Douglas Fraser: "Do vast swathes of England want to join Scotland?"

A constitutional row was brewing last night over the UK Government's planned Counter-Terrorism Bill, which, it is claimed, will drive a "coach and horses" through 300 years of Scotland's independent legal system if passed unchanged.

The bill, which among other things includes the controversial plan to increase pre-detention without charge and toughen up sentencing, states that proceedings for an alleged offence "may be taken at any place in the United Kingdom", raising worries that cases, which should be heard in Scotland, will be heard in England under a different legal system.

Concerned parties, including the Law Society of Scotland, fear, if unamended, the proposal will undermine the position of the Lord Advocate, whose prosecutorial independence is guaranteed by the 1998 Scotland Act, and the position of the High Court, which is protected by the 1707 Act of Union.

However, last night Scotland Office Minister David Cairns accused the UK Government's political opponents of "another example of a manufactured division between us on an issue where we need to stand together".

He added: "The Scottish Executive was involved fully in the drafting of the Counter-Terrorism Bill provisions and was completely content with them."

Concerns about the bill's impact on Scots law were raised yesterday in the Commons by Alistair Carmichael, the Liberal Democrats' spokesman on Scotland, who talked of the "growing concern in Scotland" about the operation of the new bill and, in particular, Clause 27, which covers the issue of jurisdiction.

He asked Home Secretary Jacqui Smith if she understood the bill was "fraught with difficulty", adding: "Can she assure me if that does go on to the statute book, it will only be operated after very clear guidelines are agreed with the Lord Advocate?"

The Home Secretary, however, made no mention of guidelines, the Scottish legal system or the Lord Advocate, but replied: "It's important if there are linked attacks, for example, in London and in Scotland, that it's possible through the proposals we are putting forward for both of those linked cases to be prosecuted in one place.

"That's what the universal jurisdiction we are proposing in the legislation would enable us to do. It makes sense when countering terrorism that we are able, wherever it is, to prosecute in the place where the investigation takes place."

The cases of the alleged failed terrorist attacks in Glasgow and London last summer have been dealt with together in London.

Mr Carmichael later told The Herald: "The concern is MI5 will just take people south of the border, that's where the suspects are questioned and that's where they are tried while Scots law is disregarded. The potential for it all going horribly wrong is massive."

Angus Robertson, SNP leader at Westminster, said: "It would be a fundamental undermining of the Scottish legal system, which is guaranteed by the Treaty of Union. It would drive a coach and horses through 300 years of the Scottish legal system in the UK."

Michael Clancy, director of law reform at the Law Society of Scotland, spoke of the need for "appropriate safeguards", adding: "The concerns are that, as it appears in the bill, it needs amendment to protect the prosecutorial independence of the Lord Advocate and the constitutional position of the High Court."