Viewpoints: May 2023

"My business partner… and I will not be party to this reckless 'pilot'. Removal of safeguards against #miscarriageofjustice seeking to increase convictions screams out the risks here." (@IanMoir5)

"An ambition to secure more convictions, rather than a higher degree of justice, is a dubious basis for legal reform." (@LivBrown Crime)

"My Firm will not be accepting instructions in any case that forms part of this pilot. No client of @mcgovernreid will be ever exploited as part of a social experiment to satisfy the demands of the Special Interest Groups. This pilot is not in the interests of justice." (@mcgovernlawyer)

"Matthew [above tweet] speaks, as always, with sense and passion. But, more prosaically, which accused would *ever* be happy to be part of a pilot scheme, much of the point of which is to increase conviction rates?" (@RoddyQC)

"Completely agree. Lawyers must never be complicit in unfairness, or injustice. I will not be accepting instructions in any judge-only trials. I call upon all my colleagues to do the same." (@StephClink)

"The Executive Committee of the Glasgow Bar Association are opposed to the proposed pilot… The proposed reforms raise significant concerns regarding fairness and transparency within the criminal justice system. These proposals seek to dismantle a jury system which has worked for centuries.

"GBA President Michael Gallen said: 'An accused is prevented by law from representing themselves in cases of this nature. Given the strength of feeling on this issue we intend to ballot our members on whether they are prepared to accept instructions in any case forming part of the pilot scheme.'" (Press release, 28 April)

"Judge only trials for very serious sexual cases is an alarming development that we can see absolutely no justification for. No other civilised country dispenses with juries in such cases. The suggestion that juries are routinely misguided in their verdicts and in some way conviction rates need to be corrected for such offences is frankly an affront to justice and should be opposed. It is likely the SSBA will require to ballot its members on whether or not we should take part in any such pilot." (Scottish Solicitors Bar Association statement, 28 April)

"We’re supportive of these plans and think they could have a positive impact for survivors.

"Already, we have heard some misleading rhetoric on this plan that does not reflect what is being proposed. It’s very important to remember that the removal of a jury is not a breach of the right to a fair trial.

"A highly trained legal expert is still in place in these cases who is accountable for their decisions. A full range of evidence would be considered…

"A pilot would give time for the effectiveness of these trials, and the experience of survivors, to be considered before they are fully rolled out." (@rapecrisisscot)

"We do not believe the current system of trial by jury is suitable for the prosecution of serious sexual offences. The Mock Jury research highlighted it is difficult for a jury to understand complex legal arguments and matters of law. We would support the recommendation of a pilot for single judge-led trials, and have the confidence that the knowledge and experience of the judiciary will lead to a more just outcome for survivors". (Victim Support Scotland, 27 April)

See also the feature in this issue