Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill

This consultation was completed by VAWG (Violence Against Women and Girls) Sub Committee members, specifically the Violence Against Women and Girls Co-ordinator, and representatives from Justice Social Work and Community Justice Partnership.

It is being submitted on behalf of Dumfries and Galloway Public Protection Committee, Dumfries and Galloway Community Justice Partnership and Dumfries and Galloway Justice Social Work.

We replied to the ‘Improving victim’s experiences of the justice system’ consultation in July 2022. We supported a Victims Commissioner being independent from Scottish Government, that they should have a statutory role, be accountable to Scottish Parliament, and produce a strategic report and annual report. Their functions should be wide-ranging – promoting victims’ interests and rights, monitoring compliance relevant codes of practice already in place, promoting best practice across agencies providing services to victims, and commissioning of research. An inclusive remit across systems (criminal and civil courts) is required, and they would need authority, whilst remaining independent. Effective engagement with victims will be necessary, specifically with violence against women and girls organisations, as will effective links with the Children and Young Person’s Commissioner.

Whilst these comments were given in relation to a Victim’s Commissioner, they are equally relevant for a Victims and Witnesses Commissioner.

Any development and increase of trauma informed practice in criminal and civil courts is to be welcomed and strongly supported. Victims of violence against women and girls offences describe the process of seeking justice as traumatic and violating, further compounding their experiences during an actual offence.

All staff working within the court systems, and justice system, should be required to undertake training on trauma-informed practice, and held accountable should victims and witnesses perceive how they have been treated not to be trauma-informed.

Training should be mandatory, of a high standard and consistent across organisations. This will have funding implications for those organisations for which such training isn’t already on their agenda.

Of interest will be the impact these measures have in relation to practices of defence solicitors and the additional trauma some lines of questioning can bring.

The use of and increased availability of special measures civil proceedings is to be supported.

The ‘not proven’ verdict option can be seen as failing both victims and defendants by seemingly leaving a case unresolved, so the removal of this as an option seems sensible.

Those involved in giving these views felt unable to comment on this provision.

Whilst the establishment of a Sexual Offences Court can be seen as beneficial in terms of ensuring court personnel are alert to the particular issues faced by victims and defendants when sexual cases are being heard, there may be implications for areas where the number of cases being heard does not warrant a regular Court being available. Thus, victims and defendants may have to wait longer, or travel further, which for victims potentially increases further the traumatic impact of seeking justice, and delays an outcome, resulting in defendants being on bail, or indeed remanded in custody, for longer.

Sufficient resources and training would support the positive impact of such Courts and minimise the negative impact.

This proposal has our support in principle. Anonymity of victims should be granted automatically at the earliest point to reduce stress and trauma; it cannot be given at a later date – particularly important given the prevalence of social media. It should be recognised however, that anonymity can be challenging in close knit, rural communities.

If we aspire to be truly trauma informed, there should be no end point to the anonymity. If based on the death of the victim, this may traumatise and negatively impact other surviving family members.

Where victims have capacity to do so, they should be able to set aside their anonymity, however recognition needs to be taken of the potential impact on others if there are multiple complainants. Where victims are children and they are considering setting aside anonymity, additional considerations are required around their age and support to ensure they are aware of the potential consequences of their decision.

We are in strong agreement with this proposal. The availability of independent legal representation should be available for complainers at all stages of court proceedings.

Organisations who work with victims of sexual offences identify that the use of evidence on sexual history and character evidence is a potentially distressing, trauma inducing, area of cross examination for them; they feel they are on trial and this can act as a barrier to victims pursuing a case. Independent legal representation should go some way to assist here.

Juries may not have sufficient knowledge, understanding or training around all aspects of a rape case. The court setting can be intimidating for all those involved, and how victims respond in court, or how they respond during the commission of the rape, can be misjudged. Evidence shows that there remains a reluctance to convict in cases of rape and other sexual violence.

However, there can be concerns that the decision falling to an individual judge may lead to unconscious bias, an issue all criminal justice organisation need to be aware of. However, the use of Sexual Offences Courts may mitigate against some of these concerns.

No answer.

No answer.