Hansard

I am very pleased to speak in the debate, which has been introduced by Katy Clark. I agree with her motion, with what she said and with the very important points that Paul McLennan made about the deep-rooted nature of some of the crimes and the responsibility of men across society to do something about that.

I have faith in the new Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain QC, who clearly has her work cut out. She has not only been left with the mess of the Rangers FC malicious prosecutions cases that were caused by her male predecessors, but has even bigger issues in respect of the backlog of tens of thousands of criminal cases and how so many women and girls are still failed by the justice system. Last month, she candidly told the Criminal Justice Committee that victims of sexual offences might not be getting justice. Her candour is welcome.

Although anyone can be a victim of domestic violence, we know that the majority of victims are female. The national procurator fiscal for domestic abuse, Moira Price, recently said that the Crown

“takes a rigorous approach to crimes of domestic abuse and stalking ... This includes a presumption in favour of prosecution where there is sufficient evidence”,

better training and prosecutors working more closely with the police.

However, I still hear far too many accounts of women being failed by the justice system. In recent times, there has been the so-called “boys club” of police officers in Moray. A female police officer reported a catalogue of alleged bullying and criminality, but her concerns were ignored.

Victims of stalking tell me how the criminal justice system exacerbates their ordeal. Manipulative men abuse our courts by using spurious excuses to string out proceedings. That can last for years, and was doing so even before Covid. It is a control tactic and is, in itself, an extension of the stalking campaign.

There is also the story of the woman whose serious domestic violence case limped through the courts for four long years. Her attacker played the system at every turn, seeking delays and giving excuses not to proceed. In the end, he was even allowed to strike a plea deal to have numerous charges either dropped or significantly watered down.

That brave woman, and many others, have told me that they would not go through that again. It is damning that they say that they would advise others in the same position not to engage with the system. Although I would not encourage that, I can see that those people have been through horrific ordeals.

Some criminals know that using the tactic known as “churn”, which is the constant delaying of cases, can result in witnesses moving on or forgetting key details, and in victims simply losing patience. There is also the practice of plea deals, which operates largely unseen by the public eye. I was pleased when the Lord Advocate recently gave a commitment, in response to a question that I asked, that plea deals will not be misused in order to meet the temptation for prosecutors to clear backlogs.

As Katy Clark is, I am interested in the report by the virtual trials national project board. Among other things, the report calls for specialist online courts to deal with domestic abuse cases. From what Ms Clark said, it sounds as if those have been successful and have been welcomed not only by victims but by legal practitioners and others who are involved in the process. The board reports that virtual trials would increase protection and reduce trauma for victims.

That is the sort of radical approach that the Lord Advocate should consider. Although she has victims on her side, and many MSPs back change, a challenge might come from the powerful legal lobby, which often seems to be culturally resistant to change. I am sure that we all wish her the best of luck.