SO, this is what passes as justice and integrity in 21st-century Scotland?
An eminent judge rules that because the deliberate withholding by a business of fundamentally relevant details, conceivably as a smokescreen for the conduct of a potentially dubious parallel operation (… otherwise, why go to such lengths to disguise it …), went undetected by the authorities at the time (… well, it would, wouldn’t it …), that makes the cast and conclusion of such underhand tactics and strategy eligible and legitimate? Depends on your concept of eligibility and legitimacy, I suppose.
That no competitive advantage was gained by anyone operating in such an arguably deceptive manner? Depends on your interpretation of “competitive advantage”, I guess.
That there was absolutely no dishonesty involved? Depends on your definition of dishonesty. maybe.
That a proportionate punishment for the perpetrators and beneficiaries of such sustained, calculated acts of culpable omission is a derisory, “post-mortem” fine? Depends on your understanding of proportionality, perhaps.
One can only imagine the public outcry if the same principles of indulgent non-retrospection and farcical leniency were to be applied to the plethora of societal evils and wrongdoing that belatedly emerge from time to time into the collective moral consciousness. No names, no pack drill.
The whole thing seems to me to make Catch ’22’ seem like a convenient loophole.
Go figure …