Justice Committee
Meeting date: Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Official Report
418KB pdf
Subordinate Legislation
Act of Sederunt (Sheriff Court Rules) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No 3) 2011 (SSI 2011/386)
There are three instruments that are not subject to parliamentary procedure for the committee to consider.
The Subordinate Legislation Committee had no concerns regarding the Act of Sederunt (Sheriff Court Rules) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No 3) 2011. As members have no comments, is the committee content simply to note the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Act of Adjournal (Criminal Procedure Rules Amendment No 7) (Double Jeopardy (Scotland) Act 2011) 2011 (SSI 2011/387)
The Subordinate Legislation Committee has drawn the Parliament’s attention to the instrument on the ground that rule 59.2(2) makes superfluous provision that duplicates the effect of section 5(1) of the Double Jeopardy (Scotland) Act 2011. That is contrary to normal drafting practice.
As members have no comments, is the committee content simply to note the instrument?
Members indicated agreement.
Act of Sederunt (Contempt of Court in Civil Proceedings) 2011 (SSI 2011/388)
The Subordinate Legislation Committee has drawn the Parliament’s attention to the instrument on a number of grounds. Members will see from paper 3 that it recommends that the Justice Committee give the instrument careful consideration.
During consideration of the instrument, the SLC wrote to ask the Lord President’s office to respond to its concerns but was not entirely satisfied with the response that it received. If the committee thinks it appropriate, we might wish to follow up the Subordinate Legislation Committee’s concern and write to the Lord President to reflect the fact that the drafting concerns remain outstanding.
I ask members for their comments.
It is a matter of concern that the drafting concerns that the Subordinate Legislation Committee flagged up remain unaddressed even though the Lord President has replied.
Are members minded to continue our consideration of the instrument next week so that we can give the matter real thought before we jump to any conclusion?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you.
Our next meeting will be on 6 December, when we will take evidence for the consultation that the Commission on a Bill of Rights is undertaking on a UK bill of rights. We have an opportunity on 13 December to hear some responses to Lord Carloway’s evidence, if members think that that would be useful.
That would be useful, convener. Have you had any indication as to a process or timetable for taking the Carloway review forward, and the Government’s position in that regard?
I think that the Government will respond in early course, but I am sure that you will get a timescale if you ask about that in the debate on Thursday.
It is tentative, because we do not know about 13 December, but we would like to take some follow-up evidence. I will let the clerks come up with some suggested witnesses and members should feed in their ideas to the clerks if there are particular witnesses whom they would like to invite. We could have a panel, or even a round table if there are too many witnesses for that. It is always useful to interact on such issues. It was a useful evidence session today. Thank you.
Meeting closed at 11:25.