Campaigner Hill accuses SIC of hacking website to discredit attempt to save tourist centre

Stuart Hill.

Sovereignty campaigner Stuart Hill has accused the SIC of “illegally hacking” his information in order to discredit an attempt to save the tourist centre.

Mr Hill claims the messages in which he plotted with three women to takeover the Market Cross building had been posted on a “private website” to which only a “select number had authorised access”.

As previously reported, Mr Hill staged an attempted takeover on 30th July, when he claimed ownership of the building on behalf of The Sovereign Nation of Shetland.

He claimed VisitScotland’s promotion of Shetland as a Scottish island had been “at least erroneous and possibly fraudulent”.

The 81-year-old from Cunningsburgh also disputed the SIC’s claim to own the building – due to the “absence of Crown Sovereignty in Shetland”.

The attempted takeover on 30th July was stopped when police attended and gave advice to Mr Hill and three others.

Two of the women present at the time, Janette Simpson and Elaine Nicolson, have submitted a bid to buy the building and retain it as a tourist centre.

The bid has been backed by the Shetland Tourism Association.

Mrs Nicolson did not deny being there when the takeover happened – but said she was merely a witness and was not “aligning or colluding with anyone”.

She said the bid for the tourist centre was “bona fide” and they were “genuine buyers”.

Messages posted on Mr Hill’s private website after the 30th July incident, described it as a “dress rehearsal” and indicated a further attempt would be made.

When asked about the attempted takeover, Mr Hill did not deny his involvement and sent a lengthy statement, which he asked to be published in full.

Mr Hill claimed the hacking of his private messages was part of an attempt to discredit the bid to save the tourist centre buy aligning the buyers with “crazy Stuart Hill”.

Explaining his involvement, he said: “In common with many people in Shetland, we were appalled at VisitScotland’s decision to close the Lerwick centre and with the SIC’s apparent intent to quickly dispose of the building.

“There seemed to be nobody capable of stepping in to save this valuable resource for Shetland.

“In the absence of Crown sovereignty in Shetland, VisitScotland’s promotion of Shetland as a Scottish island has been at least erroneous and possibly fraudulent since its inception.

“In the absence of Crown sovereignty in Shetland, the SIC’s claim to ownership of the building collapses.

“Our action on 30th July was against this background.

“After being notified of our superior claim to the building and VisiScotland’s fraudulent use of it, the SIC hurriedly put the building up for sale, with no time for anyone wanting to make a serious purchase or lease offer to come forward.

“A possible scenario is that they already had somebody ready in the background to buy up the building at a low price (perhaps even £1 as in a recent sale?).

“When a Shetland benefactor, with the interests of Shetland at heart and the necessary resources, stepped forward with an offer substantially over the asking price, it seems to have put a spanner in the SIC’s works.

“It seems that all kinds of difficulty were put in the way of this offer, including a presumed association with crazy Stuart Hill and The Sovereign Nation of Shetland.

“In order to promote this story, the SIC apparently went so far as to illegally hack into a private website to which only a small select number had authorised access and to publish the information there.

“We believe this to be an offence under the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

“The SIC may have or may not have been panicked into this action by The Sovereign Nation of Shetland’s claim on the visitor centre building, but another factor at play may have been our challenge to the authority of every councillor and head of department to show proof of that authority.”

Mr Hill maintains that the Crown does not have ownership of the land in Shetland and therefore does not have sovereignty.

He claims all organisations acting under UK or Scottish legislation therefore act without authority.

“It is easy to see why such a fundamental concept would attract an extreme reaction from those who exercise such alleged authority.

“The fact that this simple truth has no answer is what generates such hostility from the establishment.

“After 550 years of patient deception, they thought they’d got away with it.”

The SIC was asked about Mr Hill’s claims of “hacking” as well as the outcome of the tourist centre sale.

It did not respond to Mr Hill’s claims and refused to divulge information about the sale.

Chief executive Maggie Sandison said: “The council will not discuss the financial and business affairs of other parties.

“The council will also not discuss confidential negotiations relating to a contract.”

The SIC previously confirmed, in response to a Freedom of Information request, there had been three bids made for the building.

These are expected to include the bid made by the STA, which was removed when Mrs Nicolson and Mrs Simpson stepped in with their offer.

Another offer was made by Ben Laurenson of BML Accounts. He planned to use the first floor as offices for his business, while the ground floor would have been retained as some sort of tourist office, though with a greater focus on selling Shetland produce.

Mr Laurenson said the council informed him his bid had been unsuccessful.

It means the bid by Mrs Nicolson and Mrs Simpson is beleived to have been accepted.

The only alternative would be if the STA’s bid had been discounted from the three, leaving open the possibility of a further, as yet unknown, bid.

The Scottish Land Register states the most recent sale of the building was in 2019.