Child's Interview Right's Practitioner regulations: data protection impact assessment

4. Stakeholder analysis and consultation

4.1 List all the groups involved in the project, and state their interest.

Group:

Scottish Government: Youth Justice Unit – ACR implementation team

Interest:

• Responsible for commencement of section 56 of the Act.
• Responsible of setting up and maintaining the register and for providing information held in the register to PS.

Group:

Police Scotland

Interest:

• Compliance with legislation.
• Compliance with own requirements on securely processing and sharing information.

Group:

In developing the policy for ChIRPs, we consulted and engaged with representatives of the legal profession in Scotland, including:

• the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB),
• Clan Childlaw,
• the Law Society of Scotland,
• Millard Law,
• the Child Law Centre,
• Livingstone Brown,
• the Faculty of Advocates,
• Keegan Smith, and
• McCarry's Solicitors.

Children's Legal Assistance Scheme peer review group

Interest:

The Act sets out that a ChIRP must be a solicitor enrolled on the roll of solicitors kept under section 7 of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 and must be entitled to provide children's legal assistance under section 28M of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986. This means – where appropriate – they may also represent the child at any subsequent children's hearing as a legal representative rather than as a ChIRP. This recognises and respects the fundamental importance of continuing relationships for young children navigating these processes.

Group:

Children and young people in relation to their expectations from ChIRPs

Interest:

Since the ChIRP role is new, feedback from children and young people has been more general in nature, focusing on the need for ChIRPs to demonstrate empathy, and be skilled in building rapport and trust, helping the child being interviewed to feel comfortable and reassured. We will continue to engage with children and young people as the policy is implemented, learning from their experience of investigative interviews.

Group:

We held a wider consultation exercise on the policy (1 December 2020 – 19 January 2021) and received responses from:

• Police Scotland,
• COSLA,
• Social Work Scotland,
• Aberdeen City Council,
• Argyll & Bute Council,
• Dumfries & Galloway Council,
• City of Edinburgh Council,
• South Lanarkshire Council,
• West Lothian Council,
• Edinburgh Child Protection Committee,
• CELCIS,
• Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service,
• Scottish Children's Reporter Association (SCRA),
• Together Scotland, and
• Victim Support Scotland.

Interest:

Section 57(4) of the Act requires Scottish Ministers to consult on guidance relating to investigative interviews. While doing this, we took the opportunity to seek views on proposed ChIRPs policy and the code of practice.

Group:

We wrote to the Information Commissioner's Office on 4 June 2020 in relation to proposed data processing under the Child Interview Rights Practitioner (Scotland) Regulation. In doing so, we fulfilled our obligation under Article 36(4) of the GDPR to consult the Information Commissioner.

Interest:

The ICO considered the submission, and with particular reference to the Information Commissioner's regulatory priorities, did not wish to provide any further input at that time.

4.2 Method used to consult with these groups when making the DPIA.

Written and verbal communication. We have had ongoing discussion with key stakeholders, such as PS, about the need to share data for investigative interview, as well as how PS will access the register and contact details for ChIRPs.

4.3 Method used to communicate the outcomes of the DPIA.

The DPIA will be shared with PS so they will be aware of, and in a position to mitigate any risks identified as far as they are able.

It will also be shared with ChIRPs for general awareness about the information being held.