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 4 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1256 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

Thank you.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

I will continue Rona Mackay’s line of questioning on whether murder should be included in the sexual offences court. Of course, the Crown does not make a decision—it is not required to make a decision, because it is a requirement of law that a plea of the Crown must be heard in the High Court.

As Ms Constance said, the Crown could make a decision on which court a case should go to. Is there not also an argument that, since murder is such a serious offence and is already tried in the High Court, notwithstanding that there might be sexual offences to prove, murder cases should go to the highest court, because the High Court will still be the High Court? Would that not make sense?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

I have to say that I find it difficult to get my head round the issue. My understanding is that, in non-rape cases that are prosecuted in the High Court, there will still be advocate deputes and counsel. In the shift to a new court, you are trying to make sure that accused people have the same representation, but surely you need to make sure that there is the same level of prosecutor. There must be parity, as it were.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

Good morning. I echo what Ben Macpherson has said: it is important that Parliament gets this right, and we appreciate your attendance at this morning’s meeting.

The current proposal in the bill is for a jury of 12, with eight required for a conviction. You have told the committee that your focus is on fairness, and I agree with that. Why do you think that a majority of 10 to five on a jury of 15 is fairer than what is in the bill?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

Why is that fairer than what you had?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

Can you tell the committee—the stakeholder, so to speak—who is supportive of this, apart from the senators? Are there others?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

I am just trying to illustrate exactly what you said there, cabinet secretary—we all have to use our judgment. It is hard to decide whether to support the new option on the table; I find it confusing that some support it, but not the two-thirds majority. The senators support it, and you have gone with that, but some still support the 12-juror approach, and others want unanimity. It is really difficult to see a way through all that.

Where we agree—and I think that the committee agrees with this, too—is that, given all the options, if we think that the system, with corroboration and the three verdicts, was reasonably balanced, we will need to find out how we ensure fairness for everyone in a new system. I welcome what you have done with juries, but I just wanted to illustrate that view.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

I am not asking for that. You know my position on the sexual offences court, which is that the issue could be resolved by making the sexual offences court a division of the High Court and of the sheriff court. We would then not need to go into the mechanics of who represents whom. However, as you are creating a new court, I would have thought that we would all be interested in making sure that the representation aspect is not diluted by the new court. It would be helpful if you could clarify that point.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

You referred to the mock trials. Was it that data that made you conclude that 12 was the number of jurors to go with?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Pauline McNeill

I was just trying to ascertain the Government’s position on why that is a fairer approach. It was a two-thirds majority before, and it is a two-thirds majority now. The Government received representations from the senators before it drafted the bill, but it has now changed it because, as you have said, it has to be fair for everyone. Presumably, that is your rationale. If you are saying that you are changing it because many people support such a change, that is surely not a rationale for doing so, because it does not really matter who supports what if you are trying to achieve fairness.