Motion For Debate · S4M-07791 · Session 4
Corroboration
The motion
That the Parliament notes the substantial proposal to abolish the centuries old requirement for corroboration in Scottish criminal cases contained in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill; notes the overwhelming opposition to this proposal from all parts of the legal profession, including the Senators of the College of Justice, the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates, as well as the Scottish Police Federation, the Scottish Human Rights Commission, the Cross-Party Group on Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse and many legal academics; believes that the proposal to abolish corroboration cannot be looked at in isolation and that the Scottish Government’s Reforming Scots Criminal Law and Practice: Additional Safeguards Following the Removal of the Requirement for Corroboration consultation was inadequate to support a proposed change of this magnitude; notes with concern the implications of the abolition of corroboration, which would undermine confidence in the criminal justice system, and calls on the Scottish Government to remove the proposal to abolish corroboration from the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill and, instead, to seek to improve the application of corroboration by carrying out a wider review of the law of evidence in Scotland, including the interaction between corroboration and other rules of evidence, by either a referral to the Scottish Law Commission or a public inquiry.
What MSPs voted on: the motion as amended
The Conservatives’ motion was rewritten by an SNP amendment (S4M-07791.3) before this vote. A vote ‘for’ was a vote for the SNP’s wording.
That the Parliament notes the substantial proposal to abolish the centuries old requirement for corroboration in Scottish criminal cases contained in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill; notes the overwhelming opposition to this proposal from all parts of the legal profession, including the Senators of the College of Justice, the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates, as well as the Scottish Police Federation, the Scottish Human Rights Commission, the Cross-Party Group on Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse and many legal academics; believes that the proposal to abolish corroboration cannot be looked at in isolation and that the Scottish Government’s Reforming Scots Criminal Law and Practice: Additional Safeguards Following the Removal of the Requirement for Corroboration consultation was inadequate to support a proposed change of this magnitude; notes with concern the implications of the abolition of corroboration, which would undermine confidence in the criminal justice system, and calls on the Scottish Government to remove the proposal to abolish corroboration from the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill and, instead, to seek to improve the application of corroboration by carrying out a wider review of the law of evidence in Scotland, including the interaction between corroboration and other rules of evidence, by either a referral to the Scottish Law Commission or a public inquiry.S4M-07791.3 SNP that the proposal is based on the thorough and independent review of Scots criminal law and practice undertaken by Lord Carloway, the Lord Justice Clerk; accepts Lord Carloway’s conclusion that the general requirement for corroborated evidence in criminal cases is an archaic rule that has no place in a modern legal system; notes the support of Police Scotland, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, Rape Crisis Scotland, Victim Support Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid; welcomes the consideration of additional safeguards suggested by the Senators of the College of Justice in their response to the Scottish Government's consultation; notes that the Scottish Government is open to considering additional safeguards necessary to ensure fairness of proceedings as the Parliament deems fit; respects the process of parliamentary scrutiny of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, on which the Justice Committee has begun evidence-taking, and looks forward to completion of that scrutiny process in the normal way.
186 words removed by S4M-07791.3
Final wording as read into the Official Report at Decision Time. The marked changes are worked out by this site from the amendment texts and match that wording.
Amendments
- S4M-07791.3 SNP Kenny MacAskill Agreed vote, 62–23
- S4M-07791.1 Independent Margo MacDonald Not put to a vote (worked out by this site: never called at Decision Time: not selected or not moved)
- S4M-07791.2 Labour Graeme Pearson Fell per the Official Report
Vote
1 division- 25 Sep 2013Carried62 for, 23 against, 29 abstained
Amendments
3-
No recorded vote
-
No recorded vote
Supporters
No MSP has added their name to this motion.
In the Official Report
3 contributions mention S4M-07791-
25 Sep 2013Corroboration
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-07791, in the name of Margaret Mitchell, on corroboration. We are extremely tight for time so the member has exactly 10 minutes. 14:40
-
25 Sep 2013Decision Time
There are six questions to be put as a result of today’s business. I remind members that, in relation to the debate on corroboration, if the amendment in the name of Kenny MacAskill is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Graeme Pearson…
-
25 Sep 2013Decision Time
The amendment in the name of Graeme Pearson therefore falls.The next question is, that motion S4M-07791, in the name of Margaret Mitchell, on corroboration, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?Members: No.