- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive what constitutes defective representation by solicitors.
Answer
The approach to be taken by the courts in cases in which there is an allegation of defective representation is defined in
Anderson vs H.M. Advocate (1996 SCCR 114). The then Lord Justice General stated that the conduct of the defence by the accused''s legal representative can only provide a ground for appeal if it deprives the accused of a fair trial. He further stated that this can only have occurred where the conduct was such that the accused''s defence was not presented to the court.
This may be because the accused was deprived of the opportunity to present his defence; or because his legal representative acted contrary to his instructions as to the defence he wished to be put forward; or because of other conduct which, because his defence had not been put, had the effect of denying him a fair trial.
In considering applications for review based on defective representation, the SCCRC applies the above approach.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive how many freedom of information requests received by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission since the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 came into force have been (a) disclosed in the first instance, (b) refused in the first instance, (c) disclosed after review and (d) refused after review.
Answer
Nineteen requests for information, made under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, have resulted in information being released, while eight have been refused. Two requests resulted in partial disclosure. To date, four requests for review have been received and, in each case, the original decision to withhold information was found to have been correct.
In addition, in one case the SCCRC did not hold the information requested and, in another, the information requested was obtained from another source.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive how many appeals against convictions have been referred to the high court in each year since 1999, broken down by grounds of appeal.
Answer
The information requested is provided in the following table.
Conviction Referrals from 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2008
| Year | Number of Referrals | Main Grounds |
| 1999-2000 | 2 | 1 x New Evidence 1 x Change in Witness Testimony |
| 2000-01 | 4 | 2 x Change in the Law 1 x New Evidence 1 x Unfair Trial |
| 2001-02 | 9 | 6 x New Evidence 1 x Defective Representation 1 x Sentencing Issue 1 x Reasonable Doubt as to Applicant''s Guilt |
| 2002-03 | 10 | 4 x New Evidence 2 x Jury Impropriety 1 x Reasonable Doubt as to Applicant''s Guilt 1 x Defective Representation 1 x Sentencing Issue 1 x Disclosure of Evidence |
| 2003-04 | 2 | 2 x New Evidence |
| 2004-05 | 6 | 5 x New Evidence 1 x Procedural Irregularity |
| 2005-06 | 3 | 1 x Misdirection by Trial Judge 1 x Change in the Law 1 x Insufficiency of Evidence |
| 2006-07 | 7 | 2 x Misdirection by Trial Judge 1 x Sentencing Issue 1 x Disclosure of Evidence 1 x Change in the Law 1 x New Evidence 1 x Abuse of Process |
| 2007-08 | 3 | 1 x Multiple Referral Grounds 1 x New Evidence 1 x Unreasonable Verdict |
| Total | =SUM(ABOVE) 46 | |
It should be noted that there may be other grounds of review. The commission''s system records only the main ground in the first instance.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that the disclosure of the names of solicitors referred to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission for defective representation would contravene section 38(1)(b) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-12508 on 9 May 2008. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament''s website, the search facility for which can be found at
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission holds records of the names of individual solicitors referred to the commission on grounds of defective representation.
Answer
Individual applications from members of the public and/or their legal representatives will include the names of solicitors involved in a case, as will the Statement of Reasons that the Commission provides in relation to each application.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive how many freedom of information requests received by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission since the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 came into force, referred to the Scottish Information Commissioner and ordered to be disclosed have been appealed by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Answer
The Scottish Information Commissioner has never instructed the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to disclose information, therefore no such appeals have ever been made.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 9 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive how many freedom of information requests have been received by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission since the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 came into force.
Answer
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission had received a total of 32 such requests by 31 March 2008.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 April 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 8 May 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive who is responsible for determining what is an operational matter for Chief Constables.
Answer
Under the provisions of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967, the operational deployment of individual officers is subject to the direction of the chief constable.
However, there are circumstances when chief constables are legitimately influenced in their deployment by parties external to the police service. These circumstances arise when officers are deployed in more general terms under the force''s operational priorities. The tripartite system of governance for police forces dictates that these priorities are arrived at following consultation between the chief constable, the relevant police board and Scottish ministers.
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 18 March 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 8 April 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive whether Taser weapons are defined as firearms.
Answer
Taser weapons are defined as firearms under section 5(1)(b) of the Firearms Act 1968 (as amended).
- Asked by: Bill Kidd, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 18 March 2008
-
Current Status:
Answered by Kenny MacAskill on 8 April 2008
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the deployment of Taser weapons is an operational matter for Chief Constables and, if so, what (a) legislation or guidelines define such deployment as an operational matter and (b) the scope is of the term “operational matter”.
Answer
The deployment of Taser weapons is an operational matter for Chief Constables.
Section 17(2) of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967 states that the performance by a constable of his functions under any enactment or under any rule of law shall be subject to the direction of the appropriate Chief Constable.
