Proposed reforms to the legal system could undermine confidence in the courts, risk increases in miscarriages of justice and prove disastrous for those wrongly convicted, the body representing solicitors has warned.
The Law Society of Scotland has outlined its concerns about reforms contained in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, including plans to remove the need for corroboration of evidence and changes to appeals procedures.
The Bill is being considered by Holyrood's Justice Committee. The legislation includes a change to the law so that two separate sources of evidence are no longer required for someone to be convicted of a crime.
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill says corroboration has "failed" Scotland and prevented cases from being brought to court.
The Bill also seeks to improve the current situation whereby the High Court can refuse to consider a reference from the review body the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission (SCCRC), if it deems it is not in the "interests of justice".
Appearing before the committee, the Law Society said this change was "unlikely to make any real improvements", as although the High Court would be forced to consider the case, it could still decide not to quash the conviction or sentence on the basis it is not in the interests of justice to do so.
Murray Macara QC, from the Law Society's criminal law committee, said: "We do not believe it can ever be in the 'interests of justice' for the High Court to allow a conviction based on a miscarriage of justice to stand.
"We are concerned that by removing the requirement for corroborated evidence, without including sufficiently strong safeguards in the Bill, could simply result in a contest between two competing statements on oath."
Michael Walker, senior policy officer at the SCCRC, defended the role of the commission, stating: "It should not be for the High Court to decide whether it is in the interests of justice. That role was given to the commission."
Fraser Gibson, of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, spoke in support of the change, stating that allowing the High Court to decide not to quash the conviction or sentence on the basis it is not in the interests of justice to do so would guard against error, and "futureproof" the legal system.
Mr Macara said abolishing corroboration could impact on the SCCRC, adding: "It must be a matter of concern to the commission that corroboration may be abolished because that could lead to [a sudden rise in] the number of applications to the commission. An individual convicted on the basis of a single source of evidence may want to pursue whatever remedies are open to them."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article