Achi news desk-
The panel could include several professional judges or one judge sitting with two lay members, according to her response to the justice committee’s report.
The scheme is part of a wider series of reforms contained in the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill which is intended to provide more support to victims of sex crimes with lower conviction rates than crimes others.
READ MORE: Ministers to change non-jury trial pilot after SNP rebellion threat
But a number of lawyers have strongly opposed some of the reforms which are based on a review of the way sex crimes are treated in Scotland by Lady Dorrian. Some in the profession have said they will boycott the juryless trials pilot.
In her letter to the committee, Ms Constance noted that rape conviction rates are significantly lower than for other types of crime.
He pointed to research which showed that the conviction rate for people charged on individual charges of rape or attempted rape was between 22% and 27% in recent years.
Ministers have been facing a backbench rebellion from some SNP MPs over the trial without jury proposal included in the bill which is due to be voted on in the chamber in its first parliamentary term on April 23.
Members of the justice committee were split on the proposals for the pilot trial scheme without a jury with SNP members in favor while Labor and the Conservatives opposed.
Lawyers remain unconvinced by the changes suggested by Ms Constance.
The Herald asked Simon Brown, vice-president of the Scottish Bar Association (SSBA), whether his organization would support a pilot using a panel of judges or a panel of one judge and two lay members.
“It’s a non-starter,” he said.
“There aren’t enough judges at the moment, where will they get the extras they need? And lay members who sit with a judge are more likely to be influenced by them. The one of those options don’t change our position.”
He added: “The SSBA is surprised that the Scottish Government seems determined to go ahead with the pilot scheme for non-jury trials despite the clear reservations expressed by the justice committee.
“Their response to the justice committee’s report makes it clear that much more information is needed before such a pilot scheme can be considered, but without any coherent plan as to how such information will be collected .
“They also continue to beat the drum for low conviction rates with misleading and meaningless comparisons of conviction rates for all cases.
“As was patiently explained to the committee, rape is an unusually complex case that is very difficult to prove, often relying on a jury’s perception of who they believe with very little independent evidence.
“Comparing these to a case of shoplifting where the accused is seen on CCTV committing the crime is frankly insulting. Then double and use conviction rates in a specific subset of rape trials, single accused cases, to justify dismantling the jury. The system for all rape cases is misleading again.”
He continued: “The Scottish Government is also conveniently ignoring the deep opposition of almost the entire legal profession to this proposal.
“Discussions in every bar common room across Scotland show an almost unanimous refusal to take part in such trials, and without the involvement of the criminal bar, the pilot is doomed before it starts. To hear the government saying ‘We continue to engage with law practitioners on proposals for the pilot’ is ridiculous.
“Finally, and most importantly, nothing detracts from the fundamental difficulty with this plan, which is that these are real people who will have real conviction whether or not the plan is judged.” n unconditional success or abject failure, and no government should be willing to experiment. with people’s freedom.”
President of the Law Society of Scotland, Sheila Webster: “We remain firmly of the view that this proposed pilot scheme is deeply flawed and should be abandoned, so that MSPs can focus on other complex and important elements in this Bill.
“If the non-jury trials are to go ahead then it cannot be rushed, especially given the number of other changes to our criminal justice system contained in this piece of legislation.”
The non-jury trial pilot is the measure in the bill that has received the most public attention.
The legislation also proposes to scrap the unproven ruling, a move rejected by the Law Society in Scotland, and to establish a dedicated sexual offenses court.
Ms Constance said the pilot scheme to hold rape trials without juries present would not go ahead until the end of 2028.
When asked to provide a clear timetable for when the various provisions of the Bill would be implemented, she said based on the assumption that the Bill would be passed at the end of 2025, she said that the sexual offenses court would be implemented in fourth quarter 2026.
The pilot would be the last element to be implemented, taking place in the fourth quarter of 2028, he said.
He noted that some of the committee members were facing the pilot.
He said: “We note the views of the members on the pilot and reiterate our commitment to continue listening to the voices of members from all parties, as well as the voices of partners from all parts of the justice system and the victims themselves.
“Juries play a key role in the Scottish justice system, but there is a compelling body of evidence that rape myths can influence the decisions jurors make in sex crime cases.
“That is a risk to the administration of justice, which in turn could undermine public confidence in juries.
“We believe it is important that we examine the use of juries in rape cases and try to better understand the effects they have – a time-bound pilot allows us to do that .”
Amendments may be introduced in Stage 2 of the Bill which limit the time of the pilot scheme, he said.
