ON PAGES 10 and 11 of today’s Guernsey Press, a prominent local lawyer analyses the first item that States members will consider when they debate this month’s Billet d’Etat and he also looks at the consequences for Guernsey of what amounts to a challenge to the island’s law-making powers by the UK.

Given that the States’ own legal advisers have triggered the objections, there are some serious matters to be addressed and some wide-ranging issues to be dealt with.

Specifically, this is all about the accountability and transparency of St James’s Chambers and the extent of powers currently vested in the office of H. M. Procureur and how they are scrutinised.

In any other organisation, what has happened would trigger a review of the lawyers providing the advice that has proved so damaging to the interests of the States of Guernsey as client.

In the case of disastrous legislation recommended and drafted by St James’s Chambers to introduce a 12-mile fishing limit which has caused significant financial loss to taxpayers, any other client would have contacted another firm of lawyers to pursue a possible compensation claim.

But because there is no client/practitioner relationship between the States and St James’s Chambers, what has triggered a serious constitutional disagreement between the island and the UK does not even warrant an apology in the

Billet or even an explanation of how long the row had been going on before being brought to the attention of States members.

Supporters of the existing system will argue that the Crown Officers are answerable to the States but there will be little evidence of that during tomorrow’s debate – or satisfactory

explanation of on what democratic authority St James’s Chambers embarked on a drafting frenzy that brought it into head-on conflict with the Privy Council.

Guernsey needs Crown Officers. It also needs legal draftsmen, legal advisers and an independent prosecution service.

What it does not need – and the current situation amply demonstrates it – is for those four functions to be provided by St James’s Chambers, which appears again to have acted as a law unto itself.

The full text of Advocate Dawes’ comments is available as two PDF documents, which may be accessed from the following links:

• Part One
• Part Two