Pressure has mounted on Scottish ministers after a senior judge ruled that authorities acted unlawfully by refusing an official investigation into the deaths of two patients who died after being infected with hepatitis C through NHS blood transfusions.
In an unprecedented move Lord Mackay of Drumadoon yesterday quashed the Lord Advocate's decision not to hold fatal accident inquiries into the deaths of Eileen O'Hara, 72, and the Rev David Black, 66, who both died in 2003.
Lord Mackay's judicial review findings, issued by the Court of Session in Edinburgh, said ministers and Scotland's most senior law officer acted in a manner incompatible with their rights.
Last night the SNP administration was coming under pressure to honour a pre-election pledge to hold a public inquiry into people infected with hepatitis C and HIV from blood products in the 1970s and 1980s.
The former Labour-led Scottish Executive had resisted calls for a public inquiry in 2006 from victims and families of some 4000 people in Scotland who were given contaminated blood.
Mrs O'Hara received blood transfusions in 1985 and 1991 and was later diagnosed with hepatitis C.
Mr Black was a haemophiliac who had a liver transplant and received blood transfusions in the 1980s. He died of liver cancer due to hepatitis C.
Yesterday's ruling was welcomed by Mrs O'Hara's family and other campaigners. The judicial review was raised by Roseleen Kennedy, one of Mrs O'Hara's daughters, and Mr Black's widow Jean.
At a press conference in Glasgow, Mrs Kennedy, 42, a schoolteacher from Scotstoun, Glasgow, said: "I am just delighted that at last we got an opportunity to find answers to some of the questions that we have had for many years."
Solicitor-advocate Frank Maguire who campaigned on the families' behalf for more than three years, said the £100,000 cost of the families' legal action would be paid by the Scottish Government.
He said the families now wanted a full judicial inquiry by a Court of Session judge.
Philip Dolan, chairman of the Scottish Forum of the Haemophilia Society, which provided almost £50,000 for the legal fight, described the ruling as "great news".
In his findings, Lord Mackay said both the Lord Advocate and ministers had flouted Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights which states that "everyone's right to life shall be protected by law".
The law says that when a person dies after hospital treatment, ministers are obliged to have in place a system capable of providing an effective investigation into the death.
Lord Mackay further ruled that the only way such an investigation into the death of Mrs O'Hara or Mr Black could be achieved would be if the authorities were to initiate a public inquiry.
Lord Mackay continued the cases until a further hearing to allow the Lord Advocate and ministers to decide what action they will take after the ruling. No date has been set for the hearing.
Health Minister Nicola Sturgeon said yesterday: "We will now study the judgment in detail and in discussion with the Lord Advocate will consider its wider implications."
Dr Richard Simpson, Labour's spokesperson on public health, said: "Labour supports the right of individual families to know the exact circumstances that led to the death of their loved ones."
Ross Finnie, Liberal Democrats health spokesman, urged Ms Sturgeon to offer Lord Mackay the Scottish Government's "absolute commitment" to hold an inquiry.
Scottish Conservative Party justice spokesman Bill Aitken said he felt it was inappropriate to comment ahead of further legal and judicial process being completed.
A Crown Office spokesman said the opinion of the Court of Session and Lord Mackay, in particular, had been noted and would be "carefully considered" before any decision was taken.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article