Public Policy Highlights February and March 2025 including Covid, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence

Throughout the year, the Law Society Policy team and its network of committee volunteers respond to a variety of consultations and comment on a range of Bills, helping to shape good law for the benefit of its members and in the public interest.

Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry

As a core participant in the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry, a panel of Law Society representatives gave evidence at the Justice Impact Hearing.

Kevin Lang, the Law Society of Scotland’s executive director of external relations, followed up his witness statement speaking on behalf of the Society and reflecting on the widespread impact of the pandemic on colleagues, members and the sector as a whole.

Stuart Munro, as convener of the Society’s Criminal Law Committee, focused his witness statement and oral evidence on the criminal defence solicitor community. He explained how their particular profile and typical business structure meant that they experienced the effects of the pandemic in a way that was quite distinct from other parts of the profession. Criminal defence firms, for example, tend to be smaller practice units with less-established IT infrastructures; they therefore found the move to digital working more of a struggle.

Shona Smith gave her witness statement and evidence on behalf of the Society’s Child and Family Law Sub-Committee and reflected on the fact that family law practitioners as a matter of course deal with people experiencing distressing personal circumstances. For family law solicitors, particularly those from smaller firms, dealing with these matters from their own homes and with no court to attend, and therefore few or no colleagues to talk with, the pandemic was an isolating and difficult time.

Lynda Towers gave her witness statement and evidence on behalf of the Society’s Mental Health and Disability Sub-Committee and spoke about the impact that the pandemic had on some of the more vulnerable legal service users. Some of the greatest difficulties arose around guardianship orders and powers of attorney. Not only was there a swell in the numbers of people seeking these, but there were difficulties around how the courts and the Office of the Public Guardian could deal with these matters.

Find out more about the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry and watch the evidence session

UK Government’s Consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence

The Law Society of Scotland’s Intellectual Property Sub-Committee responded to the UK Government’s Consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (AI), representing Scottish legal professionals including trademark and patent attorneys, those from academia, private practice, in-house and business, and all those who contribute to Scotland’s creative economies.

The response noted the need for a balanced approach, acknowledging on one hand the need for AI developers to have access to creative content for the purposes of AI training; and on the other, that the broad range of rights holders need to operate in a sector where they have confidence that their work can be adequately protected and remunerated. A balance must be struck between the two to ensure that both can operate effectively within the creative industry space.

Find out more about the consultation and read our response

Regulation of non-surgical cosmetic procedures consultation

The Society’s Licensing Law and Health and Medical Law sub-committees responded to the Scottish Government’s Consultation on Regulation and Licensing of Non-Surgical Cosmetic Procedures.

With regard to the proposal to introduce a new licensing regime under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, the response noted that in the earlier 2020 consultation, 61% of respondents believed that the carrying out of non-surgical cosmetic procedures by individuals who are not qualified healthcare professionals should be licenced under Part 1 of the 1982 Act. However, it also noted that some respondents suggested that a system of licensing was not sufficient and that the regulation should be through healthcare systems by professionals, as opposed to what might be termed as licenced private businesses.

The Society raised questions around resourcing and noted that while the proposals might be proportionate and well-intentioned, if they are to be implemented, the necessary financial and human resources must be available.

The response expressed concerns over whether it is appropriate to place a licensing system with links to issues of potential medical negligence in the hands of local authority officers. It also noted the distinction between the medical and clinical environments required for a tattoo premises and a premises which might be offering Group 1 non-surgical cosmetic procedures.

Find out more about the consultation and read our response

Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill

The Law Society of Scotland’s Health and Medical Law Sub-Committee responded to the Scottish Parliament’s call for written evidence on the Right to Addiction Recovery (Scotland) Bill, noting in the first instance that to its knowledge there is no legal right to treatment for other health conditions. Consideration should therefore be given to the consequences of bringing this in solely for drugs and alcohol addiction, as well as considering the ability of the NHS to resource these changes.

The response notes the Bill’s statement that the health professional must explain each of the treatment options. This is in direct conflict with a 2023 Supreme Court decision which clarifies that a doctor is not required to tell a patient about all treatment options, but those which in their clinical judgement, supported by a reasonable body of medical opinion, are appropriate.

With regard to the Bill’s timescales for providing treatment, the Society expressed concerns that making it a legal requirement for treatment to be given within three weeks in an under-resourced health service could result in resource implications, including the possible diversion of resources from areas where time limit is not enshrined in statute.

On 18 March, Hilary Steele, a member of the Society’s Health and Medical Law Sub-Committee, gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s evidence session on the Bill.

Find out more about our work on the Bill and watch the evidence session

Dog Theft (Scotland) Bill

The Society’s Criminal Law Committee responded to the Scottish Parliament’s Rural Affairs and Islands Committee’s call for evidence on the Dog Theft (Scotland) Bill. The response acknowledges that given the emotional bond between owners and their dogs, the potential impact of the loss of a pet on an owner should be considered when deciding the appropriate sentence for the perpetrator. The Society also noted that the introduction of a specific statutory offence may allow for more specific data to be gathered about this type of crime.

However, the Society also noted that the sentencing process already recognises the emotional harm that dog abductions may provoke in victims, in the scope of the common law offence of theft.

Furthermore, without increased funding for criminal justice institutions, the creation of new offences will have a very limited impact in increasing the number of people convicted.

Stuart Munro, convener of the Criminal Law Committee, gave evidence on the Bill at the Scottish Parliament on 26 March 2025.

Watch the evidence session and find out more about the Law Society’s work on the Bill

Find out more about the Law Society of Scotland’s work to influence law and policy