Scottish judges object to plans to end corroboration

Senior Scottish judges have expressed their objection to plans to end corroboration in court.

Scotland is the only country in the West which requires corroborating evidence to hear a case, and Scottish ministers supporting these proposals, which are included in the Scottish Criminal Justice Bill, believe this requirement should be removed so more cases for crimes such as rape and domestic violence would be heard.

If corroboration was abolished it would mean that there would no longer be a need for two independent sources of evidence before a case can be heard in court.

Speaking to the BBC, two former heads of the Scottish judiciary system expressed concern at the proposals.

Lord Hamilton believes that there would an increasing chance for miscarriages of justice should corroboration be abolished.

“They should retain corroboration as an essential element of our criminal jurisdiction in Scotland,” he said.

Lord Cullen added: “It is very important that [corroboration] is there and always has been for centuries as a safeguard against wrongful conviction.”

As well as provision to abolish the requirement for corroboration in criminal trials, the Bill will include modernising the law around the arrest and questioning of suspects, as well as improving the right to legal advice for individuals taken into police custody.

Introducing a statutory aggravation for human trafficking, strengthening court powers to impose sentences on those who commit offences while on early release and establishing a Police Negotiating Board for Scotland for police officer pay and conditions are also included.

The Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee was told that all but one of Scotland’s High Court judges was against the change.

Lord Carloway, Scotland’s second most senior judge, instigated the reforms.

In his report on the matter he said: “The requirement of corroboration should be entirely abolished for all categories of crime. It is an archaic rule that has no place in a modern legal system where judges and juries should be free to consider all relevant evidence and to answer the single question of whether they are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused person committed the offence.”

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said: “Laws are made by the Scottish Parliament for the people of Scotland. They’re not made by the legal profession for the lawyers of Scotland. And so I listen respectfully to the judiciary and to the legal profession, but I also have to take on board the views of Victim Support Scotland, Scottish Women’s Aid, Rape Crisis Scotland, Police Scotland, the Crown and Procurator Fiscal Service, those who suffer, who have been suffering in silence behind closed doors, behind pulled curtains, where they are not and have not been getting access to justice.”

A Scottish government spokesperson stressed: “The removal of the requirement for corroboration is about giving victims access to justice and is strongly supported by organisations such as Victim Support Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid.

“In abolishing the requirement we are seeking to ensure police and prosecutors can focus on seeking the best quality of evidence available. We consider this to be a more progressive approach than trying to meet an outdated technical requirement which is a barrier to prosecutions – particularly in sexual offence and domestic abuse cases – that would go ahead in any other jurisdiction.

“Secondly, there is no evidence that any other legal system which operates without this requirement – every other jurisdiction in the Western world – has a problem with this.”

Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland, a senior Scottish prosecutor, said: “In the last few years, 170 cases of rape have had no proceedings taken in them because of insufficient evidence and in many instances it is a lack of corroboration. So I think that any mature criminal justice system in the Western world requires giving access for justice to victims of crime that happens in private.”