Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 19 April 2012
19 Apr 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Thank you. However, luckily, my wife studied law, which was very helpful to me. I have sympathy for Alison McInnes and for Colin Keir—who has disappeared from the chamber—who do not have such backgrounds either, but displayed a good grasp of the issues at hand. Perhaps they, too, chose their respective partners very well. I notice that there is no intervention, so I will assume that that is correct.
As we have heard, the bill has two main parts, each of which covers a different aspect of criminal case law. I will speak mainly about part 2, but will briefly touch on part 1, if I may.
People want and need confidence in our justice system. If that confidence is to be maintained, people—the victims of crime in particular—must understand at least the rationale behind offenders’ sentences. There is a much wider issue to be discussed to do with automatic early release, which the Scottish Government is committed to ending—alas, Mr McLetchie has had his moment.
It has been mentioned that it is extremely important that there is consistency in sentencing and that it is understood not only by the legal profession, but by the victims of crime. Part 1 was introduced to fix the anomaly that was highlighted by the Petch and Foye case. The majority of those who gave evidence commented on how complicated the legislation is, but it was also acknowledged that sentencing as a whole is a pretty complex business. The difficulty of understanding the task should not be a big enough factor alone to deter us from fixing an inconsistency in the system; after all, that is part of the job that we are mandated to do.
I accept that there is a difficult balance to strike. We must ensure that people understand sentencing procedure, but sentencing is inherently difficult. It is not a matter of simply having a prescriptive list of sentences to match specific crimes. As the Justice Committee report acknowledges, we must also look at putting in place measures to ensure that victims and witnesses fully understand the sentences that are handed down by the courts and how they apply in practice. Mr Pearson’s idea of an aide-mémoire is worthy of further consideration.
I turn to part 2. Although the bill was introduced specifically in response to the case of al-Megrahi and his abandoned appeal, it can be applied to similar cases that might arise, as John Finnie said. Therefore, it is not completely without purpose, but to pretend that it was not fundamentally driven by the unusual circumstances surrounding that particular case would, of course, be foolish. Many members are much better versed in the intricacies and complexities of that case, but it is abundantly clear to all that serious questions remain over that tragedy. Primarily, we owe answers to the families of the victims who were killed in the Lockerbie tragedy, but the reputation of the Scottish legal system has a question mark—some may even say a stain—on it that will not be washed away until some serious questions are answered.
It seems to me that the Scottish Government is doing what it can to be as transparent as possible and to move the process forward. Now that the statement of reasons is in the public domain—I cannot confess to having read all 821 pages of it—we must ask: what now? Many of us wonder whether the truth will ever fully be revealed. Surely the only way to bring further clarity would be through an appeal. It was reassuring to hear the cabinet secretary say recently that the appropriate measures are in place for the family of al-Megrahi to pursue an appeal posthumously. It will, of course, be for them to determine whether to do so, but I hope that that opportunity is taken for the sake of the victims’ families if nothing else.
The whole tragic event has been mired in controversy and secrets, deals in the desert, and kissing dictators in Bedouin tents. The talk of oil contracts and secret documents all make for a conspiracy theorist's goldmine. The bill may not be the complete answer to the many outstanding questions that exist; the only thing that will put to bed such questions is the truth.
I am not accustomed to quoting Winston Churchill, and I do not intend to do so ever again, but he was undoubtedly right when he said:
“The truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
I hope that the bill will help us to take at least a small step towards discovering the whole truth of the deeply tragic al-Megrahi affair.
16:00
As we have heard, the bill has two main parts, each of which covers a different aspect of criminal case law. I will speak mainly about part 2, but will briefly touch on part 1, if I may.
People want and need confidence in our justice system. If that confidence is to be maintained, people—the victims of crime in particular—must understand at least the rationale behind offenders’ sentences. There is a much wider issue to be discussed to do with automatic early release, which the Scottish Government is committed to ending—alas, Mr McLetchie has had his moment.
It has been mentioned that it is extremely important that there is consistency in sentencing and that it is understood not only by the legal profession, but by the victims of crime. Part 1 was introduced to fix the anomaly that was highlighted by the Petch and Foye case. The majority of those who gave evidence commented on how complicated the legislation is, but it was also acknowledged that sentencing as a whole is a pretty complex business. The difficulty of understanding the task should not be a big enough factor alone to deter us from fixing an inconsistency in the system; after all, that is part of the job that we are mandated to do.
I accept that there is a difficult balance to strike. We must ensure that people understand sentencing procedure, but sentencing is inherently difficult. It is not a matter of simply having a prescriptive list of sentences to match specific crimes. As the Justice Committee report acknowledges, we must also look at putting in place measures to ensure that victims and witnesses fully understand the sentences that are handed down by the courts and how they apply in practice. Mr Pearson’s idea of an aide-mémoire is worthy of further consideration.
I turn to part 2. Although the bill was introduced specifically in response to the case of al-Megrahi and his abandoned appeal, it can be applied to similar cases that might arise, as John Finnie said. Therefore, it is not completely without purpose, but to pretend that it was not fundamentally driven by the unusual circumstances surrounding that particular case would, of course, be foolish. Many members are much better versed in the intricacies and complexities of that case, but it is abundantly clear to all that serious questions remain over that tragedy. Primarily, we owe answers to the families of the victims who were killed in the Lockerbie tragedy, but the reputation of the Scottish legal system has a question mark—some may even say a stain—on it that will not be washed away until some serious questions are answered.
It seems to me that the Scottish Government is doing what it can to be as transparent as possible and to move the process forward. Now that the statement of reasons is in the public domain—I cannot confess to having read all 821 pages of it—we must ask: what now? Many of us wonder whether the truth will ever fully be revealed. Surely the only way to bring further clarity would be through an appeal. It was reassuring to hear the cabinet secretary say recently that the appropriate measures are in place for the family of al-Megrahi to pursue an appeal posthumously. It will, of course, be for them to determine whether to do so, but I hope that that opportunity is taken for the sake of the victims’ families if nothing else.
The whole tragic event has been mired in controversy and secrets, deals in the desert, and kissing dictators in Bedouin tents. The talk of oil contracts and secret documents all make for a conspiracy theorist's goldmine. The bill may not be the complete answer to the many outstanding questions that exist; the only thing that will put to bed such questions is the truth.
I am not accustomed to quoting Winston Churchill, and I do not intend to do so ever again, but he was undoubtedly right when he said:
“The truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
I hope that the bill will help us to take at least a small step towards discovering the whole truth of the deeply tragic al-Megrahi affair.
16:00
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-02617, in the name of Kenny MacAskill, on the Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill.I wi...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
It would appear that we have a problem with Mr MacAskill’s card. Can we do something about the sound? Interruption. Thank you.I call Mr MacAskill to speak to...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill)
SNP
Thank you for your forbearance, Presiding Officer.I thank the Justice Committee for its careful stage 1 scrutiny of the Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review...
Lewis Macdonald (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I am interested in the cabinet secretary’s view on whether a less complex approach could have been taken had the bill been a bit more ambitious in scope. In ...
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
That is not the case. There are two separate matters. The Petch and Foye judgment caused considerable concern and was commented on not only by me but by just...
Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Lab
Does the cabinet secretary accept that it would have been helpful to have consulted the information commissioner at a much earlier stage in order to resolve ...
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
It was not up to us to consult the information commissioner, because these matters have to be dealt with by the SCCRC. We have always sought to facilitate ev...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Con
I call Christine Grahame to speak to the motion on behalf of the Justice Committee.15:11
Christine Grahame (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
SNP
I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on behalf of the Justice Committee—at least, that is what it says here. I thank all those who gave evidence to t...
Jenny Marra (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
Alongside other committee members who are present, I had the opportunity to scrutinise the bill closely as it passed through the Justice Committee. I want to...
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
Does the member accept that part 2 of the bill has a wider application than just Mr al-Megrahi’s case?
Jenny Marra
Lab
John Finnie may, like me, hope that part 2 will have a wider implication in future, although it is difficult to predict when that might be. However, we will ...
David McLetchie (Lothian) (Con)
Con
As other members have done, I speak as a member of the Justice Committee, which has had responsibility for scrutinising the bill, the first part of which was...
John Finnie
SNP
Does the member accept that the Government’s position remains that the manifesto commitment will be implemented once the terms of the McLeish commission are ...
David McLetchie
Con
Yes—I accept that that is the position, but that is a cover-up for not implementing anything, as Mr Finnie will realise, the longer he serves in this Parliam...
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
I will concentrate on part 1 of the bill—the easy bit. We know that part 1 resulted from the much-talked-about Petch and Foye case. As we have heard, part 1 ...
Graeme Pearson (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I note John Finnie’s light touch in describing part 1 as “the easy bit”. On that basis, I look forward to his forthcoming book, “A Treatise on Scots Law”, be...
Roderick Campbell (North East Fife) (SNP)
SNP
I refer members to my entry in the register of interests as a member of the Faculty of Advocates. One of the advantages of the recess is that it enables one ...
Humza Yousaf (Glasgow) (SNP)
SNP
As a member of the Justice Committee, I, too, thank everybody who came forward and gave evidence on the bill.There is a constant underlying theme in the deba...
John Mason (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
SNP
Hear, hear.
Humza Yousaf
SNP
Thank you. However, luckily, my wife studied law, which was very helpful to me. I have sympathy for Alison McInnes and for Colin Keir—who has disappeared fro...
Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Lab
Presiding Officer, I think that I deserve full marks for bravery as the first non-member of the Justice Committee to venture into these choppy waters without...
Mark McDonald (North East Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Where Malcolm Chisholm leads, I will boldly follow, as another non-member of the Justice Committee entering bravely into the fray. Never has the old quotatio...
Mary Fee (West Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
The Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill is needed to remedy the judgment handed down in Petch and Foye v Her Majesty’s Advocate. The bill ...
Colin Keir (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
SNP
Over the past year, members of the Justice Committee have been faced with some complex material to digest in the course of their deliberations.As we have hea...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
Like other committee members, I am grateful to everyone who submitted evidence on the bill, because they certainly helped us to get to grips with an extremel...
Dennis Robertson (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
SNP
When I was given the task of being a member of the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, I never thought that I would be grateful for that...
Christine Grahame
SNP
I have to say that I confused myself. John Green is an intruder.
Dennis Robertson
SNP
I thought that it was males who had the problem with reds and greens.The matter that we are debating is very serious, and it needs to be resolved. I congratu...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
That brings us to closing speeches. I remind members who were in the chamber for the debate that they should be here for closing speeches.I have a little bit...