Chamber and committees

You are looking for more clarity on that.

Thank you. I will put a similar question to Graham O’Neill. Do you think that there is enough recognition of refugees?

I kind of disagree with you, because I feel that we should be spelling this out a bit more, but that is a point for conversation.

Dr Scott, you say in your submission that you would like to see more in the bill about the specialised nature of domestic abuse in respect of trauma-informed approaches. Will you expand on why that is important?

The not proven verdict is used in some sheriff trials in justice of the peace cases, where there is no jury. Given that the removal of the not proven verdict will apply in those instances, is it the Government’s view that the practice of JP courts will need some reform?

From everything that we have heard, I am getting that the approach is about fairness and justice and bringing us into line with other jurisdictions. I am perfectly content with that approach.

Thank you, convener.

So this complements the measures in the Children (Scotland) Act 2020 and will strengthen protection for vulnerable witnesses.

Okay.

That leads me to my next question, which is about legal representation. In view of the fact that the current provisions on restricting the use of sexual history and character evidence do not provide adequate protection, can you expand on the plans to provide independent legal representation to try to address those problems?

Following on from that line of questioning on the need for sexual offences courts, I have to say that I distinctly remember the Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain, saying at the start of session 6 that to improve justice for women and girls who are victims of sexual violence, radical reform was needed. I really think that that is what we are doing here.

My question relates to part 6 of the bill and the current approach to anonymity. Why should that approach be replaced by a statutory protection for victims?