A SENIOR law officer has told judges of how claims that six Scots sub-postmasters being criminalised due to a flawed computer system is a “matter of deep public concern”.

Solicitor General Ruth Charteris KC made the admission during a procedural hearing at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh today (Friday).

Ms Charteris – Scotland’s second most senior prosecutor – told judges Lady Dorrian, Lord Matthews and Lady Wise that the Crown Office were investigating the claims.

She was speaking for the Crown in a matter that has been sent to the appeal court from the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC).

The body investigates potential miscarriages of justices and it believes that issues surrounding six sub-postmasters – one of whom pleaded guilty pleaded guilty at Dunfermline Sheriff Court –should be looked at by appeal judges.

The six, one of whom has since died and is represented posthumously, are now entitled to appeal against the convictions for crimes of dishonesty arising from their roles as sub-postmasters at the Post Office.

Between 2000 and 2014, more than 700 sub-postmasters were falsely prosecuted based on information from the Post Office’s computerised accounting and sales system, Horizon.

Since then, many sub-postmasters in England have had their criminal convictions for theft, fraud and false accounting overturned.

On Friday, Ms Charteris said that her colleagues were investigating the cases and assessing available evidence.

She said: “It is clear that this is a matter of deep public concern. All material that is held by the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service has been gathered and is being considered by Crown Counsel.

The SCCRC have referred the cases of Aleid Kloosterhuis, 64, William Quarm, who is now deceased, Susan Sinclair, 57, Colin Smith, 62, Judith Smith, 60, and Robert Thomson, 63, to appeal court to see if their convictions should be quashed.

Susan Sinclair was convicted of one charge of embezzlement following a trial. Judith Smith pleaded guilty to one charge of fraud and William Quarm and the other three accused to one charge of embezzlement each.

The SCCRC concluded that the five who pleaded guilty did so in circumstances that were, or could be said to be, clearly prejudicial to them.

It also concluded that new information about Horizon which has emerged since Mrs Sinclair’s trial would have had a material bearing on a “critical issue” at her trial and may have explained why there was a shortfall of funds at the Post Office branch where she worked.

It found that the prosecution could be seen as oppressive because the absence of the relevant evidence rendered the trial unfair.

Susan Sinclair was convicted in 2004, after a trial at Peterhead Sheriff Court, of one charge of embezzlement and was sentenced to 180 hours’ community service.

Robert Thomson pleaded guilty in 2004 at Alloa Sheriff Court, to one charge of embezzlement. He received 180 hours of community service and was fined £5,000.

In 2009, Judith Smith pleaded guilty, at Selkirk Sheriff Court, to one charge of fraud and was admonished by the court.

Then, in 2010, William Quarm pleaded guilty, at Lochmaddy Sheriff Court, to one charge of embezzlement and was given 150 hours community services.

The other two cases date from 2012, when Aleid Kloosterhuis pleaded guilty, at Campbeltown Sheriff Court, to one charge of embezzlement and was sentenced to 12 months’ in jail.

In 2013, Colin Smith pleaded guilty, at Dunfermline Sheriff Court, to one charge of embezzlement and was ordered to do 180 hours of unpaid work.

On Friday, Ms Charteris told the court that prosecutors accepted that the Horizon system was defective.

She said that the Crown’s position was based on the findings of English cases on the matter.

Ms Charteris added: “The Crown’s position is that the Horizon system is flawed and suffered from a number of internal defects.

“It accepts that this was established in England and were unchallenged by the Post Office.”

Ms Charteris also told the court that the Crown was unable to say at this point in time to support the quashing of the six convictions.

She said that it would have to assess available evidence to establish whether there was still sufficient grounds to maintain a conviction.

The Solicitor General added: “The Crown’s case may differ according to each case.”

Ms Charteris also told the court that the Crown didn’t have sufficient evidence in some of the cases at this point in time to make a proper assessment of whether the convictions should be quashed. She said the Crown Office had asked the Post Office to help it gather evidence from the time.

She added: “The Post Office has been asked to conduct a further search and any new material will be distributed.”

Defence advocate Claire Mitchell KC, who is acting for Susan Sinclair, asked the Crown to provide her with information about the “processes” which existed between it and the Post Office at the time of her client’s convictions.

A further procedural hearing will be held in the case at a date yet to be arranged.