Upload
jefferson-dryer
View
225
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Policing in Scotland and Human Rights
Dr Genevieve LennonSchool of Law, University of Dundee
Outline
1. Scottish criminal court structure in relation to human rights
2. Cadder and the right to legal advice under Article 6
3. Fraser and the comparison between the right to a fair trial under Article 6 and a ‘miscarriage of justice’ under the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995
4. In defence of guilty people walking free: why the integrity of the criminal process is crucial to policing
Scottish criminal court structure in relation to human rights
Scottish criminal court structure in relation to human rights
• Scotland has a separate legal system and courts
• Scotland Act 1998: all devolution issues are reserved matters
• All appeals on devolution issues go, ultimately, to the Supreme Court
Controversy over the Fraser case• Alex Salmond: ‘The increasing
involvement of the UK Supreme Court in second guessing Scotland's highest criminal court of appeal is totally unsatisfactory’
• Independent Review Group• Scottish Parliament has no
competence to alter Scotland Act or Human Rights Act 1998
• Representativeness of ECtHR vs. Supreme Court?
Facts of Cadder
• Appellant detained and questioned under caution; not offered access to lawyer
• Convicted; prosecution relied on statements made when under caution
• Appealed on basis of infringement of Art 6
(Some of the) Differences between Criminal Procedure in Scotland and
the rest of the UK
• Length of pre-charge detention (6 hrs vs. 96 hrs)
• Corroboration • Pre-charge access
to a lawyer
The Right to Legal Advice under Art. 6
• Not absolute• 2009 Crown Court: 70% guilty plea• 45% of detainees request legal advice (Kemp
& Blamer 2011)• 49% of terrorist suspects request legal advice
(Brown 1993)
Facts of Fraser
• Convicted of murdering his wife
• Prosecution relied on evidence regarding wife’s rings
• Fraser tried to add ground of appeal of infringement of Art.6 on basis of non-disclosure – refused
• Leave to appeal to SC refused but granted by SC
Fraser in the Supreme Court
• Cameron test (Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, s.106(3)): fresh evidence
• McInnes test (Article 6: non disclosure)
Article 6: the right to a fair trial
• Right to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law
• Factual guilt and procedural fairness• Holistic approach to ‘trial’ – from pre-charge
detention to conviction• Defects can be cured by the court
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, s.106(3)
• Alleged miscarriage of justice– Fresh evidence– Unreasonable verdict
• Factual guilt and procedural fairness, but emphasis on former
• England: Criminal Appeal Act 1995, s.2: ‘if conviction is unsafe’
In defence of guilty people walking free (sometimes): why the integrity of the criminal process is crucial to
policing
• The Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure (1981): have regard ‘both to the interests of the community in bringing offenders to justice and to the rights and liberties of persons suspected of crime’
Crime Control vs Due Process
Due Process: Legitimacy of
the system is key
• Formality• Lack of finality
Crime Control: high proportion of
convictions• Speed• Informality• Finality
Crime Control Due Process
• Scotland? – Varies over time; depends on the particular aspect
of the CJS – Due process lens– Legitimacy of system as a whole is of central
importance
R v Mullen [2000] QB 520
• Mullen convicted of conspiracy to cause explosions
• Kidnapped from Zimbabwe
• Court of Appeal allowed appeal based on legitimacy argument
Conclusion
• Allegations of human rights infringements in trial raise devolution issues and will be heard (ultimately) by the Supreme Court
• Gap in practice if not law between criminal appeals procedure in Scotland and Article 6, ECHR
• Integrity of criminal process as a whole is fundamental to our CJS
Questions? Comments?
Dr Genevieve LennonSchool of Law, University of Dundee