Chamber and committees

I am grateful for your expression of empathy with the victims and the efforts that you have been making to progress changes.

On victims, you referred to the new statement of prosecution, which states that under the UNCRC the best interests of the reported child and of other children should be given primary consideration. We understand that there is no hierarchy of rights, but we have heard throughout our work in this area that young victims feel that their rights are brushed aside in favour of the rights of the reported child, for example on youth violence.

I come back to the two examples that we heard. The first was at the LoveMilton community centre, where we heard from a young girl who was there with her parents, who was possibly not the most socially adept girl within her year group. She had been befriended by one of the people in her class and invited to meet at an external destination. When she got there, she found five to 10 people with phones who recorded the most horrendous explosion of violence on her, which left her very, very seriously injured—for a while there was some concern as to whether her life was at risk. The children were all 12 at the time; they were all young.

She no longer feels safe to leave the house for school—or, at the time, she did not—or to socialise for fear that what happened would happen again, and because it had all been recorded publicly. Her mother felt very much that although the police were incredibly supportive, they did not think that, ultimately, this would go anywhere.

There seemed to be a tremendous amount of support in place to try to have the individual who had committed the offence understand the nature of what they had done and understand how filming it had been deeply harmful, but that individual was still in the community and that individual’s parents were tormenting the girl’s family and saying, “There you go; there is nothing you can do about it”. That young girl felt that she was locked up at home with no education, no counselling and no social life.

How is the long-term impact on victims taken into account when determining what the appropriate justice route might be for reported children? In the consideration of an example such as that, who ultimately is representing the interests of that victim? Even insofar as those interests are represented, what weight is finally given to them in progressing these matters?

Good morning, and welcome to the 12th meeting in 2025 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. Our colleague David Torrance, the deputy convener, will be joining us shortly.

Our first item of business is simply to agree to consider evidence in private under item 3. Are colleagues content to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

I am conscious of the cabinet secretary’s time.

Cabinet secretary, I will begin with the same anecdote that I put to the Lord Advocate. It returns to the online theme that you addressed in the remarks that you have made to this point. I referred to a television panel that I appeared on with the late First Minister just before he died. The introductory question, which was not broadcast, was about the use of online activity and the filming and posting online of attacks on young people. The panel of adults, including the late First Minister, all gave what we thought were very worthy answers and heard the usual kind of polite applause from the audience. However, after the filming session was over, young people came up and said, “You adults haven’t got the faintest idea what you are talking about in all this. You are talking about online and the use of digital technology, which is way beyond your experience of it. It is not how we as young people see it at all.”

We talk about the rapid development of digital technology and the way in which young people experience it. I referred at the start of the proceedings to an individual who was lured, with the incident being filmed by a number of people. It was then broadcast on social media and sits there in perpetuity as a legacy of the harm that was caused. Are we, as politicians and legislators, keeping up with how online activity is being deployed against young people in a series of different ways, including, sometimes, by young people against other young people?

I am conscious of your time, cabinet secretary. Finally, you have referred to various summits that have taken place. Are we clear yet about specific outturns from those or is that still work in progress? Do you expect that the evidence that was heard in those summits might lead to a debate in the chamber later in the year, which this committee might be able to participate in, given that we have been taking evidence on the same issue during this session of Parliament?

Lord Advocate, Mr Hogg and Ms Ross, thank you very much. I very much appreciate the time that you have given and the evidence that you have been able to share with us this morning. I suspend the meeting briefly.

Welcome back. I apologise for the slightly extended duration of the session with the previous panel.

We are delighted to be joined on our second panel by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance; Clare Collin, violence reduction team leader; and Tom McNamara, head of youth justice and children’s hearings. Good morning. Thank you very much for finding the time to be with us. I realise, cabinet secretary, that your time with us is limited so we will try to be concise.

Again, I will start by setting out some of the context for the evidence session. The committee has been undertaking considerable work on PE1947, on addressing youth violence, and has been struck by similar concerns that are raised in PE2064, on dealing with rape that is committed by under-16s. Both those petitions were lodged in 2022.

The committee—Mr Ewing will be rejoining us shortly and Mr Golden has had to leave us—has changed its membership during the consideration of the petitions. Indeed, I think that I am the only one left who visited the LoveMilton community centre as part of our evidence gathering for PE1947 and heard from some of the victims.

On PE1947, we took evidence from Police Scotland, the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit, the No Knives, Better Lives programme and a number of academics. We also undertook visits in the community to meet young people in an environment where they felt less intimidated, perhaps, than they might have done if they had come here to the Parliament to give evidence about their experience.

In particular, we met a young girl who, at the age of 14, was lured—the method used was a mobile—to a remote location, where she was seriously assaulted by another girl who had falsely sought to befriend her. The whole thing was recorded on mobiles and posted online. Nobody present was concerned for her welfare, but she was discovered in due course and taken to hospital with extreme injuries. The incident left her scared to leave the house. She feels very much that the perpetrator is out and about in the community, with the latter’s family even intimidating her family, leaving her as a victim completely unprotected and unsupported. Her mum says that she has got PTSD, and she has attempted to take her own life on two occasions. On the lasting impact on the young girl and her family, she said:

“I always thought that the police were there to protect and the justice system served justice.”

However, she just feels let down. It is very difficult to understand how you would feel in those circumstances as a parent or if you were the victim.

As I outlined to the first panel, the committee understands that the Scottish Government’s policy position is to avoid criminalising children where possible. However, we remain concerned about how the most serious of cases of violence and sexual offending are addressed and, crucially, how victims can meaningfully pursue justice and feel safe in their community.

I understand, cabinet secretary, that you might want to say a few words before we move to questions.

Our specific reason for having this additional committee meeting is to take evidence on youth crime, and we have two panels with whom we hope to be able to explore the issues. The session will be informed by our consideration of two separate petitions with which we have been actively engaged since 2022. The first petition is PE1947, on addressing Scotland’s culture of youth violence, and as part of our evidence taking for that petition, we have undertaken external visits and met various groups outside of Parliament. The second is PE2064, on ensuring that under-16s charged with rape are treated as adults in the criminal justice system.

I am delighted to say that our first panel is with us to assist with our consideration of the issues. We are joined by the Rt Hon Dorothy Bain KC, the Lord Advocate, whom it is our great pleasure to have back at the committee; Alistair Hogg, head of practice and policy, Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration; and Stephanie Ross, principal procurator fiscal depute in the policy unit, Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. A warm welcome to you all and thank you very much for making the time to join us this morning.

I will start by setting out some of the context, which I have already referred to. The committee undertook a considerable amount of work on the petition on addressing youth violence, but as we went along, we were struck by similar concerns that were being raised in parallel on the petition on rape committed by under-16s. On the youth violence petition, we took evidence from Police Scotland, the Violence Reduction Unit and No Knives, Better Lives as well as a number of academics and, most notably, we visited young people and their families who had been impacted by violence in their own communities.

One girl to whom we spoke was attacked when she was just 14. I do not think that any of us who were at that meeting will forget it; indeed, it is, I suppose, not normal for politicians necessarily to be confronted by that level of direct experience. Perhaps others will say that it is a story that they have heard before, but we were left profoundly moved. The girl was left at the age of 14 with post-traumatic stress disorder; she cannot leave the house without her mum; and she has attempted to end her life on two occasions.

In our evidence taking, we might well go into some of what we were told at the time, but I should make it clear that the young girl in question and her family felt let down that the justice system did not protect her and that things were just as bad after the attack. She did not feel that there were appropriate consequences for the perpetrator, who was still very much in the community and was able, along with their family, to cause her further harm.

The petitioner for PE2064, on rape committed by under-16s, has shared her view that there should be more consequences for the crime of rape committed by under-16s. She feels that the perpetrator will be free to continue attacking more people because, as she sees it, there is just no deterrence in place.

The committee understands that the system avoids criminalising children where possible. However, we remain concerned about how the most serious cases of violence and sexual offending are addressed and, crucially, how victims can meaningfully pursue justice and feel safe in their communities again. As a final comment, I would say that we were particularly struck by the organisation of some of the violence that we saw, with individuals being summoned for false reasons to destinations, only to find multiple people standing present and ready to film what was about to take place. Those victims were then abandoned without any regard whatever for their wellbeing or safety and left in an extremely difficult and dangerous condition. That was very difficult to hear.

I have been told that there has been no request by the witnesses to make any additional statements, so we will move straight to questions. I will come to the evidence that we heard from children later, but I will invite Maurice Golden to begin the questioning.

That appears to potentially contribute to the Scottish Government having the ability to intervene when online material is being used in a damaging way.

This will be your final contribution.