NOPTA's Role

Everyone knows that the bias consent order was directed at the decision made by the JA (ie Scumbo)..

However, something that came to me (while battling my hero - Memory of LK!!...lol) was this:

NOPTA made its recommendation on 29th April 2020 a mere 3 months after the January 2020 (First) Application submitted by Asset.
In writing the recommendation to the JA Authority - I assume that NOPTA has assessed/requested/checked/crossed the Ts and dotted the EYEs (i)... before recommending - APPPROVAL.

Then you come to December 2021 - 20 months AFTER the recommendation to JA - and they have submitted a NEW Memorandum (memo) which included 3 options. This memo is what troubles me with respect to NOPTA:

1. I assume the Memo was requested by Scomo and
this is the important question
2. WAS NOPTA "COERCED" to write this memo? And the answer from my opinion is - OFCOURSE!.

So... the bias that we all know of directed at the JA by the Court Order... not only applies to the JA but also to ---> NOPTA! (This is not something spectacular - cos NOPTA should always be unbiased). But they changed their recommendation in December to suit an outcome.

Final Point:
NOPTAs recommendation on 17th October 2023 sent to JA - at least with respect to the FIRST 2020 application (IMO) should NOT change from the first report they submitted back in April 2020 - and that is APPROVAL - based on the facts and assessment at the time of submission. Anything differing from that same recommendation in the 2023 report would be - in my humble opinion - BIASED (at the very least)