Criminal Justice Committee 11 June 2025
I understand Ms Dowey’s intentions, but I cannot support amendments 56 and 57, for several reasons.
Prior to the Coronavirus (Scotland) Act 2020, the transmission of legal documents took place by having the hard-copy document physically couriered between parties or organisations, or by personal service on individuals. Since the provisions relating to electronic transmission were introduced in 2020, they have become firmly embedded in Scotland’s justice system, thereby modernising many justice processes and making them more efficient and cost effective.
Ms Dowey’s amendments would make it a legal requirement to provide hard copies on request, which might not be possible in every circumstance. In particular, amendment 56 does not specify who would be entitled to make such a request or who would be required to respond to it, which might impact on existing rules and policies about public access to case papers held by the courts or by the parties.
I am concerned that amendment 57 might impact on existing rules about how non-electronic service of documents works. The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 contains detailed rules about how non-electronic service of different types of document on different recipients is to be carried out; methods range from postal service to personal service by an officer of law, such as a constable, sheriff officer or prison officer. None of those is dependent on a request being made, and the methods generally involve delivering a document directly to a recipient rather than making it available. It is unclear how amendment 57 is intended to interact with those rules, and the consequences would need to be properly considered.
The bill already permits individuals to receive documents in hard copy. The provisions simply offer an additional option to those who wish to, and are able to, use electronic means.
Although I cannot support the amendments in their current form, I would be happy to work with Ms Dowey in advance of stage 3 to explore whether any provision is required to achieve her intentions, while ensuring that no disruption is caused to operational practices that have been in place for five years or, in some situations, longer. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service have indicated that they would be happy to be involved in that.
On that basis, I ask Ms Dowey not to press amendment 56 or to move amendment 57.