łÉČËżěĘÖ

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

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

Filter your results 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 16 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1264 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 10 January 2024

Pauline McNeill

You know that I have very strong views on that—

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 10 January 2024

Pauline McNeill

Thank you.

You have given the committee some helpful figures: around 11 per cent of such business will come from the sheriff court, while 47 per cent of business will come from the High Court. That is a significant difference. What will the High Court look like in the new circumstances? Will it just be quieter?

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 10 January 2024

Pauline McNeill

Good morning, Lord Advocate. Thank you for being so vocal on the importance of doing something in Parliament about the scandalous increase in the number of sexual offences cases.

I am interested in the mechanics of the specialist court. You and the Lord Justice Clerk have made a good case for it, but my questions relate to how it would operate and how it would fit in with the current court system. You gave the committee some useful figures earlier on the cost of cases being prosecuted in the High Court and in the sheriff court. Does the Government fully appreciate what the resource implication of the specialist court would be?

11:45  

I am trying to get my head around what the specialist court would look like. It looks as though it would be a substantially large court with a substantially large number of cases, and it would not be part of the High Court. It would be separate from the High Court, although as Lady Dorrian said, her vision is very much that it would be a parallel court. That is not enshrined in the proposed legislation, and I questioned Lady Dorrian on that.

That aside, does the Government fully appreciate the resource implications for setting up such a court?

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 10 January 2024

Pauline McNeill

I suppose that the fine line that you mentioned is about where cases go. Currently, they go to either the High Court or the sheriff court. You said that, in the case of the High Court, an advocate depute has a single case and you talked about the cost of that. Will that fine line disappear with the specialist court? In other words, who will you instruct to take on those cases? Will ADs take them on? How will you decide on that, if there is no distinction between cases, as there is at the moment, which means that you decide to send them either to the High Court or to the sheriff court, if you see what I mean?

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 10 January 2024

Pauline McNeill

I am looking for some clarity from you, Danielle. The proposals that we have to scrutinise are huge, so it is really important to understand what the measures would look like if they were passed into law. I am sure that you will tell me if you are the wrong person to respond to this.

Something is confusing me about an answer that you gave to a question from Russell Findlay about a murder case. At the moment, murder can be tried only in the High Court, because it is the most serious crime and it attracts the highest sentence. If there is a sexual element, it will attract an even higher sentence. That is where I need clarity. Surely there could be no change to that. I am concerned about there being some grey area, such that murder cases could go to a court that is designed for sexual offences. I do not understand why there is any grey area for cases where the victim is dead. Will you explain?

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 10 January 2024

Pauline McNeill

That is clear. Will that change?

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 13 December 2023

Pauline McNeill

Do you think that it would be a good use of the Parliament’s time to take through the necessary legislation to allow for research such as that done by Cheryl Thomas?

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 13 December 2023

Pauline McNeill

My final question is about the numbers on the jury if the not proven verdict were to be removed. The profession would prefer a unanimous jury but would accept, as in England, a majority of 10 to two. I understand that your fundamental position is to retain the not proven verdict. Ronnie Renucci, can you talk the committee through what, you think, the Crown would have to show in order to get a conviction? To a layperson, you are saying that the jury is required to have a unanimous verdict before you could convict, and that sounds like it would be really difficult to get a conviction, whereas a majority of 10 to two seems to allow for it. However, of course, we do not understand how juries operate or the proceedings of a court.

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 13 December 2023

Pauline McNeill

That is helpful. Finally, given the hundreds of cases that you have—

Criminal Justice Committee

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

Meeting date: 13 December 2023

Pauline McNeill

I understand most of it, but I just want to clarify that, as the proposals stand—not for the other suggestion—it is still the Crown’s position that there should be the option of a retrial under the Government’s proposal for a majority of eight to four. Would you still argue for that?

12:00