Chamber and committees

Thank you for that nice round-up. It is most helpful.

I will close the session now. I thank the witnesses very much for attending. It has been fascinating evidence.

Next week, we will return to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill with two meetings. The first is on Tuesday with the Scottish Solicitors Bar Association, and the second is on Wednesday with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs. That will be our final evidence session on the bill.

You have spoken about children in response to Russell Findlay’s line of questioning. I will read out what you have written in your submission.

“It is critical that Scots law respects the legitimate autonomy of complainers in these cases and facilitates their decisions to share—or not to share—their experiences, without imposing additional legal or economic costs”.

You go on to say:

“Finding the right balance ... may be particularly challenging in terms of child complainers”.

Could you outline a wee bit more about your research, specifically on the issues that have an impact on children?

That is a helpful update and clarification.

The bill sets out a number of proposals on the victims commissioner’s role. In general, beyond what is set out in the bill, is there anything else that you feel would be relevant to include in that role, or are you supportive of the provisions as they stand? From your previous answer, I think that you are.

I will open up the discussion to members. Pauline McNeill wants to pick up on the matter of a victims commissioner.

Good morning and welcome to the fifth meeting in 2024 of the Criminal Justice Committee. We have no apologies.

I welcome the Rt Hon Dorothy Bain KC, the Lord Advocate. Thank you for taking the time to attend—it is much appreciated. We have already heard from Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service officials and have had written evidence, but the committee felt that we needed to ask you specifically about a few very important issues, so we are grateful that you are able to join us today.

I intend to allow up to 60 minutes for this evidence session, and I propose that we focus our questions to the Lord Advocate on the proposal for a victims commissioner, then on trauma-informed training and then, finally, on the abolition of the not proven verdict and changes to jury majorities.

I understand that you do not want to make an opening statement, Lord Advocate, so I will open with a question about the bill’s provisions on the proposed victims and witnesses commissioner. We understand that you have concerns that those provisions might unintentionally interfere with your independence. Will you outline those concerns and the changes that you consider are needed to address them?

Yes.

I remind members that we are looking at parts 1 to 4 of the bill.

As ever, a number of members would like to ask supplementary questions. We are dealing with a really important part of the bill. I will bring in Pauline McNeill and then John Swinney. I ask them to be as brief as possible.

John Swinney is happy not to come back in. Katy Clark has a question.

On that positive note, I thank the Lord Advocate for joining us. That has been immensely helpful.

We will have a short suspension to allow for a change of witnesses.