A crofting law expert has suggested the Scottish Government could intervene over a Crofting Commission's controversial decision to sack a grazings committee.
Upper Coll grazings committee was dismissed following a dispute over the way it carried out its duties.
An investigation by the commission found the committee in the wrong over five main issues and ordered it to correct the situation within three months or be removed from office.
The same timescale was laid down for the committee to agree to other recommendations and suggestions from the commission.
"Worrying trend concerning alleged abuse of power in Crofting Commission," fears law expert
26 April 2016
The sole outstanding matter by the March 10th deadline was getting their annual accounts audited to fulfil the committee's own regulations. The commission demanded an independent scrutiny of the past five years' financial statements. A month's extension was granted to complete the work.
The Crofting Commission disbanded the committee after rejecting the submission by a firm of chartered accountants.
The commission claimed the documents did not include any income from selling building plots off the grazings it understood to have been received during the five year period.
However, it is thought there was only one feu transferred to a family to build a home over the period which has seen a downturn in local building due to the recession. The money is held in the committee's bank account.
The commission insisted the audit lacked sufficient detail to analyse.
Some Upper Coll villagers believe the sacking is in retaliation to complaints lodged against commission convenor, Colin Kennedy, accusing him of unfair and biased conduct while chairing a meeting to consider issues raised by two local crofters against the committee.
The commission failed to tell the committee or crofters about the purpose of the meeting.
Crofting solicitor, Brian Inkster, slammed the commission for failing to "request further information on the back of receiving these accounts."
Mr Inkster stated: "Surely, if financial statements prepared by accountants were produced that did not meet whatever requirements the Crofting Commission actually had with regard to an ‘audit’ they should have sought further information/detail as necessary rather than summarily removing the grazings committee from office?”
He believed the case “highlights a worrying trend concerning alleged abuse of power within the Crofting Commission.”
Mr Inkster said it is not the first time he has heard actions taken by the Crofting Commission referred to as being “dictatorial, vindictive and unjustified.”
He stressed the Scottish Government should have "grave concern ...the crofting regulator is behaving in this way.”
He continued: “If this decision was a correct and proper one to make there must be countless other grazings committees in breach of their own regulations whom the Crofting Commission should also now be seeking to remove from office.”
If the commission fails to its "extraordinary decision" the Scottish Government should "maybe question the behaviour involved and perhaps even consider removing the commissioners responsible as “unsuitable to continue” as members."
The commission says it will not comment on the "live and on-
It said it will investigate when complaints over grazing committees are brought to their attention us by shareholders. It has written to all Upper Coll crofters explaining it will call a meeting to discuss options for the running of the grazings.