Seòmar agus comataidhean

We move to consideration of further continued petitions. PE1876, which was lodged by Lucy Hunter Blackburn, Lisa Mackenzie and Kath Murray, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to require Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service to accurately record the sex of people who are charged with or convicted of rape or attempted rape. There have been some developments on the petition, so I have a slightly long introduction before we consider potential ways forward.

At our last consideration of the petition, the committee agreed to write to a number of bodies. We have now received responses from Police Scotland, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service. We also have an additional submission from Lesley Warrender and a further response from the petitioner.

Since issuing our papers, we have received a submission from Michelle Thomson MSP, which was published and circulated to members yesterday. Unfortunately, she cannot join us as she is participating elsewhere in the Parliament this morning. In her submission, Ms Thomson highlights concerns about the failure to consider the experience of victims in the responses that the committee has received. She also highlights an evidence gap in qualitative research on the impact of the approach to recording the sex of perpetrators on those who have suffered from rape or sexual violence.

Police Scotland states that, under current operational and recording practice, sex and gender are used interchangeably, and identification is recorded based on how individuals present. However, it indicates that there are

“circumstances where the issue of biological sex may require to be explored for a legitimate policing purpose”,

such as in the case of sexual offences.

Police Scotland’s submission also states that, in considering a crime, it is irrelevant whether the perpetrator is legally defined as, or self-identifies as, male or female. It is only relevant whether they have a penis, including a surgically constructed penis, which has penetrated one of the defined bodily orifices. The submission sets out specific circumstances in which a woman might be recorded on police systems as having committed contraventions of sections 1 and 18 of the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009. In concluding, Police Scotland states that its data governance board has been instructed to review Police Scotland’s internal policies and recording procedures.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service advises that information that is used in criminal proceedings originates from Police Scotland, and therefore it is a matter for Police Scotland to record the data. The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service indicates that information relating to sex is not displayed in court papers.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission states that

“Any public body collecting data, including Police Scotland, should have a clear and transparent policy relating to the data they collect and the use they put it to”

and that that

“policy should be equality impact assessed”.

Collection of data

“must be necessary and proportionate”.

That means that

“where a body carries out a number of functions, the data they collect and the way it is collected will vary, depending on”

the intended purpose. For example,

“Police Scotland may collect information on the protected characteristics of those to whom they are providing a service, or who are the victims of crime, differently from those charged with serious offences”.

The commission also states that how best to record data on the sex of people who have been charged or convicted of rape or attempted rape will depend on how that data is to be used, and it is important that that

“is clearly defined and stated”.

The commission considers that the chief statistician’s recently produced guidance on data collection and publication provides

“helpful information on an appropriate balance to be struck in relation to the recording of data in relation to those charged with or convicted of rape or attempted rape”.

The petitioners have responded to Police Scotland’s submission and have highlighted two recent rulings of the inner house of the Court of Session. The petitioners consider that the rulings place a duty on Police Scotland to collect data on biological sex in relation to people who are charged with rape or attempted rape. The issues of the messaging to victims of sexual offending, the experience of those victims and the need to put them at the centre of consideration are also highlighted by the petitioner and included in the submission by Lesley Warrender. The petitioners have also submitted a further response, which was circulated to committee members yesterday. It references the submission from the commission and the guidance from the chief statistician.

Apologies—that is quite a comprehensive package of updates that we have received. I wonder whether, on reflection, having read these responses, members have any thoughts.

Thank you, Ruth. That is a very comprehensive series of recommendations, which I am happy to endorse. I wonder whether the committee is. Would any other member like to comment or add further recommendations? I see that they do not, so we are content to proceed on that basis. We will keep the petition open and write as suggested by Ruth Maguire to the various bodies concerned.

Are members content with those suggestions?

I am keen to bring in other committee members now.

Are members content to add those recommendations to our actions?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you. I think that we could combine your recommendation with the closure of the petition. We can write to make that suggestion. Are you content with that?

The next continued petition is PE1901, on replacing the voting system for the Scottish Parliament with a more proportional alternative. The petition, lodged by Richard Wood, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to replace the broadly proportional additional member system that is used for electing MSPs with a more proportional alternative.

In our previous consideration of the petition, we agreed to write to the Electoral Commission, which has responded that it holds “no view” on the issue.

By way of reminder, the petition states that the additional member system is “not fully proportional”. The Scottish Government has indicated that it has no ambition to review the system at the present time.

I interrupted you, but thank you for that helpful clarification.

PE1893, on introducing legislation to protect Scotland’s war memorials, was lodged by James Watson on behalf of the friends of Dennistoun war memorial. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation that recognises desecration or vandalism of war memorials as a specific criminal offence.

At our most recent consideration of the petition, the committee agreed to write to the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. We have received a detailed submission from the commission, which concludes by making clear that it does not believe that it has the authority to consider action in respect of the petition, because that would fall outside its scope, given the war memorials that are directly within its responsibility.

Members might recall that the Scottish Government said in its submission that it is content that

“there is legislation currently in place to deal with the vandalism and desecration of statutes and memorials, including war memorials ... Scottish Government has no current plans to introduce new legislation for the specific purpose requested in the petition.”

Do members want to recommend a route, given what we have heard from the Commonwealth War Graves Commission and the Scottish Government?

Mr Sweeney wants to come in and then I will invite Jackie Baillie to make a statement to the committee based on what we have heard this morning.