the Seneschal had no right to speak at meetings of Chief Pleas except as necessary to discharge his duties.

The judge said the Seneschal’s dual role ‘does not mean that he lacks the impartiality and/or independence and/or the appearance thereof’ demanded by human rights law.

The judge also rejected argument that the prohibition on an alien standing for election to Chief Pleas was a breach of EU law.
Ms McDermott said later: ‘Sir David and Sir Frederick have always pushed for full democracy and human rights for Sark.

‘Jack Straw [the Justice Secretary] has himself said in writing that he is very concerned with the dual role of the Seneschal as judge and president of Chief Pleas and that he has great concerns about the Seigneur’s role, which sits uneasily with 21st- century democratic principles.

‘It is very hard to accept that a newly reformed assembly which leaves two very powerful, unelected and unaccountable feudal officeholders at its core can be truly consistent with modern democratic principles and the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights.

‘The disappointing decision of Mr Justice Wyn Williams means that those concerns remain and must be resolved at the earliest opportunity.’

The defendants to the Barclays’ action were Mr Straw, the Committee for the Affairs of Jersey and Guernsey and Her Majesty’s Privy Council. ‘Interested parties’ were Seigneur Michael Beaumont and the Seneschal, Lt-Col Reg Guille, a direct descendant of the original 16th-century settlers of the island.