Post Requested:

Parliamentary Report for the 28th April to the 2nd May 2008

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

This week, the Justice Committee published the Stage 1 report on the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Bill, and there was a statement from the Justice Secretary to the Chamber to mark the full implementation of the Vulnerable Witnesses Act.

The Justice Committee

The Committee’s meeting was spent in private, agreeing to their Stage 1 report on the Judiciary and Courts Bill (see below)

Justice Committee Report on the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Bill

The Justice Committee published their Stage 1 report into the Judiciary and Courts Bill on Friday last week.

The key purpose of a Stage 1 Committee report is to decide whether or not to recommend the ‘general principles’ of a Bill to the Parliament, and also to comment on its substantive points. Stage 1 debates inform much of the debate in the Stage 1 debate in the Chamber, where the whole Parliament will decide whether or not to agree to the general principles. The Government may then make amendments to the Bill depending on the views of the Parliament, and the Bill will then go back to the Committee for more detailed scrutiny at Stage 3.

They overall aims of the Bill are to strengthen the independence of the judiciary, to reduce the involvement of government in the day to day running of the court system, and to modernize the court system. The specific proposals of the Bill include:

To put the independence of the judiciary on a statutory footing

To make the Lord President the head of the judiciary, and give this office increased powers over managing judges

To put the Judicial Appointments Board on a statutory footing

To make changes to the court of session, the sheriff courts and justice of the peace courts

To make changes to the Scottish Courts Service including establishing it as statutory agency

The Committee’s report endorsed the general principles of the Bill, although it had raised concerns over some of the particulars. The key parts of the report were:

The proposals to put the judiciary on a statutory footing were welcomed and were regarded as symbolically important.

There were concerns raised about the possible increased administrative burden that the changes would put on the judiciary, and in particular on the Lord President, who should be able to give primacy to the role of presiding in court. The Committee therefore recommended that independent research be carried out to quantify the increase in administration that the Bill would bring.

Following on from the reservation about the potential administrative burden, the Committee recommended that the removal of the Scottish Court Service from the direct authority of the Scottish Ministers was not necessary at this stage, although it would be beneficial at a later date.

Whether training for judges should be made mandatory or not, was a controversial issue during evidence to the Committee. Most senior members of the judiciary disagreed this would be necessary, while advocacy groups were strongly in favor, and the Lord President said he favoured arrangements that ‘verged on compulsion’. The Committee recommended that training should be made mandatory primarily in order for public confidence to be enhanced.

Proposals which would urge the judicial appointments board to take account of ‘diversity’ when making selections, also sparked controversial debate during evidence. The Committee said that although they welcomed the establishment of the Board’s Diversity Working Group, the issue of diversity should not be a matter for the Board alone. They can only appoint candidates from the available qualified pool and then only from those who make an application, and they urged the Government to ‘ensure a holistic approach’ in relation to judicial appointments, including issues such as access to education and training and working patterns.

The Bill provides that both the Scottish Ministers and the Lord President ‘may issue guidance to the Board as to the procedures to be followed by it in carrying out its functions’ to which the Board ‘must have regard’. Because it was felt it would be potentially uncomfortable to receive guidance from two separate sources, the Committee recommended that if there were to be any guidance to the Board, then this should only occur following scrutiny by the Justice Committee

The Committee were not convinced that the Board should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

The only point of dissent from within the Committee regarded whether or not complaints about judges be made public or not. The Committee’s convener, Bill Aitken dissented from the majority view, which welcomed a Judicial Complaints Reviewer.

You can read the whole of the Committee’s report and also access all the evidence that was received as part of it, here. You can also access all the documents relating the Bill including the Parliamentary ‘SPICe’ guides, on the Bill’s Homepage

You can also read press coverage of this story in the press in the Newsblog

The Stage 1 Parliamentary debate is scheduled to take place on Wednesday the 14th of May, 2008.

The Chamber

Debate on Implementation of the Vulnerable Witnesses Act

On Wednesday afternoon, the Cabinet Secretary made a statement to the Chamber to mark the full implementation of the Vulnerable Witnesses Act, and this was an opportunity to discuss many issues around the treatment of witnesses in court generally.

Kenny MacAskill began by reminding MSPs of the context in which the Act was passed, saying its origins were based in the widely accepted view that the justice system was failing witnesses. He praised the previous administration for the work they did to bring about this Act, which was part of wider reforms made throughout the court systems to make the experience of giving evidence easier for witnesses. He said that together, these changes had ‘put witnesses at the heart of the justice system’.

The Act makes provisions for ‘special measures’ to be in place for all witnesses under the age of 16, and for adult vulnerable witnesses if they are suffering from a mental disorder or where there is a significant risk of the quality of their evidence being impaired because of fear or distress in connection with giving evidence. Special measures include giving evidence via live video link, using a screen in court, and having a supporter whilst giving evidence.

The Act has been introduced incrementally over the past three years, and the Justice Secretary paid tribute to the hard work and dedication that workers throughout the criminal justice system have done in order to facilitate so many changes over this period. He highlighted the work of the Crown Office the Procurator Fiscal and the Scottish Court Service for particular praise, saying that their stated aim of attempting to avoid the need for children and vulnerable witnesses to give evidence whenever necessary was the correct approach. He also spoke of newly established ‘remote sites’ which are specially equipped so that witnesses can give evidence without having to attend court, and also the wide range of training that practitioners throughout the court system have received. He concluded by saying it was important to build up the evidence base on the effects of the Act, in order to know more accurately whether the measures are reaching those whom they are meant to help.

During the questions which followed the statement, the Cabinet Secretary emphasized that ensuring whether vulnerable witnesses were afforded better treatment in court was not only a question of adequate resources, there was also a for a cultural change within the system. He also spoke about the witness protection program that is in place for witnesses of serious crimes, and praised the work of voluntary agencies such as Victim Support Scotland.

You can read the full statement and questions in the Official Report, or you can watch it on Holyrood.TV. See also the press coverage in the Newsblog.

First Minister’s Questions

The First Minister was ‘laid low with a bug’ last Thursday, so he was replaced by his deputy Nicola Sturgeon. Annabelle Goldie spoke about recent headlines about the number of young people with alcohol problems, and she said that it was not acceptable that only 30 licenses were suspended from premises who sold alcohol to underage people, despite the fact that more than 1,300 offences were recorded. The Deputy First Minister outlined what the Government has been doing with regard to tackling this problem, including rolling out test purchasing, introducing tougher penalties, and investing large amounts to tackling alcohol misuse. She also said that the Government will publish a new ‘action plan’ to tackle alcohol misuse in the coming months. She said that the Parliament should work together on this issue, and she said that the Government was happy to listen to other parties if they had any suggestions on how to tackle this issue.

See also the story in the Newsblog.

There was also a very brief supplementary question from Johann Lamont (Lab) about the handcuffing of a pregnant prisoner during a visit to hospital. Nicola Sturgeon agreed that this was not acceptable, and said that the Justice Secretary was meeting Johann Lamont later that afternoon to discuss the case further as the Government takes this issue very seriously.

See also the story in the Newsblog

You can read both questions in the Official Report, and also watch it on Holyrood.TV.

Written Questions

Written questions this week included on the topics of the number of times provisions of the antisocial behaviour legislation have been used; and about the implementation of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act. There was a question about the number of offences of driving while under the influences of drugs and three questions about the Scottish Prison Commission . There was a question about funding for the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency and about funding for the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency.

Posted by KM on Tue 6th May 2008 at 3:00 pm
Courts Gender and crime • Permalink • Tell-a-Friend