Victim Notification Scheme (VNS): independent review

Section 8: Background

The VNS has been considerably amended and expanded since its inception in 2004. When reviewing background and historical material in connection with the VNS, we were struck by a number of familiar threads which re-appear in a number of key criminal justice reports as far back as 2007, and which arose again during our own evidence-taking.

Appendix B has fuller details of the findings of those reports.

Some key recurrent themes emerged across those reports:

2007 Scottish Government Report: Analysis Of The Statutory Victim Notification Scheme

• Victims not understanding sentencing and offender management
• Victims being confused about how the VNS operates, how to interpret the material they receive and how the system works

2017 Thomson Report: Review Of Victim Care In The Justice Sector In Scotland

• Victims perceive they are passed from authority to authority with little continuity or consistency
• 'Heartfelt pleas' made for a 'case companion' or advocacy worker
• One point of contact desired
• A feeling of powerlessness and lack of choice
• Safety must be a primary consideration

2020 Thrive Report: Transforming Services For Victims And Witnesses

• Recognition that there was still a way to go in addressing identified challenges around the experience of victims and witnesses
• User-centred, collaborative problem-solving is not embedded
• Develop the 'Witness Portal' further and make better use of technology and data with a cross-system approach (see Appendix B)

2021 Dorrian Report: Improving The Management Of Sexual Offence Cases

• A need for –
  • better and more user-friendly information from a single point
  • a trauma-informed approach
  • a collective approach, supported by IT

These earlier reports have all identified what can be done within the Criminal Justice System to improve the victim experience, including the common themes of the need for timely, personal, relevant communication, for information to be delivered in a trauma-informed personalised manner, taking away the burden from victims of having to navigate bureaucracy and managing their expectations effectively. These earlier reports have provided several suggestions to improve the victim experience. In approaching our review, we found that there was already a considerable body of analysis of the problems and proposed solutions. The 'Victim Experience' is a theme often raised in political and policy circles and it is evident that there exists a common desire amongst all those involved to make victims a key consideration across the whole CJS. However, it remains the case that evidence we took from victims themselves and the support organisations does not show victims agreeing this is their experience and it is clear there is more that could be done.

It is notable that our conclusions, based on the evidence we took in 2022, show there is a continuing need to address the identified shortcomings referred to in previous reviews. Given the complexity of the Criminal Justice System and the multiplicity of agencies involved, this presents a real challenge, but victims have not seen the marked difference they wish. Several reforms can be identified within separate agencies, and there have been significant praiseworthy initiatives, such as the establishment of the Victims Taskforce. To have a system, a truly victim-centred system, it must be driven by analysis and response to the needs of the victim and, as far as possible, be cross-system reform, both in terms of practice and culture. 'Customer experience' should be a key driver, but we will see later in this report that there are very few feedback mechanisms and we have not found much evidence this is a prime consideration in the management of the existing scheme. Many of the improvements we recommend are simple and easy to implement, but they should target the victim experience, as opposed to the efficient application of statutory requirements.

The challenge we face now is that, despite a raft of reform and improvements, victims and support organisations have told us that they still felt that the scheme is bureaucratic, complex, and hard to navigate for victims, and can cause particular emotional distress.