This report is directed to the successor committee to the Criminal Justice Committee in session 7.

The purpose of the report is to assist the new committee as it comes to develop its programme of work.

The report records the main pieces of work undertaken by the Criminal Justice Committee in session 6. The report also highlights issues that are likely to merit scrutiny in the new session. Furthermore, it makes observations about ways of working that we have found useful and that our successor committee may wish to adopt. 

Session 6 began in 2021, at a time when COVID restrictions meant that virtual attendance at committee meetings was commonplace and social distancing was still practised. It also meant that much of our early work was based on scrutinising how the justice system could continue to function.

One of the main themes for the rest of this session has been how the justice system has recovered from the pandemic. This has involved adapting to new ways of working, as well as dealing with the significant backlog in trials due to the pandemic.

There have been a number of other challenges in the justice sector this session which the Committee has examined, including issues such as rising prisoner numbers, reform of the jury system, violence against women and girls, and budgetary pressures.

All this has meant that the Committee has had a busy workload this session, both in terms of legislation and in scrutinising key issues of significance in its remit.

Our workload is illustrated by the fact that this session the Criminal Justice Committee has:

• Held 169 formal committee meetings

• Heard from 654 witnesses at formal committee meetings

• Met formally for 495 hours

• Received 1,378 written submissions in response to calls for views on Citizen Space

It is also the case that individual pieces of work considered by the Committee have, on occasion, been substantial.

As an example, the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill was a substantial and important piece of legislation. Our scrutiny involved 14 public oral evidence sessions over the course of 36 hours. We heard from 57 different witnesses. 

We would also observe that some legislation which, on the face of it, seemed fairly uncontentious, contained elements which were more complex than anticipated. For example, the provisions of both the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Bill and the Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles (Scotland) Bill required careful analysis and scrutiny due to their policy implications.

As in previous sessions, the work of the Committee has been dominated by, mostly government, legislation. This has meant that we have had limited time to schedule self-generated or inquiry work. On occasion this has been challenging, and we have had to be flexible regarding scheduling our own inquiry work.

One development which has assisted us, to an extent, this session has been the separation of criminal and civil justice into the remits of two different committees. This has meant that legislation which in previous sessions might have been considered by this committee, such as reform of the legal profession, was considered by the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. It meant, however, a disconnect between scrutiny of the civil and criminal segments of the justice system.

It remains to be seen whether this split will be replicated in session 7. If it is not, our successor committee may wish to refer to the relevant sections of the legacy report of Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee covering civil justice matters in terms of its recommendations on what issues to pursue in session 7.

We discuss our ways of working later in this legacy report, including how we responded to the challenges of a heavy legislative workload.

We set out below a summary of the main pieces of work undertaken by the Criminal Justice Committee in session 6.

This is not a full description of the scrutiny we undertook, rather an indication of the key pieces of work we undertook to give an overview of our work. A more detailed description of the Committee's work this session can be found in each of our annual reports.

We would draw the attention of our successor committee to the potential for the Committee to affect change through its work and to raise the profile of an issue. To take just two examples, changes were made to the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill as a direct result of recommendations made in the Committee's Stage 1 report. Furthermore, the Committee's ongoing interest in the issue of survivors of sexual offences gaining access to court transcripts without being charged excessive fees, eventually led to a change in the law in this area.

The Committee has been involved in the consideration of 10 bills this session, listed below in chronological order with bills the Committee considered as a lead committee first.

In 2023, the Committee conducted post-legislative scrutiny of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018.

The Committee published a report which reviewed how the Act has been implemented and made recommendations for how to overcome various challenges which the Committee had identified.

This session the Committee considered 87 statutory instruments, 53 of which were negative instruments and 34 of which were affirmative.

Several of the statutory instruments dealt with high profile subjects and were subject to detailed committee scrutiny. To take just two examples, the Committee considered an SSI which criminalised the possession of an XL Bully dog unless an exception exists; and considered an instrument which made provision for the Scottish Ministers to release certain categories of persons early from prison and young offenders institutions.

This session the Committee considered legislative consent memorandums in relation to nine different UK Bills and made recommendations to Parliament on whether to consent that devolved provisions should be included in the Bill. These were, in chronological order:

• Online Safety Bill

• Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill

• Public Order Bill

• Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill

• Investigatory Powers Amendment Bill

• Criminal Justice Bill

• Crime and Policing Bill

• Sentencing Bill

• Northern Ireland Troubles Bill

The Committee has undertaken inquiry and scrutiny work during this session on the following subjects. This is a summary of our work. Full details can be found in the committee's annual report and in the relevant reports and committee papers.

Each autumn, the Committee undertook pre-budget scrutiny in advance of the publication of the Scottish Government's budget. During this scrutiny, our focus was primarily on the financial pressures facing organisations in the criminal justice sector and the main priorities for the sector.

Of particular interest to the Committee has been the pressure on capital budgets and investment in policing, the fire and rescue services, prisons, courts, community justice, criminal social work and the third sector.

In the final year of the parliamentary session, we found it particularly useful to invite in key organisations within the remit to discuss the implications to them of the actual budget settlement they received.

This session the Committee has taken evidence from, and scrutinised the work of, officeholders and commissioners established by legislation which are accountable to the Scottish Parliament or whose work is of interest to the committee.

We have taken evidence from the following individuals and bodies: the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner; the Police, Investigations and Review Commissioner; HM Fire Service Inspectorate in Scotland; HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland; HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland; and HM Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland.

The Committee has considered three petitions this session. Further details can be found in the Committee's annual report.

• Petition PE1370 (first introduced in November 2010) – is a petition by Dr Jim Swire, Professor Robert Black QC, Mr Robert Forrester, Father Patrick Keegans and Mr Iain McKie on behalf of Justice for Megrahi on opening an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.

• Petition PE1458 (first introduced in December 2012) – is a petition by Peter Cherbi calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to create a Register of Pecuniary Interests of Judges Bill or amend present legislation to require all members of the Judiciary in Scotland to submit their interests and hospitality received to a publicly available Register of Interests.

• Petition PE2136 (first introduced in January 2025) – is a petition in the name of Fiona Drouet to make non-fatal strangulation a standalone criminal offence in Scotland.

The Committee has agreed to keep these petitions open for consideration in session 7.

In session 6, the Committee undertook extensive engagement work with individuals and communities, in order to encourage them to become involved in the work of the Committee and to provide their views on issues we were considering, based on their lived experiences.

Here are some examples of engagement work we undertook. Specific details of this work can be found in each of our annual reports and in committee papers and reports on each individual piece of work.

Based on our experiences this session, we offer the following observations about our engagement activities.

The Committee has found its use of engagement work to be extremely valuable this session. Hearing from individuals with lived experience of an issue can provide insights into policy areas which Members may not receive otherwise. Engagement work can inform the Committee's scrutiny, shape our recommendations and ultimately lead to policy change. It can also highlight issues which would not normally have been brought to our attention.

As an example of the impact of engagement work, the evidence from survivors of sexual offences had a significant impact in shaping our recommendations on the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. Furthermore, one of the recommendations of the People's Panel on reducing drug harm and deaths was that parliamentary committees should consider further action to look at the increase of drug supply in the prison sector. This recommendation contributed to our decision to launch our inquiry on substance misuse in the prison system.

However, there is a need to adopt a trauma-informed approach when conducting engagement. This is particularly true in the field of justice, where the Committee may be meeting with victims of crime who may have suffered trauma and be vulnerable as a result.

This session the Committee has taken care to adopt a trauma-informed approach when conducting engagement and to be guided at all times by the expertise of the Parliament's Participation and Communities Team. It is essential that enough time is allowed to prepare for an engagement event, and as far as possible that the format is designed in partnership with the participants. The format should be designed to minimise the potential for trauma. For example, private informal meetings may be more appropriate than a formal evidence session. We recommend that our successor committee adopts a trauma-informed approach to engagement to ensure that appropriate safeguards are put in place.

Given the potential for retraumatising vulnerable individuals, careful consideration should be given to the purpose of engagement before it is undertaken. Our view is that engagement activity should have a clear practical purpose and should not be tokenistic or box-ticking. It should be focused on hearing the participants’ experience of, and views on, policy issues, rather than simply inviting participants to recount traumatic experiences without any context.

It is also important to consider whether a committee could draw upon previous engagement work on a particular subject, rather than repeating work which has been done before. This would minimise the impact on individuals who may find it traumatic to provide evidence for a second time.

This session we have been careful to adopt these principles. We recommend that our successor committee does the same.

Below we suggest, in no particular order, some subjects which our successor committee might want to pursue in session 7. These are pieces of work which we have undertaken in session 6 which we consider are still ongoing or on which progress requires to be monitored.

This session the Committee has worked in a collegiate manner, with committee colleagues establishing good and constructive working relationships. The vast majority of decisions were taken unanimously, and any differences of views were handled respectfully. The Committee benefited from a relatively stable membership with 5 out of 8 members serving for the duration of session 6 and members who joined mid-session quickly integrating into the work of the Committee. The session 7 committee should consider how this sense of collaborative working can be fostered from the start. There may be a role for a Business Planning Day off campus to assist in this regard in order to promote early relationship-building.

It may be helpful to arrange initial evidence sessions immediately after the election with key individuals/organisations in the justice sector, in order to build Members’ awareness/expertise of key subjects.

When conducting inquiries or scrutinising legislation, it can be helpful to set aside time for Members to discuss their work informally and in private. For example:

• It can be helpful to hold private pre-meetings to discuss the Committee's approach to the formal committee meeting and which lines of questioning individual Members wish to pursue. This can help with the management of the meeting and ensure Members are well-briefed before committee meetings commence.

• After evidence sessions, it can be helpful to hold a private discussion of the evidence heard, to share reflections, and to consider what further information may be required.

• In advance of considering a draft report for the first time, it can be helpful to have a general open discussion about Members’ views on potential recommendations. This means that the views of Members can be obtained before a draft report is considered which helps shape the recommendations.

There are certain working practices which we have adopted this session which can assist in the effective management of evidence sessions. These include:

• Normally dispensing with an opening statement from witnesses, on the basis that opening statements can lead witnesses to repeat the contents of their written submissions. Exceptions are made for ministers or other high-profile witnesses, such as the chief constable,

• Where possible, limiting the number of panels of evidence to two per meeting, in order to ensure that adequate time is available to question witnesses. We have also found that limiting panels to no more than 4 witnesses has been beneficial.

• If appropriate, providing briefing to witnesses in advance of the meeting about likely areas of questioning. This will not be appropriate in every case, but it may be helpful when a witness is inexperienced or nervous about giving evidence and the purpose of the session is to elicit certain pieces of information.

When timetabling of bills is being discussed with the Scottish Government, it is important that adequate time is available at Stage 1. This session we found there were real challenges considering the Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles (Scotland) Bill to a compressed timescale as requested by the Scottish Government. By contrast, the Committee had much more time to scrutinise the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill and an extension to the timescale for Stage 1 was granted when requested by the Committee.

More generally, it is helpful for the Committee, and the clerking team, to establish an open dialogue with the Scottish Government with a view to receiving advance notice of work likely to be referred to the Committee. This can assist the Committee to plan its work programme, as well as allowing early notice of when there might be gaps which would allow inquiry work or one-off evidence sessions to be scheduled.

It can be helpful for the Committee to identify a defined policy change which it wishes to be made, rather than making broad-brush recommendations. For example, the Committee highlighted a specific issue with drug smuggling in prisons through the mail received by prisoners which had been impregnated with illegal substances. This led to changes to prison rules whereby some mail would be photocopied instead. The Committee also consistently pursued the issue of survivors’ access to court transcripts and significant progress was made in this area, including securing legislative change.

This way of working also allowed the Committee to progress certain issues without necessarily needing to undertake a formal inquiry. This was helpful this session, given the limited time available for inquiry work due to other commitments such as legislation.

A degree of persistence can be required to make progress and maintain the profile of an issue. The Committee returned to the issue of court transcripts on several occasions in order to progress this issue. The Committee also returned repeatedly to the issue of mental health and policing, to monitor what progress was being made. The Committee has also returned to budget scrutiny after the publication of the Scottish Budget, to question key organisations on the implications of the budget settlement they received.

It is also the case that specific issues which warrant further work can sometimes be raised in correspondence to the Committee or in letters from constituents. Whilst the Committee is able to look into general matters of policy raised by correspondence, it has taken the long-standing position that it cannot intervene in respect of individual cases.

One challenge we faced this session was a requirement to scrutinise two Members Bills introduced relatively late in the final parliamentary year. This led to work programme pressures which had to be carefully managed.

We welcome the proposed rule change from the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee that the deadline for introduction of such Bills should be moved from the first sitting day in June in the calendar year preceding a general election to the first sitting day in December in the third year of a parliamentary session. We hope that this will lead to the consideration of Members Bill being spread over a wider time period, giving committees more flexibility regarding the timetabling of their scrutiny.

As noted above, several members of the Criminal Justice Committee have been meeting with their counterparts on two other committees to scrutinise the efforts to tackle the harm caused by drugs and also reduce the numbers of drugs deaths in Scotland. A legacy report from this cross committee working has been published.

We believe that this work has been important and has helped keep pressure on the Scottish Government and others to tackle this issue, and enabled parliamentary scrutiny of these efforts from a number of angles, such as the criminal justice, health and social justice aspects of tackling drug misuse and deaths.

The work has not been without challenges. Due to other commitments, it has not been possible for the cross committee to meet more frequently than a few times per year, which makes sustained scrutiny more challenging. Secondly there are challenges with the interpretation of the rules around quorums which require three members of each of the three committees taking part to all be present.

Nevertheless, we feel that there is ongoing benefit to scrutiny of efforts to tackle the harm caused by drugs and also reduce the numbers of drugs deaths in Scotland on a cross committee basis and endorse the view that some appropriate means be found for this in session 7.

As a committee, we found our predecessor's legacy report to be a useful document when we began to plan our work in 2021.

Given our experience, we recommend that our successor committee discusses this report at an early meeting following the establishment of the new committee. We wish our successor committee well as it begins its important work.