Court action seeks probe of Trump’s golf courses’ purchase

(File photo) Donald Trump

The Scottish government is facing a new legal challenge over its February rejection of a motion to investigate former US president Donald Trump’s all-cash purchases of two golf courses, reviving an effort to force Trump to disclose how he financed the deals. Avaaz, a global human rights group, filed a petition in Scotland’s highest civil court seeking a judicial review of the government’s decision not to pursue an “unexplained wealth order” on Trump’s business. In February, Parliament voted 89-32 against the motion, which was brought by the minority Scottish Green Party would have sought details on the source of the money the Trump Organisation used to buy the courses in 2006 and 2014. The Avaaz petition, which has not been previously reported, was served on Scotland’s government yesterday. Trump, after decades of buying properties with debt, spent more than $300 million in cash purchasing and developing the Scottish courses, neither of which has turned a profit. Some Scottish politicians have cited mounting investigations into Trump’s US financial interests as grounds to scrutinise his business dealings in Britain. The British government introduced unexplained wealth orders in 2018 to help authorities fight money laundering and target the illicit wealth of foreign officials. The orders do not trigger a criminal proceeding. But if the Trump Organisation couldn’t satisfy the court that the money was clean, the government, in theory, could seize the properties. The 13-page petition filed by Avaaz alleges that the politicians who voted against the motion did so based on a flawed legal interpretation. “Such a continued misapplication of the law would be contrary to the rule of law,” it said. The Scottish Parliament rejected the motion seeking the order on February 3. Before the vote, Humza Yousaf — the justice minister and a member of the ruling Scottish National Party — called Trump “deplorable” but argued that unexplained wealth orders should be instigated by law enforcement officials rather than politicians. “There must not be political interference in the enforcement of the law,” Yousaf said. Yousaf said that the Civil Recovery Unit — an enforcement authority reporting to Scotland’s most senior legal officer, the Lord Advocate — should “undertake the investigatory role.” Avaaz challenges that reasoning in its court action, which asks the Court of Session in Edinburgh to rule that Scotland’s ministers have sole responsibility to determine whether to apply for an unexplained wealth order and cannot delegate that responsibility to other people or institutions.