Victim Notification Scheme (VNS): independent review

Section 35: Conclusion

Our brief recognised that victims and victim support organisations had concerns about the current operation of the scheme in that it was seen as bureaucratic, difficult to navigate, disjointed and confusing. Concerns had been expressed about the level of take-up and that some victims may be failing to engage for reasons which were not entirely clear.

The Scottish Government commissioned this independent review to ensure the scheme be fit for purpose and serving victims effectively. The review was to form part of the commitment to transform how justice services are delivered, which included putting the voices of victims and a trauma-informed approach at the heart of Scottish Justice.

Following a review of earlier work in this field, we set about talking to the widest possible number of stakeholders (of whom there are many) and also felt it important to look at international models, which had not been done before. We were also anxious to hear from victims themselves; we were unsure if any would come forward, but a number did, and what they told us has been a main driver in our considerations.

It has been noticeable that there is a great deal of consensus amongst stakeholders about what the shortcomings of the current process are and also what the solutions are to improve things. This includes those who operate the system from within the delivery organisations. It was encouraging to see the deliverers to be open to change and everyone demonstrated a desire to help victims.

All agreed the notification scheme serves an important function. We found a great number of similar schemes in operation around the World, many facing the same challenges as Scotland. If we are to genuinely try to be as trauma informed as we can be, the system must have a human touch, be sensitive and responsive, be flexible and offer choices. Despite work towards improvements, it still falls short in this regard as things stand now, but it is not enormously difficult to rectify this.

Our principal recommendation is the establishment of a new team to provide responsive and personalised information for victims, to inform fully and avoid misunderstandings, as well as refer effectively to support. We have also made a number of recommendations around processes and procedures, where we have identified anomalies or a need for change. We also suggest there is a need for more recognition that feedback from users is the best way to identify problems and improve.

We set out to devise recommendations which would be practical, achievable and affordable. We believe our recommendations do that. We have observed that change in the criminal justice system can be very slow, but we see no reason why our recommendations could not be implemented quickly; they mostly avoid the need for legislation. Looking ahead, we also think the new team could be a valuable vehicle to support the development of restorative justice as it unfolds.

We hope our recommendations will result ultimately in a scheme which is indeed fit for purpose; a human, trauma-informed and personalised process, which can go some way to help victims in their difficult situation.