Making Justice Work for Victims
and Witnesses
Victims and Witnesses Bill –
A Consultation Paper
May 2012
MAKING JUSTICE WORK FOR VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
VICTIMS AND WITNESSES BILL – A CONSULTATION PAPER
Contents
Page Number
Ministerial foreword
2
Executive Summary
3
Introduction
5
Improved information
9
Delivering greater certainty
14
Feeling supported
18
Feeling safe
30
Feeling involved
33
Making offenders pay
38
Responding to this consultation
45
Next steps in the process
47
Annex A
Summary List of Questions
48
Annex B
Scottish Government Consultation Process
52
Annex C
Response Form
(respondent information & consultation questionnaire)
53
Recipient List
66
Annex D
1
MINISTERIAL FOREWORD
The Scottish Government’s Making Justice Work Programme represents the most
significant set of reforms to our courts for more than a century. A central objective of
this programme is to improve the experience of victims and witnesses, and I have
made a commitment to bringing forward a Victims and Witnesses Bill during this
Parliament to do just that. This consultation marks an important milestone in the
development of the Bill and represents a key strand of Making Justice Work.
The proposals in this paper start from the view that victims should not simply be
seen as passive spectators of proceedings or recipients of services but people who
have legitimate interests and needs. No one wants to be a victim of crime and the
impact on their life may go on long after the justice system has moved on to another
case. How we treat victims must be a measure of the success of our justice system
as a whole.
Being a witness is an important civic duty and one which should be recognised and
treated as such by both the public and those within the justice system. We need to
remember that without witnesses there can be no justice: no mechanism through
which crimes can be investigated and prosecuted; no way of testing evidence or
ensuring appropriate punishment for those found guilty; and no sense of community
or society. If witnesses are to come forward and report what they saw or heard, they
must feel confident that their contribution will be worthwhile, valued and supported.
Some may argue that we cannot improve the experience of victims and witnesses
and ensure that the justice process is fair to the accused. I am clear that the two are
not mutually exclusive - we can, and must, seek to achieve both.
The proposals in the paper build on a number of stakeholder consultation events
about victim and witness policy during 2010-11. It also draws on various reports and
surveys on victims’ and witnesses’ experiences of the justice system, and on lessons
from other jurisdictions.
Please take time to read this paper and respond to it. By doing so, together we can
ensure that victims and witnesses get better support, give better evidence and are
helped towards a better recovery from their experience.
KENNY MACASKILL, MSP
Cabinet Secretary for Justice
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Meeting the needs of Victims and Witnesses
1.
This paper identifies six objectives for victims and witnesses policy:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Victims and witnesses should know what is going on in cases which
affect them
Victims and witnesses should know what to expect in relation to
proceedings, including that hearings will go ahead when scheduled
Victims and witnesses should feel confident in coming forward and that
their personal safety will be protected
Victims and witnesses should be able to contribute effectively to cases
which affect them
Victims and witnesses should have access to appropriately tailored
support before, during and after proceedings
Offenders should pay for the injury, loss or distress they have caused
Key Proposals
2.
The key proposals we are making are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introducing a victim surcharge so that offenders pay towards the cost
of supporting victims
Requiring the courts to consider compensation in every case where a
victim has suffered injury, loss or distress
Creating a duty on relevant public agencies to set clear standards of
service for victims and witnesses
Creating an automatic right to special measures for victims in cases
involving sexual offences and domestic abuse.
Commissioning a feasibility study into how we can provide much better
information for victims and the public about specific cases
Improving the way cases are managed so that victims and witnesses
can have far greater confidence that, where they are required to give
evidence, the case will go ahead on the day as planned
Victims should be able to make oral representations to a member of
the Parole Board so that they can contribute effectively to decisions
about parole for criminals subject to life sentences.
Consultation Questions
We would welcome your views on a range of proposed improvements, covering:•
Improved information – including around case-specific information,
promoting information-sharing, and more effective communication of
sentencing information
•
Delivering greater certainty – around standards of service and advance
agreement of a closed court
3
•
Feeling supported – around improving victims and witness care and support,
the definition and identification of vulnerable witnesses, automatic entitlement
to special measures and related notification and application arrangements,
support for child witnesses, and improved support for communication needs
•
Feeling safe and less intimidated – around who interviews victims of sexual
offences, disclosure of personal details on Child Witness Notices and
Vulnerable Witness Applications, advising victims about offender’s temporary
release, and investigative anonymity orders
•
Feeling involved – around victims’ interests in sentencing policy, the ability to
make oral representations to the Parole Board, and greater flexibility in
relation to Victim Statements
•
Making offenders pay – around a right to compensation and proposals for a
victim surcharge
Making it Happen
3.
The Scottish Government is committed to introducing a Victims and
Witnesses Bill during this session of Parliament that will give effect to many of the
proposals. A range of related proposals will be delivered by justice organisations
through the Making Justice Work (MJW) programme, which will allow us to achieve
more than legislation alone can provide. MJW has already begun to make progress
on identifying processes, procedures and behaviours which need to change to
improve witness attendance at court and ensuring victims and witnesses are only
called to give evidence where necessary and that cases go ahead as planned.
4
INTRODUCTION
Victims Policy
4.
The Scottish Strategy for Victims was published in 2001. It set out an action
plan which was based on three core principles – that victims should be provided with
generic and case specific information; that they should receive appropriate support;
and that they should have their voice heard. In 2005, the National Standards for
Victims of Crime set out the level of service that victims and witnesses should expect
in their dealings with the criminal justice and children’s hearing systems.
5.
Examples of improvements made include:
•
extending the coverage of the Victim Notification Scheme (VNS) to custodial
sentences of 18 months or more (from four years or more)
•
introducing a national victim statement scheme in solemn cases from 2009
•
providing record funding to organisations including Victim Support Scotland,
the Trafficking Awareness Raising Alliance, the Migrant Helpline and People
Experiencing Trauma and Loss; and over £44 million between 2008-09 and
2010-11 to tackle violence against women, including domestic abuse
•
making provision to cover the cost of compensating victims of violent crime
through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
•
introducing and updating information packs for victims of rape and sexual
assault, families bereaved by murder or culpable homicide, and families
bereaved by a death on the road
•
organisational developments, including the launch by COPFS of their “Our
Commitments to Victims and Witnesses”; ongoing work by the Scottish Court
Service on their estate and the provision of, and facilities at, remote sites; and
amendment of the police Standard Prosecution Report to improve
identification of witness vulnerability
•
the joint protocol between the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland
and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to challenge domestic
abuse
Witnesses Policy
6.
Much of the work on witnesses in recent years has focused on implementing
the Vulnerable Witnesses legislation which was phased in between 2005 and 2008.
It has provided a much greater focus on the needs of witnesses (including victims)
when giving evidence – helping to identify and explore vulnerability, considering the
impact this may have on their ability to give their best evidence and what special
measures and/or additional support will make a difference.
5
7.
Other developments include:•
The Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 – provisions to allow
witnesses to see their statements again before giving evidence; introducing a
statutory scheme of witness anonymity orders; and raising the age of
automatic entitlement to standard special measures to up to age 18 in human
trafficking cases
•
The Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 – provisions to widen application
of restrictions on evidence or questioning about character and sexual
behaviour in hearings in front of a sheriff, and allow use of prior statements
•
Work to update guidance on the joint investigative interviewing of child
witnesses (published in December 2011) and to roll out visual recording
equipment across Scotland (January to March 2012)
•
A project - part of the Making Justice Work programme – which focuses on
the factors that affect witness attendance at court (due to report in 2012)
Other reforms
8.
These improvements have been complemented by other reforms which have
made the justice system more responsive to the needs of victims and witnesses.
Examples include:•
High Court Reform – ensured that more cases are settled at an earlier stage
and that those cases which do go to trial are better prepared, so reducing
anxiety for, and inconvenience to, victims and witnesses
•
Summary Justice Reform - introduced a range of measures designed to
make procedures quicker, simpler, fair and effective. A series of evaluations –
including one on victims’, witnesses’ and public perception of the differences
made by SJR – was published between November 2011 and March 2012
Raising the Bar
9.
While many improvements have been made in recent years within the
Scottish justice system, the expectations of victims and witnesses are rising as well.
In a society increasingly used to high standards of information and service, the
justice system must adapt and evolve to meet these expectations.
10.
These raised expectations are also reflected in a series of developing
international standards for the way we work with victims and witnesses. Foremost
amongst these is the draft EU Directive on Establishing Minimum Standards on the
Rights, Support and protection of Victims of Crime (“the EU Directive on Victims”).
These emerging international standards raise the bar internationally and challenge
us to raise our game here too.
6
Evidence Base
11.
There is a lot of evidence available from a range of studies, surveys and
discussions about what make a difference to victims and witnesses and their
experience of the justice system. These include:•
Reports of the HMICS/IPS joint thematic inspection into services for victims
(Phase 1 published in October 2010 and Phase 2 in November 2011)
•
The annual Scottish Crime and Justice Survey
•
The Audit Scotland report into Scotland’s justice system (published in
September 2011)
•
Sheriff Principal Bowen’s independent review of Sheriff and Jury procedure
(published June 2010)
•
The evaluation report into Victims, Witnesses and Public Perceptions of
Summary Justice Reform
•
Holding focus groups, meeting and consultation on witness issues in 2010-11,
and a Victim’s Summit in January 2011.
Guiding Principles
12.
The common themes we have identified from these sources that are important
for victims and witnesses and make a real difference to their experience are:•
•
•
•
•
•
Victims and witnesses should know what is going on in cases which
affect them
Victims and witnesses should know what to expect in relation to
proceedings, including that hearings will go ahead when scheduled
Victims and witnesses should feel confident in coming forward and that
their personal safety will be protected
Victims and witnesses should be able to contribute effectively to cases
which affect them
Victims and witnesses should have access to appropriately tailored
support before, during and after proceedings
Offenders should pay for the injury, loss or distress they have caused
13.
These issues are not just about supporting victims and witnesses. They
directly impact on confidence in the system and the willingness of people to come
forward to report crime in the future. If people do not feel they are acknowledged
and their contribution valued, they are unlikely to come forward or to provide
accurate, coherent and comprehensive evidence. That cannot be in the interests of
justice.
14.
While simply expressed, these outcomes cover a wide range of issues
affecting victims, witnesses and the justice system. These are explained in more
detail in the remainder of the paper.
7
Duration of Consultation
15.
This consultation is for a period of 8 weeks, with responses due by Friday
20th July 2012. Responses should be sent to
victimsandwitnesses@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or
Victims and Witness Unit
Scottish Government
Room GW14/15
St. Andrew’s House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG
16.
This slightly shorter consultation period reflects the fact that we have already
undertaken consultation around victim and witness issues through the policy reviews
and around the content of the draft EU Directive on Victims and the content of this
Bill. This consultation paper and the themes and questions in it take account of that
feedback. Our collaborative approach - of which this paper is one part - will continue
until and after the introduction of the Bill.
8
IMPROVED INFORMATION
Case-specific information
17.
High quality information consistently comes across as a key factor in
determining the experience that victims and witnesses have of the justice system.
Equally, surveys and evaluations tell us that victims in particular do not feel they are
getting all of the information they feel they need. This creates uncertainty and
undermines confidence in the justice system.
18.
The draft EU Directive on Victims includes a number of provisions to ensure
that victims receive the information they need. It envisages them getting information:•
from the first point of contact (for example, with the police or prosecutors) about the support available and how to access it; procedures involved in
reporting crime and their role; how and under what conditions they can obtain
protection, legal advice, legal aid and compensation’; any special
arrangements if they are resident in another Member State; about complaints
procedures; and a contact point for communications
•
about their case – any decision not to proceed with an investigation or
prosecution; the outcome of any trial; information about the state of the case
or progress on it; the time and place of the trial; the opportunity to be notified
about release or escape from detention
•
in a language they understand through interpretation or translation - so that
they can participate effectively in proceedings, and receive the same
information available to victims who understand or speak the language of
criminal proceedings
•
to make an informed decision about whether to ask for a review of the
decision not to prosecute (if they wish)
19.
Much of this information is already available to victims in Scotland, although
the more case-specific information tends to be provided only for those (or their
bereaved relatives) in specific types of cases (mainly involving more serious crime)
and cases involving vulnerable victims or witnesses. The Victim Information and
Advice (VIA) service provided by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is
the primary route by which this information is provided. Victims in less serious cases
can often find out this information by making enquiries with the police or COPFS, but
at present much of the information is not provided proactively or in a concise,
accessible or user-friendly way.
20.
The draft European Directive does not currently distinguish between victims of
different types of crime in relation to the information they should receive, or between
cases that reach court and those that do not. We therefore propose to legislate to
create a right to information for victims which supports the principles of the
EU Directive.
9
21.
This will create many practical challenges. The VIA service currently deals
with a relatively small subset of total crime – more serious cases where proceedings
are taken against an identified accused, or which involve specific groups such as
child or other vulnerable victims and witnesses. While the VIA service or something
akin to it will continue to be needed for more serious and sensitive cases, expanding
the current VIA model to cover all crime is likely to be impractical and prohibitively
expensive. We therefore need to think radically about how we provide information to
victims in future.
22.
Transparency in justice is fundamental to public confidence. The view of the
Scottish Government is that as much information as possible about crime,
prosecution and the outcome of court cases should be made publicly available. In
principle, we believe that much case-specific information should be available
publicly, although there may be types of information where access should be
restricted to the victim only. There will therefore be a need for suitable protections,
such as password-controlled access to some information, as in the Victim
Information Portal being developed in Northern Ireland.
23.
Much of this information is already recorded by police, COPFS, the Scottish
Court Service and, in relation to offender release, the Scottish Prison Service.
However, it is not all recorded electronically and is held in several different
databases. The Scottish Government will commission a feasibility study into
developing an online information hub for justice that will provide case-specific
data in Scotland. The study will also examine the extent to which such data
can be made publicly available and the protections that would be needed to
avoid unhelpful intrusion into the privacy of victims and witnesses or
incursion into fundamental protections for accused persons. We will also
investigate victims’ and witnesses’ views on the potential use of automatic
notification of updates using text and email.
24.
Not all victims and witnesses will have online access, and many will need
support to deal with the information they are receiving where a case has had a
serious impact on them or their family. The intention is therefore to ensure that
support groups can access information (where appropriate with the victim’s or
witness’ consent). This will ensure that victims and witnesses can receive the
information within the context of a support or advice service where appropriate.
25.
Such an online system should not be seen as removing the need for direct
human contact from statutory justice bodies, particularly in serious and upsetting
cases. There will continue to be many cases where it will be important and
appropriate for the VIA service, police or prosecutors to speak directly to victims and
their families to ensure they are given a full picture of developments, and to allow
input and feedback from victims to be provided.
26.
This is an ambitious and far-reaching proposal. The feasibility study will
therefore be important in defining timescales for delivery.
10
Q1 Do you agree with the principle of having a case-specific information hub
for justice in Scotland?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
27.
The draft EU Directive on Victims envisages making information available to
victims on: any decision not to proceed with an investigation or prosecution; the
outcome of any criminal proceedings; information about the state of the case or
progress on it; the time and place of any trial; the opportunity to be notified about
release or escape from detention.
Q2 Are there any other types of case-specific information that would be of
value to victims and witnesses?
Promoting Information-Sharing
28.
A key aspect of improving information provision and support to victims and
witnesses is better information-sharing. Currently, justice organisations have limited
access to each other’s data. This can sometimes give the appearance of a
disjointed system, adversely impact on efficiency and make it difficult to ensure
appropriate and timely support. The data held by statutory bodies is also often not
transparent and accessible to third sector support organisations.
29.
Ideally, we want to move towards a situation where victims and witnesses can
find out a range of information about their case from whichever statutory body or
support organisation they are currently dealing with. More ambitiously, we also
believe there would be benefits in moving towards a one-stop-shop for victim and
witness information, advice and support, most likely in the third sector. The
examples in paragraph 57 give some indication of possible approaches.
30.
The information hub is likely to take us a long way in this direction, but some
have suggested that a duty to share information to the benefit of victims and
witnesses would be helpful in this context.
Q3 Do you believe a statutory framework is needed to promote informationsharing in the interests of victims and witnesses?
Yes
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Q4 What protections would need to be built into such a system?
11
No
Understanding sentencing
31.
Knowing the outcome of a case and what that means for the offender is a
recurring theme within research studies, including a recent joint inspection report by
HM Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland and the Inspectorate of Prosecution in
Scotland. The Victims, Witnesses and Public Perceptions evaluation of Summary
Justice Reform made the same finding and also found that if victims, witnesses and
the public are to have confidence in the justice system, they need to understand the
sentence, how the sentence was decided and understand more clearly why a court
considered that the sentence was proportionate to the offence.
32.
Information is currently provided about different types of sentences. For
example, in serious cases, judges will generally state in court what the “punishment
part” of a custodial sentence is and that this means the convicted person cannot be
considered for parole before that period of time is served; they will also generally
explain if an offender is given a sentence discount for pleading guilty. COPFS’
Victim Information and Advice service has a publicly available information leaflet on
sentences. Amongst other information, it explains how the judge reaches a decision,
what different sentences – custodial and others – actually mean in practice, what
happens if someone has committed more than one crime and what factors affect the
time an offender spends in prison. The leaflet was developed in response to the
sorts of questions that VIA staff were asked by victims and their families.
33.
The Scottish Government is considering more generally what other
practical measures could be taken to try and improve public understanding of
sentencing. Achieving this doesn’t necessarily require legislative action but we wish
to take the opportunity in this consultation to obtain views on how we can do better in
this area.
34.
We would like to use this consultation to gather views on what sentencing
information victims, witnesses and the public more generally would find useful, and
what the best method of providing that information would be.
Q5 What information would help victims, witnesses and the public understand
different types of sentences better?
Q6 What is the best way to provide information about sentences to victims,
witnesses and the public?
Notifying bereaved relatives of return of an offender’s driving licence in road
death cases
35.
Groups supporting bereaved families in road death cases have said how
important it is for families to know when someone convicted of an offence which
includes reference to a death has had their driving disqualification rescinded and
driving licence returned. They also feel families should have the chance to raise any
concerns they have about return of the licence.
12
36.
Section 42 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 currently states that when
considering an application for the return of a driving licence, the court should
consider:
•
•
•
the character of the person disqualified and their conduct since the
disqualification
the nature of the offence
any other circumstances of the case
37.
When an offender requests the return of their driving licence, the police
provide a report covering the offender’s behaviour since the offence. Road Traffic
legislation is a reserved matter, but there may be an opportunity to notify bereaved
families as part of the information gathering for the police report. The police could
note any concerns that the family have and include this in the report. It would then
be open to the judge to consider these views as part of ‘any other circumstances of
the case.
Q7 Do you agree that bereaved families in road death cases should be:(a) advised when the offender’s driving disqualification is rescinded and their
driving licence returned to them?
Yes
No
(b) given the chance to register any concerns about return of the driving
licence?
Yes
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answers
13
No
DELIVERING GREATER CERTAINTY
38.
One of the most regular conclusions of studies and surveys of the experience
of victims and witnesses is that they do not feel valued within the court process. A
major part of this is the degree to which they experience long waits in court and the
frequency with which trials are postponed or do not go ahead at the last minute.
This leads to a poor experience for victims and witnesses, and undermines
confidence in the justice system.
39.
More generally, we now live in a society where citizens expect a high
standard of service from public institutions and transparency about what they can
expect.
Making Justice Work
40.
The Making Justice Work programme aims to take a co-ordinated systemwide approach. It aims to deliver a fair and accessible, effective and efficient justice
system in which disputes and prosecutions will be resolved quickly and secure just
outcomes. In turn, this contributes to the Scottish Government’s National Outcome
15, namely that 'Our public services are high quality, continually improving, efficient
and responsive to local people's needs'.
41.
One of the projects within Making Justice Work is specifically looking at
improving procedures and case management, and one of the objectives of the
programme is to improve the experience for users, primarily victims and witnesses.
Some of the areas that the programme is working on to deliver greater certainty
include:
•
•
•
a range of initiatives to ensure witnesses attend at court and that trials can
therefore go ahead, reducing the number of times which people are called to
court and do not give evidence
improving engagement between prosecution and defence to try to agree
evidence and resolve cases earlier so that fewer witnesses need to be cited to
court
making sure key evidence is available as early as possible to reduce the
number of times cases proceed to trial only for a guilty plea to be entered on
the day.
42.
These are complex and challenging objectives, and some of the factors
involved, such as the behaviour of accused, are not always under the control of
Government or statutory bodies. Nevertheless, we believe there is much that can be
done to improve on the current, unsatisfactory situation.
Standards of Service
43.
National Standards for Victims of Crime were published in 2005. These set
out the level of service that victims (and victims when giving evidence as witnesses)
should expect in their dealings with the criminal justice and children’s hearing
14
systems. The aspects covered – information, support and participation – reflected
the themes in the 2001 Scottish Strategy for Victims. The standards were based on
generic principles and did not include commitments and expectations to be delivered
by each of the criminal justice and children’s hearings agencies. There are currently
no specific service standards for witnesses. However, COPFS launched Our
Commitment to Victims and Prosecution Witnesses) in October 2010, and there are
a number of partnership agreements in place, including:o a Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) and Scottish Court
Service (SCS) Joint statement on Crown Witnesses (2005)
o an Information Exchange Agreement between the Victim Information and
Advice Service and SCS on victims, vulnerable witnesses and bereaved
relatives (2007)
o an Operational Protocol on Referrals and Information Exchange between
COPFS and Victim Support Scotland (2007).
44.
Several years on, a recurring theme in the consultations undertaken around
the recent victim and witness policy reviews was the need for clear service
standards.
45.
The Scottish Government proposes to create a duty on relevant public
bodies requiring minimum standards of service for victims and witnesses to
be set. Our intention is that the legislation would also require those bodies to report
performance against those standards and have to have an effective complaints
procedure.
46.
Such standards should:•
•
•
make clear what victims and witnesses can expect from the various
organisations they come into contact with
set a clear benchmark against which performance of public bodies can be
measured
help improve accountability and influence behaviour and attitudes
Q8 Do you agree with the proposal to create a duty on relevant public bodies
to publish minimum standards of service for victims and witnesses?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
47.
Standards in other jurisdictions have typically been introduced through codes
setting out minimum standards of service for victims and apply to witnesses only
where they are also victims. However, there was clear support during witness policy
review discussion for standards to cover all witnesses.
48.
There are many forms such a set of standards could take. They could be an
integrated set of system-wide standards or a linked series of commitments by
individual organisations. They could be focused solely on standards of service to the
15
victim or witness but they could also potentially set out some underlying expectations
on the part of witnesses regarding, for example, responding to citations and
attending at trial.
Q9 Do you agree that standards should encompass both victims and
witnesses?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why
49.
Our expectation is that the core standards will set out for victims and
witnesses:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The levels of service that they can expect to receive e.g. about the type and
timing of information about their case
The information they can expect about what their rights are, including the
information they are entitled to about why decisions have been made
The information they can expect before giving evidence in court e.g. about the
court process and about special measures
That information will be provided in plain language, translated if necessary
That they will be treated with dignity and respect, and that high standards will
be provided regardless of race, age, gender, disability, ethnicity, religion or
sexual orientation
That suitable arrangements will be made for those with a disability
How information they provide can be used in the justice system
How to make a complaint if unhappy with the service provided and informal
attempts to resolve the matter have been unsuccessful
Q10 Are there any other issues that you think standards should cover?
Agreeing a closed court in advance
50.
A number of EU Directives include measures allowing a hearing to take place
without the presence of the public as one of the ways to provide protection for
vulnerable victims during criminal proceedings. Support organisations have made
strong representations that it would significantly reduce witness anxiety if they knew
in advance that the court would be cleared of the public when they gave evidence.
51.
In most instances where the public are excluded, accredited members of the
media are allowed to remain, but with appropriate restrictions on what can be
reported. We do not propose to change this arrangement, the operation of which is
under the control of the courts.
52.
Giving evidence in private is a special measure in England and Wales, and
Northern Ireland, under s25 of the Youth Justice & Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and
Article 13 of the Criminal Evidence (NI) Order 1999 respectively. Both apply the
16
measure in sexual offence cases and cases with the potential for intimidation. The
provisions allow for one nominated member of the press to be present.
53.
In Scotland, it is a basic rule that all trials should be held in public, but there
are some situations in which the public can be excluded:
•
The Court has a common law power and duty to regulate its own proceedings.
This includes the power of the judge to exclude the public from proceedings
where this is necessary for the administration of justice. There is also specific
guidance to exclude the public in child witness cases (Lord Justice General’s
Memorandum on Child Witnesses).
•
Section 50(3) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (“the 1995 Act”)
provides that any proceedings in relation to an offence against, or any
conduct contrary to, decency or morality, (e.g. a sexual offence) where a child
is called as a witness, the court may direct that the Court is cleared.
•
Section 92(3) of the 1995 Act permits the judge, at the commencement of the
leading of evidence in a trial for rape or other serious sexual offences, to
cause all persons other than the accused and counsel and solicitors to be
removed from the court-room.
54.
We understand that an application for a closed court is routinely agreed on
the day in the specific cases outlined but, by then, the issue will have caused the
witness stress. The Scottish Government wishes to ensure that the matter is
considered at an early stage in appropriate cases and that vulnerable
witnesses know as early as possible if they will be able to give their evidence
in private. One option would be to make a motion for a closed court part of the
preparations at pre-trial hearings (i.e. First Diet, Intermediate Diet or Preliminary
Hearing); another would be to make giving evidence in a closed court a special
measure and subject to a Child Witness Notice or Vulnerable Witness Application.
Q11 Do you agree that a closed court should be:
(a) requested through a motion at the pre-trial hearing (First Diet, Intermediate
Diet or Preliminary Hearing)?
Yes
No
or (b) made a special measure (i.e. the subject of a Child Witness Notice or
Vulnerable Witness Application)?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
17
FEELING SUPPORTED
55.
For many victims and witnesses, the experience of crime leaves them fearful
and anxious. This is particularly so for vulnerable groups such as children. Giving
evidence in court is an unfamiliar and uncomfortable experience for most lay
witnesses. Facing the accused will often be a particular focus of anxiety.
56.
The proposals in this section are designed to extend the protections for
victims and witnesses and to address some of these concerns. The aim is to
reassure them about their safety while ensuring that the evidence given is of the
highest quality and integrity.
Improving victim and witness care and support
57.
The consultation gives us an opportunity to look at how services are currently
provided and whether this can be done better – for both victims and witnesses, and
those who provide the service. Outlined below are some of the ideas already
suggested by partners and which we might test locally after further exploration. As
part of this consultation, we would welcome your views on these suggestions.
•
A dedicated contact point - appoint a single professional to advise and
update the victim or witness throughout the criminal justice process (pre,
during and post). This could help deliver information tailored to individual
needs.
•
A co-ordination/liaison/care unit – a multi-justice organisation team which
would take responsibility for dealing with victim and witness contact,
information and organisation of support measures (legislative or otherwise).
This could help deliver more effective information-sharing between
organisations and a more stream-lined service for individual victim and
witnesses
•
A support programme for child victims/witnesses - make available, as a
matter of course, a support programme which focuses on preparing a child for
court in a way that ensures they are able to give their best evidence but does
not prejudice the right of the accused to a fair trial. The programme would
focus on building a child’s resilience and could have a therapeutic element to
help them move on from and beyond the justice process. This could help
improve participation in the justice process and individual recovery.
•
A central hub - to support professionals with awareness, training and
preparation for dealing with child and other vulnerable witnesses and their
families. This could also be developed to act as an information and contact
point for vulnerable witnesses and their families at various stages of the
judicial process. This could help improve engagement with and support of
victims, witnesses and families.
18
Q12 Please let us have your views on the possible options for piloting
improved care and support for victims and witnesses
Q13 Are there any other models for improving care and support that you
would like to tell us about? If so, please provide details.
Definition and identification of vulnerability
Definition of a child witness
58.
Part 1 of the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004 (“the 2004 Act”)
defines a person under the age of 16 as a vulnerable witness. Section 88 of the
Criminal Justice & Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 amended this to up to age 18 in
people trafficking cases. This ensures we meet the terms of the EU Directive on
Human Trafficking where a child is defined as a person up to age 18. However,
other EU Directives (e.g. on Victims and Child Sexual Abuse) and the UN
Convention on the Rights of a Child also define a child as being up to age 18.
England and Wales, and Northern Ireland have both recently revised their definition
of a child as a person up to age 18 through s98 of the Coroners and Justice Act
2009 and Article 7 of the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011.
59.
We wish to ensure that child victims and witnesses in Scotland are entitled to
the same support as elsewhere in the UK and EU. We therefore intend to make
provision in the Bill so that the definition of a child witness will be changed to
someone up to the age of 18 for the purposes of eligibility for automatic
entitlement to standard special measures.
Q14 Do you agree with the proposal to change the definition of child witness
to be up to age 18?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why
Definition of a vulnerable adult witness
60.
The main definitions of a vulnerable adult witness in the 2004 Act is that there
is a significant risk that the quality of their evidence will be diminished by reason of:
o mental disorder (within the meaning of s328 of the Mental Health (Care
& Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, or
o fear or distress in connection with giving evidence at the trial
61.
Any witness who may be vulnerable is eligible to be considered for special
measures. The discretionary category in the 2004 Act (where there was a significant
19
risk that the quality of evidence would be affected) was designed to cover this, take
account of a wide range of circumstances and avoid a hierarchy of vulnerability.
62.
However, the draft EU Directive on Victims envisages a wider definition of
vulnerability than applies in Scotland. It considers that any person could be
vulnerable depending on their individual characteristics and the nature of the crime.
It proposes that child witnesses (up to age 18) should always be presumed
vulnerable. For other vulnerable witnesses, vulnerability should be identified through
individual assessments.
63.
The assessment should, in particular, take into account age, gender and
gender identity, ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, state of health, disability,
communication difficulties, relationship to or dependence on the suspected or
accused person, previous experience of crime, the type or nature of the crime such
as organised crime, terrorism, or bias crimes and whether the victim is a foreign
victim. These are similar but not exactly the same factors as already set out in
s271(2) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (“the 1995 Act”). Victims who
have been identified as vulnerable should be offered measures (decided through the
assessment, in discussions with the victim and in accordance with judicial
discretion), to protect them during criminal proceedings.
64.
We wish to ensure that vulnerable witnesses in Scotland are entitled to the
same support as elsewhere in the UK and EU. We therefore intend to make
provision in the Bill that the definition of vulnerability reflects the proposals in
the final version of the European Directive on Victims.
Q15 Do you agree that we should amend the definition of vulnerable witness
to match the requirements of the EU directive?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why
Rights-based entitlement to special measures
65.
Currently child witnesses are the only category of witness who have automatic
entitlement to standard special measures. As explained in paragraph 59, we
propose to change the definition of a child to be a person up to age 18 and so all
child witness up to this age will automatically be entitled to standard special
measures.
66.
There was support amongst statutory and voluntary organisations during the
consultation around witness support and policy in Scotland in 2010-11 to give victims
of sexual offences and domestic abuse automatic entitlement to special measures
when they give evidence. This is in keeping with other developments to improve
support for these victims: examples include the COPFS Review of the Investigation
and Prosecution of Sexual Offences, the setting up of the National Sexual Crimes
20
Unit within COPFS, the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009, and the creation of
Domestic Abuse courts in Glasgow and Edinburgh.
67.
In England, Wales and Northern Ireland victims of sexual offences are already
automatically entitled to special measures (unless they opt-out). Section 17(4) of the
Youth Justice & Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and Article 4 of the Criminal Evidence
(NI) Order 1999 give these rights respectively.
68.
In early drafts of the EU Directive on Victims, one of the categories defined as
vulnerable was those with a significant impairment of intelligence and social
functioning. Under section 328 of the Mental Health (Care & Treatment) (Scotland)
Act 2003, “mental disorder” is defined as “any mental illness, personality disorder or
learning disability however caused or manifested”. In England, Wales and Northern
Ireland, the definition of mental disorder also includes “a significant impairment of
intelligence and social functioning” (see section 16(2)(a) of the Youth Justice &
Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and Article 4 of the Criminal Evidence (NI) Order 1999).
We believe the definition of mental disorder in section 328 of the 2003 Act is broad
enough to encompass witnesses in this category and do not believe any amendment
to the definition is necessary. However, we may require to revisit this issue if the
final EU Directive includes different categories of vulnerability.
69.
Section 271A(14) of the 1995 Act sets out the standard special measures – a
live TV link in another part of the court building (s271J), a screen (s271K) and a
supporter in conjunction with either of these (s271L). We propose to extend an
automatic right to standard special measures to:
•
•
•
victims of sexual offences
victims of domestic abuse
any other category defined as automatically vulnerable in the final
version of the EU Directive on Victims
Q16 Do you agree the definition of a vulnerable witness - and therefore
automatic entitlement to standard special measures - should be extended to
include:
(a) victims of sexual offences
Yes
No
No
(b) victims of domestic abuse
Yes
(c) those witnesses defined as automatically vulnerable in the final version of
the EU Directive on Victims
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answers
21
70.
Under current legislation, children can opt-out of using the standard special
measures to which they are entitled if they so wish and it is accepted by the court.
We are keen to ensure that victims of sexual offences and domestic abuse can also
opt-out in the same circumstances.
Q17 Do you agree that any witnesses who are automatically entitled to
standard special measures should be able to opt-out of using them?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
71.
We would like to monitor and evaluate the impact of this change to ensure it
delivers best evidence in the future. We therefore propose to include in the
legislation flexibility to extend the range of standard special measures if necessary in
future. This would most likely be through secondary legislation.
Q18 Do you have any comments on the proposal to include in the legislation
flexibility to extend the range of standard special measures if necessary in
future?
Notification/application arrangements
72.
The current process for applying to the court for special measures is through
submitting a Child Witness Notice (under s271A of the 1995 Act) or a Vulnerable
Witness Application (under 271C of the 1995 Act). A court can also make an order
that a child witness gives evidence without the benefit of special measures if the
child has expressed such a wish or using special measures would prejudice the
fairness of the trial or the interests of justice and that these outweigh the interests of
the child witness (s271A (10) of the 1995 Act).
73.
We are aware that widening the definition of vulnerability and a rights-based
approach to special measures, and extending the range of special measures
available for application have the potential to increase demand for them. This
consultation provides the opportunity to revisit the administrative arrangements for
special measures and consider if there are any ways they could be streamlined while
maintaining the interests of the witness and of justice.
74.
The Scottish Court Service clearly needs to know in advance what special
measure(s) a witness requires to be able to make the necessary arrangements. This
is also true of the Witness Service or any other organisation in relation to providing a
supporter. We would also wish to ensure that people could opt-out of the special
measures to which they are automatically entitled but, in facilitating this, avoid any
disproportionate administrative burden.
22
Q19 Do you have any suggestions about how the administrative arrangements
for special measures might be streamlined:(a) for those witnesses automatically entitled to standard special measures? If
so, please give details
(b) for other witnesses who may fall into the definition of vulnerable but do not
automatically do so? If so, please give details
(c) for those witnesses who wish to opt-out of using the standard special
measures to which they are entitled? If so, please give details
Additional support for child witnesses
Visual recording of child witness’ evidence
75.
A number of recent EU Directives include provisions to ensure effective
participation of child witnesses in proceedings and seek to ensure entitlement to
giving evidence using appropriate communication technologies. Equipment to
visually record joint investigative interviews with child witnesses in serious cases is
being introduced in Scotland now. The recently updated Guidance on Joint
Investigative Interviewing of Child Witnesses in Scotland makes clear that these
interviews should be visually recorded unless there is a good reason why this is not
appropriate (e.g. recording was a feature of the alleged crime).
76.
We require to make more specific statutory provision to ensure compliance
with EU legislation. This means putting the guidance referred to in the paragraph
above on a statutory footing. We propose to create a duty on those who carry
out joint investigative interviews with child witnesses to have regard to the
guidance when undertaking such interviews.
Q20 Do you have any concerns about the proposal to put the Guidance on
Joint Investigative Interviewing of Child Witnesses in Scotland on a statutory
footing?
Yes
No
If you have answered “yes”, please give details of your concerns
Presumptions around child witnesses under age 12
77.
Part 1 of the 2004 Act amended section 271B of the 1995 Act to include a
presumption that child witnesses under age 12 in prescribed sexual or violence
cases should give evidence away from the court building. Although there are
exceptions to the rule, feedback from some statutory and voluntary partners
23
suggests that the current presumption is applied too rigidly and does not take
account of individual circumstances. They feel it can add to rather than reduce
stress for the witness and their family e.g. because it involves attendance at different
locations. Others feel that it is important that the child is not in the same court
building as an accused and that the presumption should remain.
78.
The Scottish Government wishes to ensure that child witnesses under age 12
are able to give their evidence in a way and in an environment that best meets their
needs. In England and Wales, and Northern Ireland, s100 of the Coroners and
Justice Act 2009 and Article 8 of the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 have
removed this presumption to place all child witnesses on the same footing. This
does not mean that a child witness cannot give evidence away from the court
building, just that it is not automatically assumed to be the best support.
Q21 Should we seek to remove the presumption that child witnesses under
age 12 in prescribed sexual or violence cases should give evidence away from
the court building, while retaining the ability for them to do so?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reasons for your answer
Child Witness Notices
79.
Some support organisations have suggested that the submission of Child
Witness Notices should be a compulsory part of pre-trial hearings. They feel this
would avoid unnecessary last-minute applications and better ensure the needs and
rights of child witnesses are built into the courts process more effectively than at
present.
80.
This suggestion could be overtaken if the arrangements for notifying/applying
for special measures are changed (see question 19 above). However, if it is not
appropriate or feasible to streamline the general arrangements, then this proposal
could be considered. It could be achieved by amending the existing provisions
within the 1995 Act which are designed to ensure parties are ready to go to trial: first
diets for sheriff and jury cases (s71), preliminary hearings in the High Court (s72)
and intermediate diets for summary proceedings (s148).
Q22 Should the submission of Child Witness Notices be made a compulsory
part of pre-trial hearings?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
24
Visual recording of vulnerable witness’ evidence
81.
Visual recording is not currently a special measure as such in Scotland.
However, the 1995 Act provides for applications to be made for non-standard (known
as “further”) special measures so that a vulnerable witness can give:
•
•
visually recorded evidence by a commissioner (section 271I); this includes all
the stages of giving evidence i.e. main evidence (“evidence in chief”) as well
as cross-examination and re-examination
their main evidence (“evidence in chief”) in the form of a prior statement
(section 271M); while not stated on the face of the legislation, this can in
practice include a visual recording
82.
Video recording of evidence in chief is specifically a special measure in
England and Wales (section 27 of the Youth Justice & Criminal Evidence Act 1999)
and in Northern Ireland (Article 15 of Criminal Evidence (NI) Order 1999). Neither
jurisdiction uses the term, or has provision for, prior statements. We propose to
make clear in the legislation that section 271M does include visual recording.
Q23 Do you have any concerns about the proposal to make clear that section
271M of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 does include provision for
visual recording of evidence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
83.
England, Wales and Northern Ireland also have provision for video recording
supplementary evidence (Section 103 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and Art
11 of the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011).
Q24 Do you believe we need specific provision allowing for visual recording
of supplementary evidence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Improved support for communication needs
Support for communication needs
84.
We are also keen to explore how best to support witnesses with
communication needs – another particularly vulnerable group - to ensure that they
can understand questions and articulate answers effectively in investigation and
prosecution stages.
25
85.
Two consultations have asked about whether the use of intermediaries would
be of benefit in Scotland: the Vital Voices consultation which preceded the 2004 Act
and a separate consultation in 2008 on intermediaries as a special measure. The
first concluded that we should await the outcome of intermediary pilot schemes in
England and Wales, and the second did not rule out their use in future but decided
that we should focus on implementation of the 2004 Act which was phased in
between 2005 and 2008.
86.
England and Wales already use intermediaries as a special measure (section
29 of the Youth Justice & Criminal Evidence Act 1999). Northern Ireland has
provision for this (Article 17 of the Criminal Evidence (NI) Order 1999) and is
committed to delivering an implementation plan during 2011-12 for their introduction.
We are keen to ensure that the most vulnerable witnesses in Scotland are able to
participate effectively in proceedings and wish to revisit this question.
87.
Section 271H of the 1995 Act enables Scottish Ministers to prescribe such
other special measures as they think appropriate. This would have to be laid before
and approved by the Scottish Parliament. This existing power could be used to
prescribe means of meeting communication support needs.
88.
Models we are aware of to meet these communication needs are outlined
below.
•
Intermediaries – help victims and witnesses with communication needs to
give their best evidence in criminal investigations and at trial by ensuring that
they can understand questions put to them and can communicate their
answers effectively. The intermediary may explain the questions asked or
answers given to the extent necessary to enable them to be understood.
There are a number of different models already operating in different
jurisdictions, which operate an adversarial system, for example: England and Wales: intermediaries were piloted in six areas between
February 2004 and June 2005, rolled out nationally in 2008 and extended
to the accused following the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
Intermediaries are registered professionals who have experience in
communication difficulties. They can be involved from first contact with
vulnerable witnesses and certain vulnerable defendants so can advise the
police and the courts about strategies and special measures that can
assist the witness give their best evidence. There was an evaluation of
the pilot intermediary scheme in 2006 (The Go-Between: Evaluation of
Pathways Pilot Project – Intermediaries) and intermediaries were also
mentioned in a study - Court experiences of adults with mental health
conditions or learning disabilities.
Northern Ireland: are committed to introducing an intermediary scheme
and to coming up with an action plan in 2011-12.
Ireland: intermediaries can be used for children under age 17. The
intermediary must ask questions in the words used by the questioner or so
26
as to convey to the witnesses in a way which is appropriate to their age
and mental condition.
South Africa: have had provision for intermediaries since 1993. The
system is for children under age 18 where it appears to the court that the
child will suffer undue mental stress or suffering if they testify at
proceedings. The intermediary only asks the witness questions and does
not ‘translate’ their answers. The witness only hears the intermediary’s
questions, not those of the lawyers and gives evidence through CCTV or
behind a one way mirror.
Australia New South Wales: in certain sex offence cases, an intermediary
can be used for a witness who has a communication deficit but only where
the person uses an intermediary on a daily basis to communicate.
Western Australia: use intermediaries for the sole purpose of preventing
an unrepresented accused in a criminal trial from directly cross-examining
a witness under age 16 or a ‘special witness’ (one who is likely to suffer
severe emotional trauma or be so intimidated or distressed as to be
unable to give evidence satisfactorily). They also use child communicators
– suitably qualified persons from whom counsel may seek assistance in
communicating with a child witness who may have difficulty in
understanding questions or framing answers.
Israel: specialist child interviewers conduct interviews of children aged
under 14, decide how the child participates in proceedings and can veto
the child from testifying (and can present the child’s evidence on their
behalf). These specialists can also be used as intermediaries during
•
Witness Profiling – this is an initiative which has been operating in Liverpool
since 1997. It aims to promote equal access to justice for witnesses with
learning disabilities and to other vulnerable witnesses by providing an in-depth
support and preparation programme.
At the investigation stage, an assessment of the individual’s potential to be a
credible and competent witness is carried out by social services. A witness
profile is drawn up and presented to the court for any trial. It allows the judge
to give directions in the courtroom as to any assistance the witness may need
and assists the lawyers in the case to formulate questions at a level the
witness will understand.
89.
These options clearly have financial and practical implications which we would
need to explore more fully with partners. However, we recognise the need for
support for this vulnerable group. We therefore propose to extend the types of
support measures available incrementally to include means of meeting
communication support needs. We intend to do this in a way that allows
Ministers to pilot a measure in a specific area and, if appropriate following
monitoring and evaluation of the pilot, roll-out the measure out across
Scotland.
27
Q25 Do you agree with the principle of extending the types of special
measures available specifically to help meet communication support needs?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reasons why
Q26 If you agree in principle we should extend the types of special measures
available to meet communication support needs, do you have any views at this
stage on which option/model you would favour?
intermediaries?
witness profiles?
some other means (please specify)?
Please comment on the reason(s) for your choice
Existing support for people with mental disorders
90.
Appropriate Adults (AAs) facilitate communication between the police and
adults (persons aged 16 or over) who have a mental disorder. This is defined in the
Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 as “any mental illness,
personality disorder, learning disability however caused or manifested”. In practice
this includes people with acquired brain injury, autistic spectrum disorder and
dementia.
91.
The assistance of an AA is available to victims, witnesses, suspects and
accused. AAs are independent of the police and are not usually known to the person
being interviewed. They are often social workers or health professionals by training
(though they do not fulfil the AA role in that professional capacity).
92.
The role of an AA is to:•
•
•
•
•
facilitate communication between the police officer and interviewee
monitor the interview to try to ensure that the person does not become unduly
distressed and lose understanding about what is going on
make sure the person understands, and continues to understand, why they
are being interviewed and the implications of their answers or lack of them
try to ensure that the person is not disadvantaged by their disorder
advise the interviewing officer of any concerns they have about the interview.
If necessary, the AA can prompt suspension of the interview to allow these
discussions to take place
93.
An AA can be present during every stage of the investigation, including
searches, interviews, medical examinations, the taking of forensic samples (e.g.
DNA), fingerprinting, photographing, and identification parades. The AA does not
28
take an active role in the interview other than to assist the police and the interviewee
to communicate. It is not the function of an AA to: advise the person being
interviewed whether or how to answer any questions; object to any questions being
asked except for the purpose of facilitating communication between the police and
the interviewee; tell the police if they think a particular line of questioning is unfair; or
offer support after interview or help arrange ongoing referrals.
94.
Chapter 6.4 of the Carloway Review into criminal law and practice published
in November 2011 made recommendations about the AA service in Scotland in
relation to their use with vulnerable adult suspects The recommendations are that
the role of an AA in assisting a suspect should be defined in statute; access to an
AA should be provided as soon as practicable after detention and before any
questioning; and that the qualifications, professional or otherwise, necessary for a
person to be an AA should be defined, at least in broad terms, in statute. While these
recommendations specifically deal with AAs in relation to vulnerable adult suspects,
there is a read-across to the AA role with victims and witnesses too.
95.
A Scottish Government response will be made to the recommendations in the
Carloway Review. In the context of this consultation paper, the Scottish Government
is keen to ensure that victims and witnesses who require communication support
receive it at whatever point in the justice system they require it – when a crime is
reported, an interview or statement given, before and during any court proceedings.
If a victim or witness requires communication support at the start of the process, they
will need it throughout. We are interested in your views about how best these needs
can be met and services dovetailed.
Q27 If the role of Appropriate Adults in relation to suspects is defined in
statute, do you believe the same is necessary for their role in relation to
victims and witnesses?
Yes
No
29
FEELING SAFE
Right of victims of sexual violence to choose the gender of their interviewer
96.
The draft EU Directive envisages that all interviews with victims of sexual
violence, unless conducted by a public prosecutor or judge, are conducted by a
person of the sex chosen by the victim if they so wish and it would not be prejudicial
to the proceedings. We propose to enshrine the right of victims of sexual
violence to choose the gender of the interviewer.
Q28 Do you agree that victims of sexual violence should have the right to
choose the gender of the person who interviews them?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Disclosure of personal details
97.
Concerns have been expressed by statutory and voluntary partners about the
extent to which a witness’ personal circumstances require to be disclosed in a Child
Witness Notice or a Vulnerable Witness Application. They feel this is unnecessarily
intrusive for the victim or witness and diverts attention from the core evidence; they
also believe that disclosing personal information (e.g. medical details) in an
application for a special measure or measures is unnecessary and irrelevant since
the evidence can still be tested and so does not affect fairness to the accused.
Others hold the view that such information is relevant to the witness’ credibility.
They also feel that giving evidence using a special measure can be detrimental to
the impact of that evidence – because the witness may not be seen in open court,
may not be in the courtroom at all and so questioning of them is done “remotely”.
98.
The important factor for the Scottish Government is that witnesses are able to
give evidence in a way which makes them feel safe while at the same time giving
evidence that can be appropriately tested and ensures fairness to the accused. The
Scottish Government is proposing that it should not be necessary to disclose
the witness’ personal circumstances in an application for standard special
measures.
Q29 Do you agree with the proposal that it should not be necessary to
disclose the witness’ personal circumstances (e.g. medical details) in an
application for standard special measures?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
30
Advising victims about offender temporary release
99.
Section 16 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 gives victims or
parents, carers or relatives the right to receive certain information about the person
convicted of the offence against them or their family member. This applies where
the offender was given a custodial sentence of 18 months or more.
100. The scheme under which this information is provided is called the Victim
Notification Scheme (VNS). More information about the scheme, the different
categories of offender to which it applies, and the arrangements which apply to each
is given on the VNS page of the victimsofcrimeinscotland website.
101.
•
•
•
•
•
The VNS provides the right to information:
about the date of the offender’s release from prison (other than on temporary
release)
if the offender dies in prison before release, about the date of death
if the offender has been transferred out of Scotland
that the offender has become eligible for temporary release (but not the date
of each individual period of release)
if the offender escapes from prison, is released from prison or is returned to
prison to serve the remainder of the sentence
102. Temporary release (unescorted leave from prison) is intended to help
reintegrate offenders into the community and to test them in non-custodial conditions
before their eventual release. Such release is allowed:•
•
•
•
•
to enable a visit home or to another approved place for a period (for no more
than seven days)
to prepare a prisoner for release by developing links to his family/community
(for no more than one day)
to enable a prisoner to attend a work or educational placement (for no more
than one day)
for compassionate reasons e.g. to attend a family funeral, or to visit a close
relative who is unable to visit in prison (for no more than one day)
for health reasons e.g. attend hospital (for no more than one day)
The first three of these types of temporary release can be planned in advance but
the last two are unpredictable.
103. The EU Directive on Victims includes a right for a victim to be informed, if they
so wish, if someone remanded, prosecuted or sentenced has been released or
escaped detention; this is currently defined as applying “at least” in cases where
there might be a danger or identified risk of harm to the victim unless there is an
identified risk of harm to the offender which would result from the notification.
104. Currently, victims or parents, carers or relatives are notified by the Scottish
Prison Service (SPS) when the prisoner first becomes eligible for temporary release.
They do not currently have the right to make representations about what conditions
should be attached to a temporary release licence. We propose that they are
31
given the right to raise concerns that the SPS might not be aware of before a
prisoner is given planned temporary release for the first time.
Q30 Do you agree that victims (or parents, carers or relatives) should be given
the opportunity to make written representations about what additional
conditions might be included in the licence when an offender first becomes
eligible for temporary release?
Yes
No
Please comment on any concerns you have about this or any implications you
think the proposal has
Investigative anonymity orders
105. Section 90 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010
introduced Witness Anonymity Orders (WAOs). These allow courts, in appropriate
cases, to grant an order preserving the anonymity of a witness when giving
evidence. The orders are not specific to particular offences but offer protection
where there is a serious threat to a witness’ safety or property (including psychiatric
injury or serious financial loss) or where, for operational reasons, it would be
undesirable for the identity of the witness to be disclosed.
106. Investigative Anonymity Orders (IAOs) would offer earlier protection in similar
circumstances to those who subsequently would be considered for a WAO. The
Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency have suggested they would be helpful
for witness in cases that they deal with. IAOs were introduced in England and Wales
by sections 74 – 85 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. They are available only in
respect of investigations concerning suspected homicides (murder and
manslaughter) where death was caused by a gun and/or a knife. Northern Ireland
have not introduced or made provision for them.
Q31 Should we seek to introduce Investigative Anonymity Orders in
Scotland?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Q32 If you think we should, in what circumstances or for which cases should
they be used?
32
FEELING INVOLVED
Victims’ interests
107. The Scottish Government is keen to ensure that the justice system
acknowledges what has happened to victims and bereaved families in the most
serious cases, and reflects their legitimate interests in the investigation, prosecution
and outcome. These are important factors which help or hinder people’s ability to
deal with events and live with the impact on their lives when the justice system has
moved on. We believe that victims’ interests can be acknowledged and, where
appropriate, given a legitimate hearing on an equal footing with the rights of accused
and offenders.
108. Being a victim of crime can result in inconvenience, anger and despair and
affect a victim’s sense of security and freedom to go about their lives. An efficient
and compassionate response from across the criminal justice system can help
reassure victims and the general public that victims and their concerns are taken
seriously and acted upon.
109.
•
•
•
We propose to reflect victim interests in the following ways:Considering how the views of victims could help inform development of
sentencing policy
Giving victims the option to speak to a member of the Parole Board about any
fears they may have before a Tribunal considers the release of the offender
Allowing the carer of a child under 14 the right to make a victim statement on
the child’s behalf where the victim has died
Sentencing policy
110. The Scottish Government is committed to giving victims an input into
sentencing policy (custodial and non-custodial). This is not about sentencing
decisions in individual cases but about how general sentencing policy develops and
will ensure that those who are most affected by crime have a say in how criminals
are dealt with. We are interested to hear your views about how victims might make
an input the development of sentencing policy which then provides a framework
within which judges and sheriffs make their decisions in individual cases.
Q33 What mechanisms could be used to ensure victims’ interests are taken
into account when sentencing policy is developed?
Oral representations to the Parole Board
111. The Parole Board for Scotland is not concerned with punishment but with
assessing the risk to the public if the prisoner is released. Section 17 of the Criminal
Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 gives victims (or parents, carers or relatives) the
33
opportunity to make written representations to the Parole Board before any decision
is taken to release an offender, if they have indicated they would like to do so. This
applies to offenders:o released on licence (that is, those sentenced to four years or more, and those
whose sentence includes a period of supervision in the community) and
o who are aged 16 or over at the time the case is referred to the Parole Board
for a decision on release
112. There was a debate during the passage of the Criminal Justice and Licensing
(Scotland) Act 2010 about allowing victims (or parents, carers or relatives) to make
oral representations when release was being considered. At that time, no changes
were made but Ministers gave a commitment to consider the issue and return to
Parliament with a workable scheme.
113. Since then, a number of options have been considered with key partners
including victims’ representatives. Considerations have focussed on how to provide
the opportunity to be heard while ensuring safety and that any process is not unfair
to the prisoner whose release is being considered. We have concluded that any
change should, in the first instance, apply to life sentence prisoners. These are
prisoners who are reviewed for possible release on life licence by the Parole Board,
sitting as a Life Prisoner Tribunal.
114. The Scottish Government proposes to implement a scheme which will
allow victims (or relatives in relevant cases such as where the victim is a child
or is deceased) to meet and put their views to a member of the Parole Board
who is not a member of the Life Prisoner Tribunal that will make the decision
in the particular case. The person meeting the victim can explain the role of the
Parole Board and hear the victim’s views on relevant issues. They would then agree
a summary to put to the Tribunal making the decision, and which the offender would
be allowed to see.
Q34 Do you agree with the proposal to allow victims (or relatives in
appropriate cases) to speak to a member of the Parole Board before a Life
Prisoner Tribunal considers the release of an offender on licence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Victim Statements
115. Victim statements allow victims and close relatives to tell the court about the
physical, emotional and financial impact of a crime on them. They were first
introduced on a pilot basis in Edinburgh and Kilmarnock as provided for by section
14 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. Following an evaluation, the scheme
was rolled out nationally in solemn cases (those heard in front of a jury) from April
2008.
34
116. A victim statement is written and is given to the court if the accused pleads or
is found guilty. The judge or sheriff will consider the statement and what weight
should be attached to it – it will not always have an effect on the sentence. More
information about the scheme is available on the victim statement page of the
victimsofcrimeinscotland website.
Ability to submit later than when the accused pleads/is found guilty
117. Section 14 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 provides that Victim
Statements should be submitted when the prosecutor moves for sentence (solemn)
or when a guilty plea is tendered or the accused is convicted (summary). At present
they are only used in solemn cases.
118. On occasion, the Victim Statement may not be available for the court at the
relevant time. This can be due to a range of circumstances, including the timing of
the plea, especially if it is a particularly early plea of guilty. We propose to amend
the legislation so that Victim Statements can be submitted to the court prior to
sentence. This will ensure that, if the statement is not available at the time of the
guilty plea, this does not prejudicially affect the victim in the case.
Q35 Do you agree with the proposal to allow Victim Statements to be
submitted to the court at any time after the prosecutor moves for sentence (or
the accused pleads guilty or is found guilty), but before sentence is passed?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Child under 14 (who is not the direct victim): ability of carer to make a Victim
Statement on their behalf
119. Under current legislation, children under 14 years are entitled to have a victim
statement made on their behalf by their carer if they are the direct victim of the crime.
However, in cases where the victim has died, children aged under 14 (e.g. the son,
daughter or sibling of the victim) are not eligible to make a statement or have one
made on their behalf by a carer, although relatives over the age of 14 years can
make a statement in these cases.
120. A similar issue applied in relation to the Victim Notification Scheme (VNS)
which was introduced by sections 16 and 17 of the 2003 Act – see paragraphs 99104 for more information about this scheme. Again, the carer of a child under age
14 who was the direct victim of a crime could apply to join the VNS on the child’s
behalf, but there was no such right to join where the victim was dead. This anomaly
was rectified by section 36 of the Criminal Proceedings etc. (Reform) (Scotland) Act
2007: it allows the carer of the child to apply to receive information on their behalf
whether or not the child was the direct victim of the crime.
35
121. The Scottish Government would like to ensure greater consistency
between the two schemes and proposes to extend eligibility so that a child
under age 14 can have a victim statement made on their behalf if the direct
victim (e.g. their parent or sibling) has died. We realise there are sensitivities
around this issue: revisiting the crime could be very traumatic for the child and may
impact on their emotional recovery; and the parent or carer may find it difficult to
seek the views of the child, or separate them from their own, if they too have been
affected by the crime. We would need to ensure that these issues are explored fully
before any detailed practical arrangements were made.
Q36 Do you agree with the proposal to extend eligibility for the Victim
Statement scheme so that a carer of a child under age 14, who is not the direct
victim of the crime, can make a Victim Statement on their behalf?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
122. Another anomaly in the 2003 Act (which was rectified in relation to the Victim
Notification Scheme in the 2007 Act) is the definition of the carer eligible to make
statements on a child’s behalf. Under section 14(6)(a)(ii) of the 2003 Act, the carer
was defined as being the person who cared for the child immediately before the
(apparent) offence took place, in accordance with the definition of “person who cares
for” in section 2(28) of the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001. However, this
could lead to a situation where a child would have no eligible parent or carer e.g. in a
case whether the mother is killed by the father. In such a case, the carer now would
be different from the carer immediately prior to the crime. There are arguments for
and against the current carer (who may have a limited knowledge of the child or the
events surrounding the offence) making a statement on the child’s behalf.
Q37 Do you agree with the proposal to amend the definition of carer in
relation to the Victim Statement scheme so that the carer who makes the
statement on behalf of a child under age 14 does not have to have been the
carer at the time of the (alleged) offence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
123. Any amendment to the legislation could also allow for situations where the
carer is different because of other circumstances e.g. a different residential
placement or the child is now living with another relative because of family
circumstances. Again, these issues would have to be explored fully before any
detailed practical arrangements were made.
36
General
124. You may have other ideas about how the interests of victims and witnesses
can better be acknowledged and taken into account, while still ensuring the rights of
accused and offenders are respected.
Q38 What more could be done to acknowledge and take into account the
interests of victims and witnesses?
37
MAKING OFFENDERS PAY
A right to compensation
125. The draft EU Directive on Victims envisages that victims will be entitled to
obtain a decision on compensation by the offender within a reasonable time, except
where national law provides for such a decision to be made in other legal
proceedings. Member States are required to promote measures to encourage
offenders to provide adequate compensation to victims. The Scottish Government is
also committed to establishing a more direct link between offenders and
compensation for their victims.
126. Section 249 of the 1995 Act provides for a compensation order to be granted
against a convicted person for personal injury, loss or damage caused directly or
indirectly, or for alarm and distress caused directly. Where such an order is granted,
section 250(1) of the 1995 Act provides that where a person receives both a fine and
a compensation order but has insufficient means to pay both the compensation order
takes priority.
127. The Scottish Government’s view is that where an offender has caused harm,
loss or distress to an identifiable victim, the first recourse should be to ensure the
offender pays compensation direct to the victim. This provides the clearest possible
link between offending and compensation, reinforcing a sense of payback, and
reduces reliance on taxpayer-funded arrangements such as the Criminal Injuries
Compensation Scheme.
128. The current law is phrased in a permissive way to allow the courts to consider
compensation. The Scottish Government proposes to strengthen this position
so that courts are required to consider the provision of compensation
wherever a victim has suffered injury, loss or distress. This will not affect the
ability of the victim to apply to CICS where an award ordered by the court is
lower than the relevant CICS tariff due to considerations around the offender’s
ability to pay.
Q39 Do you agree that courts should be required to consider the issue of
compensation in all cases where an identifiable victim has suffered injury, loss
or distress?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
38
Victim Surcharge
129. The principal aim of introducing a victim surcharge is to make offenders more
accountable for the harm or damage that their actions cause to victims of crime.
While we propose measures to strengthen the direct compensation provided by
offenders to victims, this is not always possible where there is no identifiable victim
or because of the offenders ability to pay any meaningful level of direct
compensation. In these circumstances, the surcharge provides a pool of revenue
that can be used to the benefit of victims more generally.
130. In England and Wales the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004
amended the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to include a victims’ surcharge with effect
from 1 April 2007. The legislation also includes provisions to allow the surcharge to
be applied where a custodial or community sentence is imposed and fixed penalties
on traffic offences. The UK Government recently consulted on proposals to apply
these provisions as part of a wider consultation on victims and witnesses. The
Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 includes provisions for imposing an offender
levy.
131. Our proposal is that a surcharge should be applied in cases that result
in a court fine, with the potential to rollout surcharge arrangements to
custodial sentences, community sentences and direct measures after bedding
in period and possible refinements in light of that.
Q40 Do you support the principle of adopting a victim surcharge?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Q41 Do you agree that the surcharge should only be applied to court fines in
the first instance?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Q42 Should we consider the possibility that legislation could include a
provision to roll out application of the surcharge to custodial sentences,
community sentences and direct measures at a later date?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
39
132. The intention is that the revenue raised will be used for the benefit of victims.
Some of the revenue may be used to fund improvement in victim information and
support, but our proposal is that the bulk of the revenue should be used to
alleviate hardship amongst victims, particularly of more serious crime. This
would be administered through the third sector and involve a minimum of
bureaucracy.
Q43 Do you agree that revenue accumulated from the surcharge should be
used primarily to support victims?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
133. Ideally, the Scottish Government would wish to apply a progressive scheme
that related the amount of surcharge to the size of the fine. The simplest way of
doing so would be to deduct a percentage of any fine and retain it as a surcharge.
However, as a significant part of fine revenue in Scotland is currently remitted to HM
Treasury, we do not believe this is likely to be possible. We believe it will be more
achievable in the short term to apply the surcharge as a flat rate or variable charge
on top of any other penalty. While a flat rate would be administratively simpler, a
variable arrangement, for example a banded system or a percentage amount added
to the value of a financial penalty, would allow the system to reflect the seriousness
of the offence and ability to pay.
Q44 Do you think the surcharge should be a flat rate or a variable scheme that
reflects the size of a financial penalty?
Flat rate
Variable
Please comment on the reason for your answer.
Q45 If you think there should be a flat rate surcharge, what level should it be
set at?
£15
£20
£30
£other (please specify)
Q46 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, how do you think
this should work?
A percentage amount added to the value of the financial penalty
other (please specify)
40
Q47 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, do you think there
should be minimum and maximum levels set?
Yes
No
Q48 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, what should:
(a) the minimum be?
(b) the maximum be?
134. As indicated earlier, section 250(1) of the 1995 Act currently provides that
where a person receives both a fine and a compensation order but has insufficient
means to pay both the compensation order takes priority. We propose that priority
be given to any compensation payment to the victim, followed by the
surcharge and then the principal fine.
Q49 Do you agree that priority should be given to any compensation payment
to the victim, followed by the surcharge and then the principal fine?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on how you would prioritise the payments?
Restitution orders
135. Police officers form a particular category of victim, in that they are very
frequently exposed to criminal damage and injury not merely in the course of their
duties, but actually as a direct result of carrying them out.
136. For this reason the law recognises that police officers deserve a degree of
particular protection. While it would be competent to charge a person who assaulted
a police officer with the general common law offence of assault, there has been a
particular charge of assaulting a police officer in the execution of his or her duty for
some time now. Currently this charge is set out in Section 41(1)(a) of the Police
(Scotland) Act 1967, though in due course it is likely that a similar charge in the
Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Bill will take its place.
137. Moreover, the police are in an unusual position of paying to treat the damage
done to themselves by criminal assaults from their own pockets. While police officers
are, of course, entitled to NHS treatment they contribute, in addition, to the work of
the Police Benevolent Funds, and also for the Treatment Centres which provide
convalescent care.
138. The Scottish Government deplores assaults on all workers in the exercise of
their functions. It is particularly concerned at the high level of violence experienced
by serving police officers. During the period 1 January 2010 to 28 March 2012, there
41
were 4,890 convictions on charges of assaulting police officers, and a further 3,403
convictions on charges of resisting, obstructing, molesting or hindering police officers
in the exercise of their duty.
139. The Government therefore proposes to introduce a mechanism whereby
those who carry out assaults on the police pay to support the specialist non
NHS services which treat or assist the victims of those assaults.
140. As described earlier in this paper, the Scottish Government proposes to
strengthen the current law to require courts to consider the provision of direct
compensation wherever a victim has suffered injury, loss or distress. However, as
indicated while describing the victim surcharge, there may be circumstances where
such direct compensation is difficult. The victims surcharge would provide a pool of
revenue to help meet the immediate needs of victims more generally.
141. We are proposing a particular scheme for the case of assaults on police
officers. In this case there is an established need, matched with charging, reporting
and collection arrangements which allow proceeds from any financial penalties to be
followed. Finally, there are beneficiaries of any funds raised which already exist to
help deal with the damage, mental and physical, these assaults cause –
beneficiaries which are currently paid for by the victims themselves.
142. As indicated earlier, we do not believe it is possible to deduct percentages of
fines and retain them for such a scheme, as a significant part of fine revenue is
currently remitted to HM Treasury. For this reason, as well, we believe the option of
a fine should continue to be open to sentencers.
143. Instead we propose to allow sentencers enhanced discretion through an
additional sentencing option. The sentencer may choose to order an offender
convicted of the relevant charge of assault on a police officer to pay a restitution
order, in addition to (where appropriate) compensation to the individual, and a fine,
or as an alternative to either or both of these. The option of imprisonment in addition
to all these kinds of financial penalties would also be retained. The sentencer will
have discretion to decide on the most appropriate disposal or disposals.
144. Proceeds from restitution orders would go to a fund which would make
disbursements to purposes approved by the Government and the Scottish
Parliament through the passing of the required legislation. These purposes would be
arrangements to treat, assist or mitigate the effects of assaults on police. The
obvious possibility is the Police Benevolent Fund, which would thereby be enabled to
support mental and physical treatment and convalescent care. There may be other
options, subject to detail, such as direct support for the relevant Police Treatment
Centre. In Scotland the Castlebrae Centre in Auchterarder provides convalescent
care. All proceeds from restitution orders, other than those needed to pay the
expenses of administering the fund, would go to the approved purposes.
42
Q50 Do you agree with the suggestion that there should be restitution orders
whereby those who assault police officers may be sentenced to pay into a
fund to support treatment and care of police victims?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
Q51 Do you agree that the Scottish Government should set the purposes to
which the fund to support treatment and care of police victims should be
applied?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer
145. In solemn proceedings there is currently no limit on the amount of any
compensation order to the individual victim. In summary proceedings the limit on
compensation orders to individuals is the prescribed sum (currently £10,000) in
sheriff and stipendiary magistrates’ courts, and in JP courts it is Level 4 on the
standard scale (currently £2,500). We propose to use the same limits for restitution
orders as exist for compensation orders.
Q52 Do you think limits for the size of a restitution order should be as
described in paragraph 145 ( the same limits as exist for compensation
orders)?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
146. Earlier in this paper we note that where a person is sentenced to both a
compensation order and a fine but has insufficient means to pay both, the
compensation order takes priority. We would propose that collection and
enforcement of a restitution order should take priority, in these circumstances, after a
compensation order, but before a fine. This does not affect the discretion of the
sentencer in deciding the most appropriate disposal or set of disposals.
Q53 Do you agree that priority in collection and enforcement should be given
to any compensation payment to the victim, followed by the restitution order
and then any fine?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on how you would prioritise the payments
43
147. As indicated above, police officers are disproportionately victims of assaults.
The procedure for charging and sentencing their assailants is distinct, and there are
arrangements for their treatment and care. We believe this justifies action in the case
of police officers now. However, we are conscious that other emergency workers,
for example, are also subject to assault. Sections 1, 2, 3 and 5 of the Emergency
Workers (Scotland) Act 2005 deal with, amongst others, fire service personnel and
ambulance service personnel. Convictions for such assaults recorded under the
2005 Act are much lower than recorded for the police under the 1967 Act and
therefore the need for the introduction of restitution orders may be seen as lower.
However the Scottish Government is open to extending the restitution order scheme
to other groups of workers at risk of assault, where the conditions – risk, distinct
charges and collection arrangements, and the existence of appropriate beneficiaries
- would justify it.
Q54 Do you think restitution orders should be extended to groups other than
the police?
Yes
No
If so, please comment on what group(s) of workers should also benefit from a
fund supported by restitution orders
44
RESPONDING TO THIS CONSULTATION PAPER
We are inviting written responses to this consultation paper on victims and witnesses
by Friday 20th July 2012.
To respond, and make our analysis of the responses received easier, please
complete the Response Form at Annex C which has two parts:•
•
respondent information (see “handling your response” section below), and
the consultation questionnaire
Please return the completed form to victimsandwitnesses@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or to:
Victims and Witness Unit
Scottish Government
Room GW14/15
St. Andrew’s House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG
If you have any queries contact Susan Scott on 0131 244 2610.
Alternative formats and community languages
This consultation paper can be made available in alternative formats (audio, Braille,
CD, computer disk, large print) or translated into community languages on request.
Please contact Susan Scott on 0131 244 2610 if you need an alternative format or
community language.
Handling your response
We need to know how you wish your response to be handled and, in particular,
whether you are happy for your response to be made public. Completing the
Respondent Information Form (first part of Annex C to this consultation paper) will
ensure that we treat your response appropriately. If you ask for your response not to
be published we will regard it as confidential, and treat it accordingly.
All respondents should be aware that the Scottish Government are subject to the
provisions of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and would therefore
have to consider any request made to it under the Act for information relating to
responses made to this consultation exercise.
Viewing SG consultations
This consultation, and all other Scottish Government consultation exercises, can be
viewed online on the consultation web pages of the Scottish Government website at
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations.
45
The Scottish Government has an email alert system for consultations,
http://register.scotland.gov.uk. This system allows individuals and organisations to
register and receive a weekly email containing details of all new consultations
(including web links). It complements, but in no way replaces SG distribution lists,
and is designed to allow stakeholders to keep up to date with all SG consultation
activity, and therefore be alerted at the earliest opportunity to those of most interest.
We would encourage you to register.
46
NEXT STEPS IN THE PROCESS
Individual Responses
Where you have given permission for your response to be made public, we will
check that it does not contain any potentially defamatory material. Your and other
responses will then be made available to the public in the Scottish Government
Library by 17 August 2012. We will also post them on the Scottish Government
consultation web pages by the end of August 2012.
You can make arrangements to view responses by contacting the SG Library on
0131 244 4552. Responses can be copied and sent to you, but a charge may be
made for this service.
After the consultation closing date
Following the closing date, all responses will be analysed and considered along with
any other available evidence to help us reach a decision on what should be included
in the Victims and Witnesses Bill. We aim to issue a summary of this consultation by
mid-October 2012
Subject to comments from consultees, and the availability of Parliamentary time, the
Scottish Government anticipates working towards an introduction date for the Bill
during this Parliament. This timing should also allow us to ensure as far as possible
that the proposed legislation complies with the requirements of the EU Directive.
Comments and complaints
If you have any comments about how this consultation exercise has been conducted,
please send them to victimsandwitnesses@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or
Victims and Witness Unit
Scottish Government
Room GW14/15
St. Andrew’s House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG
47
Annex A
SUMMARY LIST OF QUESTIONS
(with request to give reason(s) for answers as appropriate)
Q1 Do you agree with the principle of having a case-specific information hub for
justice in Scotland?
Q2 Are there any other types of case-specific information that would be of value to
victims and witnesses?
Q3 Do you believe a statutory framework is needed to promote information-sharing
in the interests of victims and witnesses?
Q4 What protections would need to be built into such a system?
Q5 What information would help victims, witnesses and the public understand
different types of sentences better?
Q6 What is the best way to provide information about sentences to victims,
witnesses and the public?
Q7 Do you agree that bereaved families in road death cases should be (a) advised
when the offender’s driving disqualification is rescinded and their driving licence
returned to them, and (b) given the chance to register any concerns about return of
the driving licence?
Q8 Do you agree with the proposal to create a duty on relevant public bodies to
publish minimum standards of service for victims and witnesses?
Q9 Do you agree that standards should encompass both victims and witnesses?
Q10 Are there any other issues that you think standards should cover?
Q11 Do you agree that a closed court should be (a) requested through a motion at
the pre-trial hearing (First Diet, Intermediate Diet or Preliminary Hearing), or (b)
made a special measure (i.e. the subject of a Child Witness Notice or a Vulnerable
Witness Application)?
Q12 Please let us have your views on the possible options for piloting improved
care and support for victims and witnesses
Q13 Are there any other models for improving care and support that you would like
to tell us about? If so, please provide details.
Q14 Do you agree with the proposal to change the definition of child witness to be
up to age 18?
Q15 Do you agree that we should amend the definition of vulnerable witness to
match the requirements of the EU Directive on Victims?
48
Q16 Do you agree the definition of a vulnerable witness - and therefore automatic
entitlement to standard special measures – should be extended to include (a) victims
of sexual offences, (b) victims of domestic abuse, and (c) those witnesses defined as
automatically vulnerable in the final version of the EU Directive on Victims?
Q17 Do you agree that any witnesses who are automatically entitled to standard
special measures should be able to opt-out of using them?
Q18 Do you have any comments on the proposal to include in the legislation
flexibility to extend the range of standard special measures if necessary in future?
Q19 Do you have any suggestions about how the administrative arrangements for
special measures might be streamlined (a) for those witnesses automatically entitled
to standard special measures; (b) for other witnesses who may fall into the definition
of vulnerable but do not automatically do so; and (c) for those witnesses who wish to
opt-out of using the standard special measures to which they are entitled?
Q20 Do you have any concerns about the proposal to put the Guidance on Joint
Investigative Interviewing of Child Witnesses in Scotland on a statutory footing?
Q21 Should we seek to remove the presumption that child witnesses under age 12
in prescribed sexual or violence cases should give evidence away from the court
building, while retaining the ability for them to do so?
Q22 Should the submission of Child Witness Notices be made a compulsory part of
pre-trial hearings?
Q23 Do you have any concerns about the proposal to make clear that section 271M
of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 does include provision for visual
recording of evidence?
Q24 Do you believe we need specific provision allowing for visual recording of
supplementary evidence?
Q25 Do you agree with the principle of extending the types of special measures
available specifically to help meet communication support needs?
Q26 If you agree in principle we should extend the types of special measures
available to meet communication support needs, do you have any views at this stage
on which option/model (intermediaries, witnesses profiles, some other means) you
would favour?
Q27 If the role of Appropriate Adults in relation to suspects is defined in statute, do
you believe the same is necessary for their role in relation to victims and witnesses?
Q28 Do you agree that victims of sexual violence should have the right to choose
the gender of the person who interviews them?
49
Q29 Do you agree with the proposal that it should not be necessary to disclose the
witness’ personal circumstances (e.g. medical details) in applications for standard
special measures?
Q30 Do you agree that victims (or parents, carers or relatives) should be given the
opportunity to make written representations about what additional conditions might
be included in the licence when an offender first becomes eligible for temporary
release? Please comment on any concerns you have about this or any implications
you think the proposal has.
Q31 Should we seek to introduce Investigative Anonymity Orders in Scotland?
Q32 If you think we should, in what circumstances or for which cases should they be
used?
Q33 What mechanisms could be used to ensure victims’ interests are taken into
account when sentencing policy is developed?
Q34 Do you agree with the proposal to allow victims (or relatives in appropriate
cases) to speak to a member of the Parole Board before a Life Prisoner Tribunal
considers the release of an offender on licence?
Q35 Do you agree with the proposal to allow Victim Statements to be submitted to
the court at any time after the prosecutor moves for sentence (or the accused pleads
guilty or is found guilty), but before sentence is passed?
Q36 Do you agree with the proposal to extend eligibility for the Victim Statement
scheme so that a carer of a child under age 14, who is not the direct victim of the
crime, can make a Victim Statement on their behalf?
Q37 Do you agree with the proposal to amend the definition of carer in relation to
the Victim Statement scheme so that the carer who makes the statement on behalf
of a child under age 14 does not have to have been the carer at the time of the
(alleged) offence?
Q38 What more could be done to acknowledge and take into account the interests
of victims and witnesses?
Q39 Do you agree that courts should be required to consider the issue of
compensation in all cases where an identifiable victim has suffered injury, loss or
distress?
Q40 Do you support the principle of adopting a victim surcharge?
Q41 Do you agree that the surcharge should only be applied to court fines in the
first instance?
Q42 Should we consider the possibility that legislation could include a provision to
roll out application of the surcharge to custodial sentences, community sentences
and direct measures at a later date?
50
Q43 Do you agree that revenue accumulated from the surcharge should be used
primarily to support victims?
Q44 Do you think the surcharge should be a flat rate or a variable scheme that
reflects the size of a financial penalty?
Q45 If you think there should be a flat rate surcharge, what level should it be set at £15, £20, £30, other (please specify)?
Q46 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, how do you think this
should work - a percentage amount added to the value of the financial penalty, or
other (please specify)?
Q47 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, do you think there
should be minimum and maximum levels set?
Q48 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, what should (a) the
minimum be, and (b) the maximum be?
Q49 Do you agree that priority should be given to any compensation payment to the
victim, followed by the surcharge and then the principal fine? If not, please comment
on how you would prioritise the payments?
Q50 Do you agree with the suggestion that there should be restitution orders
whereby those who assault police officers may be sentenced to pay into a fund to
support treatment and care of police victims?
Q51 Do you agree that the Scottish Government should set the purposes to which
the fund to support treatment and care of police victims should be applied?
Q52 Do you think limits for the size of a restitution order should be as described in
paragraph 145 (the same limits as exist for compensation orders)?
Q53 Do you agree that priority in collection and enforcement should be given to any
compensation payment to the victim, followed by the restitution order and then any
fine? If not, please comment on how you would prioritise the payments
Q54 Do you think restitution orders should be extended to groups other than the
police? If so, please comment on what group(s) of workers should also benefit from
a fund supported by restitution orders
51
Annex B
THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION PROCESS
Consultation is an essential and important aspect of Scottish Government working
methods. Given the wide-ranging areas of work of the Scottish Government, there
are many varied types of consultation. However, in general, Scottish Government
consultation exercises aim to provide opportunities for all those who wish to express
their opinions on a proposed area of work to do so in ways which will inform and
enhance that work.
The Scottish Government encourages consultation that is thorough, effective and
appropriate to the issue under consideration and the nature of the target audience.
Consultation exercises take account of a wide range of factors, and no two exercises
are likely to be the same.
Typically Scottish Government consultations involve a written paper inviting answers
to specific questions or more general views about the material presented. Written
papers are distributed to organisations and individuals with an interest in the issue,
and they are also placed on the Scottish Government web site enabling a wider
audience to access the paper and submit their responses.
Consultation exercises may also involve seeking views in a number of different
ways, such as through public meetings, focus groups or questionnaire exercises.
Copies of all the written responses received to a consultation exercise (except those
where the individual or organisation requested confidentiality) are placed in the
Scottish Government library at Saughton House, Edinburgh (K Spur, Saughton
House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh, EH11 3XD, telephone 0131 244 4565).
All Scottish Government consultation papers and related publications (e.g. analysis
of response reports) can be accessed at: Scottish Government consultations
(http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations)
The views and suggestions detailed in consultation responses are analysed and
used as part of the decision making process, along with a range of other available
information and evidence. Depending on the nature of the consultation exercise the
responses received may:
indicate the need for policy development or review
inform the development of a particular policy
help decisions to be made between alternative policy proposals
be used to finalise legislation before it is implemented
Final decisions on the issues under consideration will also take account of a range of
other factors, including other available information and research evidence.
While details of particular circumstances described in a response to a
consultation exercise may usefully inform the policy process, consultation
exercises cannot address individual concerns and comments, which should
be directed to the relevant public body.
52
Annex C
Making Justice Work for Victims and Witnesses:
Victims and Witnesses Bill – A Consultation Paper
RESPONDENT INFORMATION FORM
Please Note this form must be returned with your response to ensure that we handle
your response appropriately
1. Name/Organisation
Organisation Name
Title Mr
Ms
Mrs
Miss
Dr
Please tick as appropriate
Surname
Forename
2. Postal Address
Postcode
Phone
Email
3. Permissions - I am responding as…
/
Individual
Group/Organisation
Please tick as appropriate
(a)
Do you agree to your response being made
available to the public (in Scottish
Government library and/or on the Scottish
Government web site)?
Please tick as appropriate
(b)
Yes
(c)
The name and address of your organisation
will be made available to the public (in the
Scottish Government library and/or on the
Scottish Government web site).
No
Where confidentiality is not requested, we will
make your responses available to the public
on the following basis
Are you content for your response to be made
available?
Please tick ONE of the following boxes
Please tick as appropriate
Yes, make my response, name and
address all available
or
Yes, make my response available,
but not my name and address
or
Yes, make my response and name
available, but not my address
53
Yes
No
(d)
We will share your response internally with other Scottish Government policy teams who may be addressing the
issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so.
Are you content for Scottish Government to contact you again in relation to this consultation exercise?
Please tick as appropriate
Yes
No
Please return the completed respondent information form and questionnaire by
Friday 20th July 2012 to: victimsandwitnesses@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or
Victims and Witness Unit
Scottish Government
Room GW14/15
St. Andrew’s House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG
You can access the consultation online at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations.
54
VICTIMS AND WITNESSES BILL - CONSULTATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Please tick and add comments as appropriate
Q1 Do you agree with the principle of having a case-specific information hub
for justice in Scotland?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q2 Are there any other types of case-specific information that would be of
value to victims and witnesses?
Comments
Q3 Do you believe a statutory framework is needed to promote informationsharing in the interests of victims and witnesses?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q4 What protections would need to be built into such a system?
Comments
Q5 What information would help victims, witnesses and the public understand
different types of sentences better?
Comments
Q6 What is the best way to provide information about sentences to victims.
witnesses and the public?
Comments
55
Q7 Do you agree that bereaved families in road death cases should be
(a) advised when the offender’s driving disqualification is rescinded and their
driving licence returned to them?
Yes
No
(b) given the chance to register any concerns about return of the driving
licence
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q8 Do you agree with the proposal to create a duty on relevant public bodies
to publish minimum standards of service for victims and witnesses?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q9 Do you agree that standards should encompass both victims and
witnesses?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why.
Comments
Q10 Are there any other issues that you think standards should cover?
Comments
Q11 Do you agree that a closed court should be:
(a) requested through a motion at the pre-trial hearing (First Diet, Intermediate
Diet or Preliminary Hearing)?
Yes
No
or
(b) made a special measure (i.e. the subject of a Child Witness Notice or
Vulnerable Witness Application)?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
56
Q12 Please let us have your views on the possible options for piloting
improved care and support for victims and witnesses (a dedicated contact
point, a co-ordination/liaison/care unit, a support programme for child
victims/witnesses, central hub)?
Comments
Q13 Are there any other models for improving care and support that you
would like to tell us about? If so, please provide details.
Comments
Q14 Do you agree with the proposal to change the definition of child witness
to be up to age 18?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why.
Comments
Q15 Do you agree that we should amend the definition of vulnerable witness
to match the requirements of the EU Directive on Victims?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why.
Comments
Q16 Do you agree the definition of a vulnerable witness - and therefore
automatic entitlement to standard special measures – should be extended to
include:
(a) victims of sexual offences?
Yes
No
(b) victims of domestic abuse?
Yes
No
(c) those witnesses defined as automatically vulnerable in the final version of
the EU Directive on Victims?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answers.
Comments
57
Q17 Do you agree that any witnesses who are automatically entitled to
standard special measures should be able to opt-out of using them?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q18 Do you have any comments on the proposal to include in the legislation
flexibility to extend the range of standard special measures if necessary in
future?
Comments
Q19 Do you have any suggestions about how the administrative arrangements
for special measures might be streamlined
(a) for those witnesses automatically entitled to standard special measures?
No
Yes
(b) for other witnesses who may fall into the definition of vulnerable but do not
automatically do so?
Yes
No
(c) for those witnesses who wish to opt-out of using the standard special
measures to which they are entitled?
Yes
No
Comments
Q20 Do you have any concerns about the proposal to put the Guidance on
Joint Investigative Interviewing of Child Witnesses in Scotland on a statutory
footing?
Yes
No
If you have answered “yes” please give details of your concerns.
Comments
Q21 Should we seek to remove the presumption that child witnesses under
age 12 in prescribed sexual or violence cases should give evidence away from
the court building, while retaining the ability for them to do so?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
58
Q22 Should the submission of Child Witness Notices be made a compulsory
part of pre-trial hearings?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q23 Do you have any concerns about the proposal to make clear that section
271M of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 does include provision for
visual recording of evidence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q24 Do you believe we need specific provision allowing for visual recording
of supplementary evidence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q25 Do you agree with the principle of extending the types of special
measures available specifically to help meet communication support needs?
Yes
No
If you have answered “no”, please comment on the reason(s) why.
Comments
Q26 If you agree in principle we should extend the types of special measures
available to meet communication support needs, do you have any views at this
stage on which option/model you would favour?
Intermediaries
Witness profiles
Please comment on the reason(s) for your choice
Comments
59
Some other means
(please specify)
Q27 If the role of Appropriate Adults in relation to suspects is defined in
statute, do you believe the same is necessary for their role in relation to
victims and witnesses?
Yes
No
Comments
Q28 Do you agree that victims of sexual violence should have the right to
choose the gender of the person who interviews them?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q29 Do you agree with the proposal that it should not be necessary to
disclose the witness’ personal circumstances (e.g. medical details) in an
application for standard special measures?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q30 Do you agree that victims (or parents, carers or relatives) should be given
the opportunity to make written representations about what additional
conditions might be included in the licence when an offender first becomes
eligible for temporary release?
Yes
No
Please comment on any concerns you have about this or any implications you think
the proposal has.
Comments
Q31 Should we seek to introduce Investigative Anonymity Orders in
Scotland?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
60
Q32 If you think we should, in what circumstances or for which cases should
they be used?
Comments
Q33 What mechanisms could be used to ensure victims’ interests are taken
into account when sentencing policy is developed?
Comments
Q34 Do you agree with the proposal to allow victims (or relatives in
appropriate cases) to speak to a member of the Parole Board before a Life
Prisoner Tribunal considers the release of an offender on licence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q35 Do you agree with the proposal to allow Victim Statements to be
submitted to the court at any time after the prosecutor moves for sentence (or
the accused pleads guilty or is found guilty), but before sentence is passed?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q36 Do you agree with the proposal to extend eligibility for the Victim
Statement scheme so that a carer of a child under age 14, who is not the direct
victim of the crime, can make a Victim Statement on their behalf?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
61
Q37 Do you agree with the proposal to amend the definition of carer in
relation to the Victim Statement scheme so that the carer who makes the
statement on behalf of a child under age 14 does not have to have been the
carer at the time of the (alleged) offence?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q38 What more could be done to acknowledge and take into account the
interests of victims and witnesses?
Comments
Q39 Do you agree that courts should be required to consider the issue of
compensation in all cases where an identifiable victim has suffered injury, loss
or distress?
Yes
No
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q40 Do you support the principle of adopting a victim surcharge?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q41 Do you agree that the surcharge should only be applied to court fines in
the first instance?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
62
Q42 Should we consider the possibility that legislation could include a
provision to roll out application of the surcharge to custodial sentences,
community sentences and direct measures at a later date?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q43 Do you agree that revenue accumulated from the surcharge should be
used primarily to support victims?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q44 Do you think the surcharge should be a flat rate or a variable scheme that
reflects the size of a financial penalty?
Flat rate
Variable
Please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q45 If you think there should be a flat rate surcharge, what level should it be
set at:
£15
£20
£30
£other (please specify)
Comments
Q46 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, how do you think
this should work:
a percentage amount added to the value of the financial penalty
or other (please specify)
Comments
63
Q47 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, do you think there
should be minimum and maximum levels set?
Yes
No
Comments
Q48 If you think there should be a proportionate surcharge, what should (a)
the minimum be, and (b) the maximum be?
Comments
Q49 Do you agree that priority should be given to any compensation payment
to the victim, followed by the surcharge and then the principal fine?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on how you would prioritise the payments?
Comments
Q50 Do you agree with the suggestion that there should be restitution orders
whereby those who assault police officers may be sentenced to pay into a
fund to support treatment and care of police victims?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q51 Do you agree that the Scottish Government should set the purposes to
which the fund to support treatment and care of police victims should be
applied?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
64
Q52 Do you think limits for the size of a restitution order should be as
described in paragraph 145 (the same limits as exist for compensation
orders)?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on the reason(s) for your answer.
Comments
Q53 Do you agree that priority in collection and enforcement should be given
to any compensation payment to the victim, followed by the restitution order
and then any fine?
Yes
No
If not, please comment on how you would prioritise the payments?
Comments
Q54 Do you think restitution orders should be extended to groups other than
the police?
Yes
No
If so, please comment on what group(s) of workers should also benefit from a fund
supported by restitution orders
65
Annex D
RECIPIENT LIST
Abused Men in Scotland
ACTS - Action of Churches Together in Scotland
Age Scotland
Agency for the Legal Deposit Libraries
Amina Muslim Women’s Aid
Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland
Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland - Public Protection
Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland - Victims and Witnesses Group
Association of Directors of Social Work
Association of Sheriffs Principal
ASSIST - Advocacy and Support Service for Victims of Domestic Abuse
Barnardo’s Scotland
BEMIS - Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland
Brake
Breathing Space
Capability Scotland
Chairman, Equality and Human Rights Commission
Child Protection Committees
Children 1st Scotland
Clerk of the Justice Committee
Convention of Scottish Local Authorities
Council of Ethnic Minority Voluntary Organisations
Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority
Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service
Cruse Bereavement Care Scotland
Dean of the Faculty of Advocates
Departmental Committee Liaison Officer
Eighteen and Under
Enable Scotland
Engender
Equality Network
Getting People to Court Project Manager
Glasgow Women’s Library
Health in Mind
Hermat Gryffe Women's Aid
HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland
Inclusion Scotland
Independent Living in Scotland
Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland
Judicial Office for Scotland
Judicial Studies Committee
Justice for Children
Justice for Victims
Justice of the Peace Association
Law Society of Scotland
LGBT Youth Scotland
66
Legal Deposit Libraries
Local Criminal Justice Boards
Lord Advocate’s Department
Lord President and the Judges of the Court of Session
Lothian Gay and Lesbian Switchboard
Mental Welfare Commission
Migrant Help
Ministry of Justice
Moira Anderson Foundation
National Joint Investigative Interview Training Tutors Forum
Northern Ireland Department of Justice
Parole Board for Scotland
Part-time Sheriffs’ Association
PETAL - People Experiencing Trauma and Loss
Procurators Fiscal Society
Quarriers
Rape and Abuse Line
Rape Crisis Scotland
Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists
Samaritans Scotland
SCID - Scotland's Campaign Against Irresponsible Driving
Scotland Commissioner for the Equality and Human Rights Commission
Scotland Office
Scotland's Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Domestic Abuse Project
Scottish Appropriate Adult Network
Scottish Association for Mental Health
Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration
Scottish Consortium for Learning Disability
Scottish Court Service
Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency
Scottish Disability Equality Forum
Scottish Domestic Abuse Helpline
Scottish Government Library
Scottish Human Rights Commission
Scottish Interfaith Council
Scottish Law Agents Society
Scottish Law Commission
Scottish Legal Aid Board
Scottish Local Authorities
Scottish Members of the European Parliament
Scottish Police Federation
Scottish Prison Service
Scottish Refugee Council
Scottish Transgender Alliance
Scottish Women's Aid
Scottish Women’s Convention
Shakti Women's Aid
Sheriffs' Association
Skills for Justice
SOLAR - Society of Local Authority Lawyers and Administrators in Scotland
67
South West Scotland Criminal Justice Authority
SPICe Library
Stonewall Scotland
Strathclyde Gay and Lesbian Switchboard
TARA -Trafficking Awareness Raising Alliance
University Law Faculties
Victim Support Scotland
Women’s National Commission
Young Scot
Interested individuals
68
© Crown copyright 2012
You may re-use this information (excluding logos and images) free of charge in any
format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this
licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/
or e-mail: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to
obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
ISBN: 978-1-78045-813-7 (web only)
The Scottish Government
St Andrew’s House
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG
Produced for the Scottish Government by APS Group Scotland
DPPAS12966 (05/12)
Published by the Scottish Government, May 2012
w
w
w
.
s
c
o
t
l
a
n
d
.
g
o
v
.
u
k