Written Question · S1W-29110 · Session 1
How many High Court sentences have been reduced (a) under human rights legislation and (b) for any other reasons in each of the last three …
The question
To ask the Scottish Executive how many High Court sentences have been reduced (a) under human rights legislation and (b) for any other reasons in each of the last three years and how many such sentences were originally life sentences.
The answer
The information relating to successful appeals against sentence in High Court cases is contained in the following table: | 1998 | 1999 | 2000
Total of which involved life sentences | 61 | 56 | 105
Appeal against sentence1 | 4 | 1 | 1
Appeal against aspects of sentence2 | 15 | 11 | 74
Notes:1. Crime reduced from murder to culpable homicide or a re-trial was authorised.2. Effective start date or punishment part.There have been no sentences imposed in the High Court that have been reduced as a result of the provisions contained in the Convention Rights (Compliance) (Scotland) Act 2001 under which the High Court is required to specify the punishment part of a life sentence. The punishment part is such part of a life sentence as the court considers appropriate to satisfy the requirements of retribution and deterrence (ignoring the period, if any, which may be necessary for the protection of the public). The sentence of life imprisonment is unaffected by the fixing of the punishment part. It is only once the punishment part has expired that the prisoner has the right to require the Scottish ministers to refer his or her case to the Parole Board for the board to decide whether the prisoner requires to continue to be confined for the protection of the public.Under the transitional provisions contained in the Schedule to the 2001 act, the Scottish ministers are under a duty, subject to certain exceptions detailed in the Schedule, to refer to the High Court the cases of life prisoners who were sentenced prior to 8 October 2001, the date on which the relevant provisions came into force, for a punishment part to be fixed. As regards those prisoners who were the subject of minimum recommendations made by the sentencing court under the former statutory provisions, as the Appeal Court noted in its opinion in the case of William Stewart v Her Majesty's Advocate, issued on 6 September 2002 (Appeal No. C228/02): "it does not follow that periods which have been recommended in the past provide a general yardstick by reference to which the length of a punishment part should be determined." The full opinion is available on the Scottish Court Service website (www.scotcourts.gov.uk).
Total of which involved life sentences | 61 | 56 | 105
Appeal against sentence1 | 4 | 1 | 1
Appeal against aspects of sentence2 | 15 | 11 | 74
Notes:1. Crime reduced from murder to culpable homicide or a re-trial was authorised.2. Effective start date or punishment part.There have been no sentences imposed in the High Court that have been reduced as a result of the provisions contained in the Convention Rights (Compliance) (Scotland) Act 2001 under which the High Court is required to specify the punishment part of a life sentence. The punishment part is such part of a life sentence as the court considers appropriate to satisfy the requirements of retribution and deterrence (ignoring the period, if any, which may be necessary for the protection of the public). The sentence of life imprisonment is unaffected by the fixing of the punishment part. It is only once the punishment part has expired that the prisoner has the right to require the Scottish ministers to refer his or her case to the Parole Board for the board to decide whether the prisoner requires to continue to be confined for the protection of the public.Under the transitional provisions contained in the Schedule to the 2001 act, the Scottish ministers are under a duty, subject to certain exceptions detailed in the Schedule, to refer to the High Court the cases of life prisoners who were sentenced prior to 8 October 2001, the date on which the relevant provisions came into force, for a punishment part to be fixed. As regards those prisoners who were the subject of minimum recommendations made by the sentencing court under the former statutory provisions, as the Appeal Court noted in its opinion in the case of William Stewart v Her Majesty's Advocate, issued on 6 September 2002 (Appeal No. C228/02): "it does not follow that periods which have been recommended in the past provide a general yardstick by reference to which the length of a punishment part should be determined." The full opinion is available on the Scottish Court Service website (www.scotcourts.gov.uk).
In the Official Report
No contribution in the Official Report cites S1W-29110 by reference.