Untitled item
S5W-20395 · Written Question · lodged by Finnie, John
The answer
In many cases, where there is sufficient evidence to justify proceedings, a prosecution will be appropriate and, in that event, the prosecutor will commence and pursue proceedings in the appropriate forum. The Prosecution Code articulates a general rule that cases should be taken in the lowest competent Court unless there is some good reason for prosecuting in a higher Court. This proposition reflects an underlying principle: that the response of the criminal justice system should be proportionate.
The Prosecution Code recognises that prosecutors have other options, commonly described as alternatives to prosecution, which, in particular circumstances, and especially in relation to less serious offending behaviour, may effectively and proportionately reflect the public interest. These alternatives to prosecution include warnings by the Procurator Fiscal, diversion from prosecution, fiscal fines, fiscal compensation orders, combined fiscal fines & compensation orders, and fiscal work orders. Apart from warnings and diversions, these are provided for in statute.
The Prosecution Code sets out factors which may, depending on the circumstances of the particular case, be relevant in determining what action is in the public interest. These include, among other things, the nature and gravity of the offence; the impact of the offence on the victims and witnesses; the age, background and circumstances of the accused; the actions of the victims; the motive for the crime; and the risk of further offending. The weight to be attached to any particular consideration will depend upon the circumstances of the individual case.
The use of such alternatives to prosecution, including warnings, is a common feature of European jurisdictions. The system complies with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Answered by James Wolffe QC on 18 Dec 2018.