Victims Bill amendments needed to safeguard criminal justice system

The Law Society of Scotland has urged MSPs to make further changes to proposed criminal justice legislation because of the risk of miscarriages of justice.

Stuart Munro, the Convener of the Law Society’s Criminal Law Committee, appeared before the Scottish Parliament’s Criminal Justice Committee this morning to provide Stage 2 evidence on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill.

Mr Munro appeared alongside representatives from the Scottish Solicitors Bar Association and the Faculty of Advocates, following evidence provided by Rape Crisis Scotland and Victim Support Scotland.

In its first hearing since the Scottish Government announced its proposal for a pilot of single-judge trials was being dropped from the bill, the committee focused on ongoing plans to abolish the not proven verdict, change jury majority rules and establish a dedicated sexual offences court.

Mr Munro told the committee that Scotland’s criminal justice system is complex and unique, standing apart from other common law jurisdictions with a number of interlinked features to maintain its integrity.

“If you take away one of these key cornerstones, in this case the not proven verdict, there can be implications that then need to be considered.”

He told the committee that the changes proposed, alongside a recent High Court decision in relation to corroboration, meant that convictions based on a simple majority or 10 out of 15 did not provide adequate safeguards.

Mr Munro said: “No other common law jurisdiction does it that way. Virtually every other common law jurisdiction is 12-people juries and requires either unanimity or something very close to it.

“Our view ultimately is that if we are planning on a fundamental shift of our system, a fundamental removal of cornerstones or parts of the foundations, a safer way of approaching it would be to go and try a system that works, to take the jury system that for instance is operated south of the border.”

He indicated that the Law Society remains unsupportive of a new sexual offences court, pointing to the difficulties it would create in assessing the effectiveness of already implemented changes to improve the experience of victims and witnesses in the justice system.

Mr Munro said: “The Law Society represents solicitors from across the profession, so it’s not just those acting in criminal defence, it’s procurators fiscal, it’s those representing the interests of complainers, and we ultimately support any measures which make the system work better.”

The Law Society will be providing MSPs with suggested amendments to resolve the shortcomings identified in the bill in the coming weeks.