To ask the Scottish Executive whether, for each prosecution under the Emergency Workers (Scotland) Act 2005, it will provide a breakdown of category of emergency worker attacked.
The Crown Office andProcurator Fiscal Service’s case management database does not record the professionor job title of victims in a way that would allow aggregate information to be extractedin the format requested, but the following table gives a breakdown of the chargeswhich have been reported to procurators fiscal, under the Emergency Workers (Scotland)Act 2005 since its introduction in May 2005 and the action taken in respect of thosecharges.
Charges: Offencesunder Emergency Workers (Scotland) Act 2005 (from 9 May 2005 to 27 July 2007)1,2,3
Section of Act | Court Proceedings | Direct Measures4 | No Action 5 | Under Consideration 6 | Total |
S:1(1) - Assault, obstruct or hinder constable/fire officer/person providing assistance in terms of S:35 or S:36 of the Fire (Scotland) Act 2005/ambulance worker | 174 | 12 | 9 | 1 | 196 |
S:2(1) - Assault, obstruct or hinder other emergency workers responding to emergency circumstances | 277 | 19 | 14 | 16 | 326 |
S:3(1) - Assault, obstruct or hinder person assisting emergency worker responding to emergency circumstances | 14 | 1 | 7 | - | 22 |
S:5(1) - Assault, obstruct or hinder health worker/ambulance worker/assistant to said workers on hospital premises | 401 | 7 | 37 | 12 | 457 |
Grand Total | 866 | 39 | 67 | 29 | 1,001 |
Notes:
1. The informationin the table has been extracted from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service’scase management database. The database is a live, operational database used to managethe processing of reports submitted to procurators fiscal by the police and otherreporting agencies. If a procurator fiscal amends a charge submitted by a reportingagency, the database will record details only of the amended charge.
2. The database ischarge-based. The figures quoted therefore relate to the number of charges ratherthan the number of individuals charged or the number of incidents that gave riseto such charges.
3. The table reflectsthe position at 27 July 2007.
4. “Direct Measures”relates to charges where action was taken but the action did not involve court proceedings.This action may have involved the offer of a fiscal fine, the issue of a warningletter or a reference to the Reporter to the Children’s Panel.
5. “No Action” relatesto charges where the procurator fiscal concluded, following careful considerationof the report, that no action should be taken.
6. “Under Consideration”relates to charges where, as at 27 July, a decision had yet to be made on the appropriatecourse of action.