Victim Notification Scheme - Independent Review: SG response

Response to the Review Recommendations

Our approach

Since the report was published in May 2023, we have discussed it with a wide range of people who operate, use and otherwise interact with the VNS, in order to better understand the recommendations and how we might respond.

Our approach to these conversations was driven by the fact that the VNS is inherently a multi-organisational system:

• the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) plays a role at the start of the process, by distributing registration packs to victims
• the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) writes to victims with information
• the Parole Board for Scotland (PBS) and Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland facilitate victim representations
• the Scottish Government writes to victims of mentally disordered offenders with information
• Victim support organisations provide support and assistance to victims registered on the VNS and who can request information under the VIS, and some now have proxy rights to notification

In our discussions, we focused on how to provide a more responsive and human service to victims who use the VNS. We know that this ambition is shared by victims, victim support organisations and criminal justice agencies.

We frequently heard of the challenge faced by victims in navigating the VNS, as well as the criminal justice system and forensic mental health system more generally.

We also heard that reform of the VNS should align with wider transformational changes being made within the justice system and are committed to that alignment.

The initiatives highlighted by the review and referred to in its recommendations, wider initiatives that seek to transform the justice system, and more recent experiences with measures to manage the prison population and victim notification, have all helped to inform and shape our response.

Our response

In responding to the recommendations, we have adopted three positions:

• Agree
• Agree in principle – this is used where we agree with the recommendation, and further exploration and consideration is required
• To note – this is used where recommendations are either complete, and there is no further action, or where recommendations are for bodies that are independent of the Scottish Ministers

In setting out our response, we have summarised and grouped the recommendations by theme, rather than in numerical order. The Annex sets out the recommendations in full.

Process and systems improvements

We are committed to removing complexity and introducing simplicity, flexibility and a personalised service for victims, and making changes that will quickly deliver benefits so the VNS operates in a way that focuses on victims’ needs.

Recommendations 17, 20, and 21

Victims should be automatically referred to a new Victim Contact Team (to be managed by or reporting to Government’s Justice Directorate) for a trauma-informed discussion about their options on registering for the VNS, their rights, and key information. The Victim Contact Team should work closely with delivery partners and victim support organisation to provide a personalised service for victims throughout

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 4

Consideration of how existing projects (the Witness Gateway and Single Point of Contact^[6]) could support access to the VNS

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendations 5 and 6

Unnecessary verification steps in the registration process should be removed

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 9

A process should be put in place to enable victims of (i) offenders held in secure care^[7] and (ii) young people detained in secure inpatient care to access information

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 13

Any proposed VNS reforms that relate to children should be accompanied by a Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment

Our response

To note

Recommendation 14 (part of)

There should be a clearly laid-out process for the registration of a young person over 12 years old, including in relation to advice and safeguarding

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 16

Where there is a VNS flag in relation to an offender, VNS agencies and Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) policy colleagues should work together to address why relevant information is not shared with these safety planning partnerships

Our response

To note

Recommendation 18 (parts of)

i) That delivery partners clarify their UK GDPR procedures, and

ii) That victims be given the opportunity to specify dates on which they do not wish to receive information under the VNS

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendations 17, 20 and 21: victims should be automatically referred to a new Victim Contact Team (to be managed by or reporting to Government’s Justice Directorate) for a trauma-informed discussion about their options on registering for the VNS, their rights, and key information. The Victim Contact Team should work closely with delivery partners and victim support organisation to provide a personalised service for victims throughout.

Agree

Recommendations 17, 20 and 21 are jointly the key innovations from the review and as they are inter-related, we comment on them together.

We welcome these recommendations. By seeking to find a middle ground between the VNS being an opt-in or opt-out system, these recommendations will uphold victims’ autonomy and their ability to choose.

We will work with partners to develop an in-house Victim Contact Team that reflects victims’ needs.

From our discussions, we know that there is support for process and system improvements that will improve victims’ experiences of the justice system, particularly where this would result in less risk of re-traumatisation for victims and enhanced access to support and advice. Victim support organisations in particular support the introduction of automatic referral of victims for a supported conversation about whether they wish to join the VNS. Our response to this package of recommendations reflects these points.

The Scottish Prison Service currently holds the function of delivering the VNS and being responsible to those in its custody. The new team and its functions will remove any tension between those roles and will ensure that victims receive a service that is specifically tailored to their needs. Scottish Prison Service and Scottish Government health officials will play a vital role once the Victim Contact Team is in place: they would provide information about the management of offenders, as well as providing technical expertise on matters like sentence calculations and mental health orders.

The new team will create positive opportunities for the Parole Board for Scotland and Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland. When either body makes contact with a victim for the purposes of making representations, this would be based on a foundation of trust developed through the sensitive handling of the relationship by the Victim Contact Team.

The Scottish Government currently delivers the CORO VNS. This means that there is already in-house expertise on victim notification, which can be drawn upon as the Victim Contact Team is established.

We have started development about case volumes for the Victim Contact Team to inform staffing and other requirements^[8]. There are some challenges to understanding what will be needed, because we expect the automatic referral function and the Victim Contact Team to result in an increased number of registrations to the VNS, which is difficult to quantify at this point. We will regularly review the impact of the Victim Contact Team on scheme take-up and use this to inform resource needs.

These recommendations were inspired by the model in place for victim notification in England and Wales, the Victim Contact Scheme, which involves victims being contacted in writing by a dedicated team to ask if they would like to receive contact. We will learn from this model as part of developing the Victim Contact Team.

Recommendation 4: consideration of how existing projects (the Witness Gateway and Single Point of Contact) could support access to the VNS

Agree in principle

In our discussions, the COPFS expressed support in principle for the Witness Portal (also known as the Witness Gateway) aspect of the recommendation.

The Single Point of Contact work is being led by the Victim Centred Approach workstream of Victims Taskforce and is due to report later this year.

We are committed to ensuring that our longer-term delivery plans for the Victim Contact Team is joined up to these projects, so that we can create simplicity for victims rather than complexity.

Recommendations 5 and 6: unnecessary verification steps in the registration process should be removed

Agree in principle

These recommendations propose changes to how checks are conducted for victim eligibility for the VIS (ie: where an offender is sentenced for less than 18 months). In practice, this relates to a Scottish Court and Tribunals Service (SCTS) check of sentence length. SCTS welcomes these recommendations. We know that eligibility checks being carried out as efficiently as possible will benefit victims. We will work with other stakeholders on how this might be carried out as part of wider VNS reform.

Our acceptance of the review’s recommendations on the Victim Contact Team and its functions may also create an opportunity to introduce efficiencies into how these checks are carried out.

Recommendation 9: a process should be put in place to enable victims of (i) offenders held in secure care and (ii) young people detained in secure inpatient care to access information

Agree in principle

This recommendation engages a complex range of rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), including the need to treat a child’s best interests as a primary consideration, and the requirement to give the views of a child due weight where the child in question is capable of forming their own views.

We will also need to consider data protection law, and the right to privacy under the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), as well as the balance between a child offender’s privacy and the victim’s interests in receiving information. The complexities may also be compounded in situations where both the offender and the victim are children.

Regardless of the specifics of any given offence, we know that a child involved in a crime, whether as an offender or a victim, is likely to be exceptionally vulnerable. That point is at the heart of our response. This is a particularly complex area, which needs to carefully consider the appropriate rights-based response.

Our commitment to the review’s recommendations on the Victim Contact Team and its functions may create the opportunity to embed specialists in the needs of children into the team from the start, which could support the longer-term delivery of this recommendation. We also anticipate links with recommendations that focus on guidance and registration forms, and the rationalisation of website content.

For sub-part (ii) of the recommendation, work is ongoing to deliver a national secure adolescent inpatient service for Scotland (Foxgrove^[9]) which is currently under development as a new unit with Ayrshire Central Hospital in Irvine. We will join up work for this recommendation with the development of that service.

The CORO VNS already enables information to be provided in relation to patients aged 16 or over where they are subject to a Compulsion Order and Restriction Order. We expect delivery of this recommendation to largely involve confirmation that existing processes for delivering the CORO VNS will be effective within Foxgrove. It is very unusual for a person aged 16 or 17 to be subject to a CORO, and we would expect the number of victims to be extremely low.

Recommendation 13: any proposed VNS reforms that relate to children should be accompanied by a Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment

To note

Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessments (CRWIA) are routinely undertaken in relation to any proposed decisions, and the development of policies and services.

This is also a statutory obligation for Scottish Ministers, and we are committed to taking forward a CRWIA as part of any relevant proposals to reform the VNS.

Recommendation 14 (part of): there should be a clearly laid-out process for the registration of a young person over 12 years old, including in relation to advice and safeguarding

Agree

We will work with partners to develop child-friendly materials for the purposes of joining the scheme, including registration forms and guidance as part of developing the Victim Contact Team and its functions. We will also identify more child-friendly ways of delivering information under the VNS and will engage with children as we take this work forward.

Recommendation 16: where there is a VNS flag in relation to an offender, VNS agencies and Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) policy colleagues should work together to address why relevant information is not shared with these safety planning partnerships

To note

Recommendation 16 refers to “the anomaly” of non-disclosure of relevant information to safety planning partnerships. The review refers to non-disclosure of the name of a victim registered on the VNS.

Our conversations with stakeholders have identified that the victim’s name is available to relevant MAPPA partners where relevant but is not made available where it is not necessary. In our view, non-disclosure is not anomalous, as suggested by the review.

Recommendation 18 (parts of): that delivery partners clarify their UK GDPR procedures, and that victims be given the opportunity to specify dates on which they do not wish to receive information under the VNS

Agree both parts in principle

We are committed to embedding this recommendation into the new VNS delivery model from the outset so will work with our delivery partners to explore the application of UK GDPR.

Work to deliver recommendations on the Victim Contact Team (recommendations 17, 20 and 21), and nominating someone to receive information on behalf of a victim (recommendations 12 and part of recommendation 14) will highlight the need for data protection.

We will join work for providing victims with the ability to specify dates on which they do not wish to receive information with that on refreshing registration forms and with rationalising website content.

Data, evidence and reporting

These recommendations would deliver a VNS (including the CORO VNS) that is informed by robust standards of service and reporting of those standards. They would provide an enhanced understanding of who uses the system in a way that could drive future service delivery improvements.

Recommendation 1

There should be clear objectives and targets for the VNS, including in relation to the CORO VNS

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 2

Information about the CORO VNS should be included in the annual reports on standards of services for victims and witnesses

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 3

Key data and user feedback for the VNS should be identified and used to support performance measurement

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 22 (part of)

Diversity monitoring should be introduced

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 1: there should be clear objectives and targets for the VNS, including in relation to the CORO VNS

Recommendation 3: key data and user feedback for the VNS should be identified and used to support performance measurement

Agree both in principle

Recommendations 1 and 3 extend to all the criminal justice agencies which deliver the VNS. Some of these organisations operate independently of Scottish Ministers. The Scottish Prison Service delivers the functions of the Scottish Ministers.

COPFS has confirmed that it regularly reviews the nature and content of its standards of service for victims and witnesses and will continue to do so in relation to all aspects of prosecution policy.

We will work with justice partners to identify what else might be included about the VNS and the VIS within the standards of service.

Recommendation 2: information about the CORO VNS should be included in the annual reports on standards of service for victims and witnesses

Agree

We will legislate to require the Scottish Government to set and publish standards of service in relation to the CORO VNS, and annual reports on these standards. These changes would help ensure consistency of service and oversight across the VNS, and support delivery of recommendations 1 and 3.

Recommendation 22 (part of): diversity monitoring should be introduced

Agree

Our commitment to establishing the Victim Contact Team and related recommendations gives us the opportunity to ensure that diversity monitoring is embedded into new delivery mechanisms for the VNS therefore we will work with partners to develop a monitoring form for both the VNS and the VIS.

Enhanced information

Most of the recommendations set out here would result in expansion of information available under the VNS, or the VIS. This will benefit victims in terms of peace of mind and the ability to carry out more tailored safety planning.

Recommendation 7

Victims should be provided with an explanation by the Parole Board for Scotland of why their application to view a hearing has been rejected (VNS for criminal justice system only)

Our response

To note

Recommendation 8(a)

Victim information entitlements should be reviewed for the situation where an offender is subject to a CORO, transfers out of Scotland and later returns to Scotland (CORO VNS only)

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 8(b), 8(c), 8(e) and 8(f)

Victims should also be able to receive information where the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland makes no order; where there is an appeal against conditional discharge of a patient and the outcome of an appeal; appeals against recall to hospital or outcome of an appeal; the first occasion of unescorted suspension of detention outwith hospital grounds; and the information available following certain decisions about an offender where the victim has been afforded the opportunity to make representations (CORO VNS only)

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 8(d)

Provisions governing information to victims about conditions imposed where someone is given conditional discharge under mental health legislation should be clarified (CORO VNS only)

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 8(g)

The information available following certain decisions about an offender where the victim has been afforded the opportunity to make representations should be considered (CORO VNS only)

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 10

Information-sharing where an offender or patient is transferred to another UK jurisdiction or deported should be explored

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 15 (part of)

Victims should be able to receive information about death in custody and transfer outwith Scotland where an offender has been sentenced to less than 18 months

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 15 (part of)

Victims should receive information about every instance of temporary release where the offender might come into close proximity with the victim, not just the first instance of temporary release for the offender (VNS and VIS)

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 7: victims should be provided with an explanation by the PBS of why their application to view a hearing has been rejected (VNS for criminal justice system only)

To note

This is already in place. Under Rule 30 of the Parole Board (Scotland) Rules 2022, the Chairperson of the panel must send the registered victim and the parties a written notice of the decision which includes the reasons for the decision.

Recommendation 8(a): victim information entitlements should be reviewed for the situation where an offender is subject to a CORO, transfers out of Scotland and later returns to Scotland

Recommendation 10: information-sharing where an offender or patient is transferred to another UK jurisdiction or deported should be explored

Agree both

We respond to recommendations 8(a) and (10) together, due to their similar nature.

Recommendation 8(a) aims to resolve a gap in the current VNS where a person subject to a CORO is transferred outwith Scotland, and then transferred back in. In that situation, the original CORO does not exist for the purposes of the transfer back to Scotland, and the CORO VNS does not apply. Conversations with stakeholders have consistently highlighted the challenges victims face in accessing meaningful information where a cross-border transfer occurs.

We will therefore work with partners to identify an appropriate solution. As part of this, we will also consider general transfers into Scotland where the offender is made subject to a CORO on arrival, and whether there is an equivalent gap in the criminal justice VNS, and how this can be remedied.

Where there are issues about cross-border transfers, we will work with the UK Government to build consensus and find solutions.

The review made a recommendation in relation to victim notification where the offender is deported but it did not extend to extradition of a person from a prison in Scotland, who has been convicted and sentenced in the UK and is extradited at the end of serving their sentence in Scotland^[10]. Although we are not aware of any situations where an offender’s extradition has raised questions about victim information, we will consider this as part of our work on recommendation 10.

As part of ongoing work for this recommendation we will also consider the VIS in line with recommendation 15 - that information available under that scheme include transfer outwith Scotland.

Recommendations 8(b), 8(c), 8(e), and 8(f): (respectively) victims should also be able to receive information where the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland (MHTS) makes no order; where there is an appeal against conditional discharge of a patient and the outcome of an appeal; appeals against recall to hospital or outcome of an appeal; the first occasion of unescorted suspension of detention outwith hospital grounds (CORO VNS only)

Agree

While these recommendations relate to the information available under the CORO VNS, in some cases they will also apply to offenders subject to an Hospital Direction^[11] or Transfer for Treatment Direction^[12].

We want to ensure that victims registered under the VNS and the CORO VNS can receive equivalent information, if they wish. We will legislate to make these changes, and will align them to deliver recommendations that relate to the criminal justice VNS.

Recommendation 8(d) and 8(g): provisions governing information to victims about conditions imposed where someone is given conditional discharge under mental health legislation should be clarified, and the information available following certain decisions about an offender where the victim has been afforded the opportunity to make representations should be considered

Agree

We will consider whether these recommendations may be delivered through guidance, or whether legislation is required. We will join this up with work to deliver recommendations 8(b), 8(c), 8(e) and 8(f).

Recommendation 15 (part of): victims should be able to receive information about death in custody and transfer outwith Scotland where an offender has been sentenced to less than 18 months

Agree

We agree that information about death in custody and transfer outwith Scotland would provide greater equality for victims in terms of information entitlements, regardless of the length of sentence for an offender. We are keen to ensure that victims are treated in the same way where appropriate. We will join this work up with our work for recommendation 10 (reviewing information entitlements where a cross-border transfer occurs).

Recommendation 15 (part of): in any instances of temporary release, victims should receive information about every instance of temporary release where the offender might come into close proximity with the victim, not just the first instance of temporary release

Agree in principle

There are complexities for this part recommendation, which applies to the VNS and the VIS. Our discussions with stakeholders showed that there is no clear consensus about the meaning of “close proximity”. We will discuss the best way to take this work forward with justice partners and victim support organisations.

Eligibility to receive information

These recommendations ensure that the VNS better recognises the wide range of secondary victims of crime, and gives victims enhanced choices in how the VNS can specifically work in relation to them.

Recommendation 11

Where a victim is deceased, discretion should be applied to the current family members eligible to apply for the VNS to reflect contemporary families and relationships

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 12

Victims should be able to nominate a person to receive information on their behalf

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 14 (part of)

Children over 12 should be able to nominate an adult to receive information on their behalf

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 11: that discretion be applied to the list of relatives who can register on the scheme where a victim has died

Agree in principle

Introducing discretion to the list of relatives who can register on the scheme in this situation would reflect family circumstances in the 21^st-century, and support a trauma-informed and personalised approach. There are challenges to enabling discretion and the implications of this for victims and delivery bodies. There are complexities in how the current list is set out in legislation^[13], so we will consider how we can best take this forward.

Recommendation 12: that victims be able to nominate a person to receive information on their behalf

Agree in principle

Providing victims with greater choice and autonomy into how the VNS works for them would deliver real benefits. Delivering this recommendation comes with legislative and operational challenges^[14]. From our discussions, we know that victim support organisations would support expanding the scope of this recommendation to that nomination of a person works in the same way as nominating a victim support organisation under the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023.

We will work with our partners to consider how nomination could work in the same way, regardless of whether a person or victim support organisation is nominated.

Recommendation 14 (part of): that a child aged over 12 who is eligible to register on the scheme be able to nominate an adult to receive information on their behalf

Agree in principle

We want to ensure that children over 12 who are eligible for the VNS in their own right are fully supported, and safeguarded, in making that decision. As with recommendation 12, we will explore extending the scope of this recommendation so that a child aged 12 or over can nominate someone to receive information on their behalf, or at the same time as the child themselves.

Communications

Victims should be able to access clear and straightforward information about the VNS that helps them make meaningful choices. Registration to the VNS should be straightforward. We are committed to ensuring that victims’ individual needs and preferences are reflected in how we communicate information about the VNS.

Recommendation 8(h)

VNS registration forms should be reviewed to ensure that victims can opt to receive all information to which they are entitled in principle

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 8(i)

Victims should also be told when they will stop receiving information in certain situations, and be given explanations as to what information can be provided or not

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 18 (parts of)

Victims registered on the VNS should be given a range of communication options and information should not be delivered on dates that have significance for a victim (e.g. birthdays or anniversaries)

Our response

Agree in principle

Recommendation 19

Information about the VNS on official websites should be rationalised to ensure consistency

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 22 (part of)

Victims should be given information orally where this might cause anxiety, confusion or an emotional response, and information should be available in a variety of accessible forms, including the visual

Our response

Agree

Recommendation 8(h): VNS registration forms should be reviewed to ensure that victims can opt to receive all information to which they are entitled in principle

Agree

The information available to victims should be clear when victims register, and has an important role in helping a person decide whether or not to register.

We will work with partners to review the registration form and ensure that it truly meets victims’ needs. Our commitment to establishing a Victim Contact Team creates the opportunity to embed a digital-first approach so we will actively engage with victims to develop the form and consider digital options for a registration form.

Recommendation 8(i): victims should be told when they will stop receiving information in certain situations, and be given explanations as to what information can be provided or not

Agree in principle

This recommendation relates to the situation where an offender has received a prison sentence, is also subject to an Hospital Direction or Transfer for Treatment Direction, and is released from their sentence^[15] whilst in a forensic mental health facility. In these circumstances, an offender might remain in hospital under a civil order (although this is not always the case).

Section 20 of the review’s report sets out that where an offender is released from their sentence, a Hospital Direction or Transfer for Treatment Direction will end. In those circumstances there is no victim entitlement under either the criminal justice VNS or CORO VNS^[16] to receive information. The review recommends that victims are specifically advised that there is no entitlement to information in these circumstances, given the privacy implications of disclosing an offender’s health condition.

We recognise the benefits of victims clearly understanding the information they are entitled to, and we recognise that disclosure of an offender’s health condition would be a breach of their privacy. We are committed to upholding the privacy rights of all parties to whom the VNS relates.

We have reviewed this complex intersection of the criminal justice system and forensic mental health system and understand that information may be available to victims for some situations under the criminal justice VNS, although there are wide range of possible scenarios given the differing ways an offender who is subject to a Hospital Direction or Transfer for Treatment Direction may be managed.

We will work with partners to explore possible offender management scenarios with partners in order to create certainty around information entitlements and provide victims with clarity about their rights under the VNS.

Recommendation 18 (part of): the introduction of a menu of means of staying in touch for victims registered on the VNS

Agree in principle

We recognise the clear benefits to victims of having options for the way they receive information. The VNS is currently a paper-based system and the introduction of new means of contact would be a considerable delivery shift, which would likely require a digital solution.

We will join up this aspect of recommendation 18 with work on the Victim Contact Team. Outcomes from delivering recommendation 22 (the introduction of diversity monitoring) could help inform this longer-term work.

Recommendation 19: the rationalisation of online information about the VNS

Agree

We will review content on the VNS on Government websites like gov.scot and mygov.scot^[17] and will engage with our justice partners on how they can support delivery of this recommendation.

The review recommended that website content not be confined to script (written text), and so we will explore options for other formats, for example audio or infographics. As with the work on registration forms and guidance, we will directly involve victims in the development of this work.

Recommendation 22 (part of): victims should be given information orally where this might cause anxiety, confusion or an emotional response; information should be available in a variety of accessible forms, including visual

Agree

We recognise the benefits of speaking to victims in order to provide them with information and want to provide opportunities to give victims choices about how the VNS will work for them. Work to deliver the Victim Contact Team and related recommendations could be more effective mechanisms for providing choice.

We recognise that each victim’s recovery journey will be different, and that their preferences may change with time. We want to ensure that victims can revisit their choices with the passage of time. This links to recommendation 18 (that victims be offered a menu of means of staying in touch).

The second element of this part recommendation 22 relates to providing information in a variety of accessible forms. We acknowledge that provision of information under the VNS or the VIS should reflect victims’ needs and preferences.

This links with a number of other recommendations that cover: the Victim Contact Team and its functions; that victims be offered a menu of means of staying in touch; provision of appropriate advice to a child aged over 12; the rationalisation of online information (including different formats); and the introduction of diversity monitoring. We will join up work on all these recommendations to ensure consistency of approach.