Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 15 September 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 989 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Katy Clark

As the convener is aware, last year we heard from a lawyer from Norway, who was over in the Parliament. She was previously a defence agent but is now employed full time as a representative of victims. That system has developed in Norway in the past 50 years. When the cabinet secretary is in Norway, is it possible—obviously, it will depend on the rest of her commitments—for her to look at that system, to see whether anything can be learned?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Katy Clark

If the pilot led to fewer convictions, would that be seen as a failure?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Katy Clark

My first question was going to be very similar to the one that was asked by Pauline McNeill, so I will pick up where she left off. I was going to ask about how to evaluate a pilot with so little base data, and how that relates to the many and massive changes that the bill proposes.

As you know, one of the criticisms of the bill is that it might cause a range of big changes all at the same time. You have outlined that some of those decisions are still to be made, including on whether a pilot might take place in the new court, with some cases perhaps being within the pilot and others being outside it, or would happen after the abolition of the not proven verdict and the changes to jury majorities.

You have also not decided whether concurrent cases would be compared with one another or cases within the pilot would be compared with historical cases. We understand that there is very little data, but we have some—for example, about conviction rates in recent decades.

I appreciate that you are still thinking through much of that, but do you not think that Parliament should know which options will be taken forward? Do you not think that those decisions should be made during the passage of the bill and that, given the significance of many of the changes, Parliament should be very clear about which proposals will be taken forward?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

You are saying that you do not think that single-judge trials are the solution. Is there any solution if you believe that it is inevitable that conviction rates will be lower for rape? Is there anything that this Parliament should do to change how the process works in order to improve conviction rates, given that we know that there is a sufficiency of evidence in the cases that are taken forward by the Crown?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

That is not what is being said. I have one final question. You said:

“There will, inevitably, be lower conviction rates”.

Are you saying that there will be similar conviction rates whether you have a jury or a judge-only case?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

You referred to a conviction rate of 42 per cent. I appreciate that there are different ways of looking at that, but I will take that as the figure. We know that the figure is slightly, but not massively, higher in England, and that the conviction rate for rape is significantly lower than the rate for many other types of offence. I appreciate that many other cases will be summary cases, which will not involve juries, and that those are different, but you specifically made a parallel with other serious crimes, which is not an argument that I have heard being put to the committee before.

Will you elaborate on that? If you are saying that we are making the wrong comparison because we are comparing the conviction rate in rape cases with other forms of crime, what types of crime would make a fairer comparison? Would it be, for example, complex fraud or murder? What direction would you point us in, to look at those kinds of conviction levels?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

Let us exclude them, then. What kind of cases do you think we should be comparing them with?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

Surely, in a murder case, which is a very serious case, the Crown will proceed if there is sufficiency of evidence. That would be the test that it would apply in a murder case.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

Is it generally the case that jury trials tend to lead to more acquittals than non-jury cases?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 6 February 2024

Katy Clark

I think that we understand that. However, we know that, in Scotland, the way that the Crown marks cases is based on sufficiency of evidence—