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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 8 June 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1213 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

That makes sense. I am interested to hear which test will be applied to other witnesses at trials. I am sure that we all agree that, at the end of the day—and quite apart from all the technology that is involved—what matters is that there is fairness in criminal justice. I cannot find anything that tells me which criteria would be applied in the Lord Justice General’s decision making on an individual trial. Will guidance be issued on those?

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

That is fair enough. We will need to go back to them, then.

I was quite concerned about some of the evidence that was given to the committee last week. I can understand why people would want to give their evidence in the comfort of their own home, but there must be some limitations on all this modernisation. I do not see how you can control the environment if you extend the circumstances in which virtual proceedings are allowed.

Can you help me with that? As far as you are concerned, what requirements must be met for a witness to give their evidence virtually? Must it be given in a particular setting that you have prescribed? Should there be no one else in the room, as Sharon Dowey suggested? As far as I can see, the only way in which you could monitor that would be if the evidence had to be given in designated places. I would like to hear your view on that.

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

If that aspect has not been fully thought through, what needs to happen to make the arrangements robust?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

According to the explanatory notes, the Lord Advocate will decide the sheriffdom. Is that not quite a big departure from the principles of jurisdiction under which we currently operate?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

That makes sense. Does the bill extend the Lord Advocate’s discretion to go beyond that?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

To be fair, you will see that we are all still using paper here. There is a certain insurance policy in our having paper in front of us.

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

I do not want to get into any more complexity here but, based on what you have said, Paul Smith, would it make sense for the committee to separate out the issues in relation to virtual attendance from the issue of national jurisdiction? You are marrying the issues up in what you have said about the only way in which a national jurisdiction could work. However, given what you have said, it would make sense for the committee to scrutinise the full extent of the powers that are being asked for under the national jurisdiction provisions and to look separately at the rules around virtual attendance. Would that be your view?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

I take your point. However, there is still a test, which is not applied automatically.

I think that you have answered my question, and I hear your position on choice. However, the bill does not give people that choice; it simply says that virtual attendance can happen when that is in the interests of justice.

You are answering yes to my question, in that the facilities that you are developing will give reassurance to the court system. It is still important that witnesses give evidence in certain conditions. Even if the bill is passed without amendment, it would perhaps meet the test that the court will have to apply, which is that giving evidence remotely can be done if that is in the interests of justice.

Adam, did you want to respond?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

Yes, but the bill does not say that. I have been ploughing through the explanatory notes and I am more confused than ever. I cannot see where the bill sets that out. The bill treats them as though they are separate provisions. I want to ask about national jurisdiction in a bit more detail, but am I right in saying that?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 January 2025

Pauline McNeill

I am thinking that there is good reason both for national jurisdiction, if it was qualified, and for virtual attendances, if the provision was refined to reflect some of your concerns. Would it be fair to say that?