Victim Notification Scheme (VNS): independent review

Section 19: The Parole Board for Scotland and the VNS

The Parole Board for Scotland is the key agency with regard to part 2 of the VNS. By virtue of where the parole system sits within the criminal justice process, it can be many years before a victim comes into contact with them and this by itself creates issues. Since 2021, victims have been permitted 'silent' attendance at hearings. Consequently, the PBS set up a dedicated victim's unit to improve victim support. Whilst there have been relatively few observations to date (7 at the time of writing), the process is that observation will take place remotely in a safe place, such as Local Authority premises, accompanied by a victim team member.

The PBS representatives we spoke to informed us that the organisation is committed to trauma-informed training for staff, including Board members. Information booklets, FAQs and feedback forms had been introduced since the creation of the victim resource. We were told however there is no formal feedback process.

Given their key concern that the process results in long gaps between communications, they were broadly supportive of consideration of an 'opt out' VNS process. They were conscious of the sensitivity of wording in their letters (the principal means of communication) and suggested a secure portal for online access might be a helpful option.

On 1 April 2023, a change in Parole Board regulations came into force, restricting observation of Parole hearings only to those registered under part 2 of the VNS. Hitherto any registered victim had been given an entitlement to observe. This change will reduce the administrative burden on PBS but has the effect of adding another nuance to a complex process, unless the Scheme is simplified as we recommend.

We are aware that the provision for victims to be 'silent observers' remotely at Parole Board hearings has caused some public debate. We understand there have been very few cases so far, 7 in total. We note that victims may make representations in writing or orally. It is understood the majority of representations are written. We note the concerns from commentators on the restriction on participation at hearings, but as the process is in its very early stages, we make no particular recommendation in this regard, but suggest that, in line with our observations around performance improvement by delivery agencies and the need to encourage and respond to user feedback, the situation be closely monitored to see if changes might be warranted by victim demand.

Victims are required to apply to attend a hearing and their application may be rejected by the Chair, without a reason being given. One victim told us they applied and were rejected without explanation, to subsequently discover that despite being sent an invitation, participation was not possible due to Covid restrictions. If an application to attend is rejected, then a reason should surely be given.

Recommendation 7. Explanation for rejection – Parole. Section 19.

We recommend that unless there are exceptionally overriding circumstances, any rejection of a victim's application should be explained to them.