The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM OBJECTIVES REVIEW
PROPOSALS FOR THE INTEGRATION OF AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS IN THE SCOTTISH CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

PART V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

9 OVERARCHING AIMS, OBJECTIVES, VALUES

9.1 The agreed approach to this Review was to look at joining up objectives and targets for the various agencies in the system "within a framework of overarching aims and objectives".

9.2 There is a need for such a framework to promote and assist joined-up working across the CJS, while still respecting the necessary independence of parts of the system. Although the different organisations in the system have their own sets of aims and objectives (or equivalent) reflecting their own particular responsibilities, the CJS is the sum of the constituent parts and depends for its effectiveness on their co-operation with each other and co-ordination of their respective activities. Setting overarching aims and objectives recognises and underlines that. The need is clear from the project findings that appear to demonstrate, for example, a significant degree of persisting fragmentation within the system, poor communication, objectives or targets that fail to mesh or even conflict, lack of awareness of each other's work and failure of 'organisational empathy' within the principal agencies. An overarching set of aims and objectives should help to encourage a greater sense of common purpose and to secure more efficient and effective performance of the system as a whole. Despite the scepticism of some practitioners, there is value too in the public having available to it a statement of what the system is about and what it sets out to achieve.

9.3 There has been no framework of overarching aims and objectives for the CJS in Scotland, but various high level statements of government policies and priorities for criminal justice, and in particular the very recent statement of aims and objectives in relation to crime in Building a Better Scotland [ Building a Better Scotland Scottish Executive Spending Proposals 2003-2006.] provide a valuable background to and basis for the development of such a framework.

9.4 The Scottish Executive's original Programme for Government in its section on Justice set out as its headline priorities - A Safe Scotland; a Fair Scotland; and an Open Scotland. The first priority related to criminal justice, and explained the headline commitment to "Working together for a safe and fair Scotland" by stating "We want a secure Scotland where individuals and communities are free from crime and free from the fear of crime." Specific issues included attacking the drugs menace, promoting effective measures to support victims of crime and protecting communities through the rehabilitation of offenders. "We will be tough on crime and on criminals", the Programme promised. [ Making it Work Together: A Programme for Government , September 1999, page 3.]

9.5 The Executive's follow-up report on achievements and statement of new priorities and commitments contained no stated overarching objectives for the Scottish CJS, though it said that "We are working with the police, with local communities and those in the justice system to prevent crime and deal effectively with offenders" and asserted "We want to make Scotland a place where people are safer and feel safer." The report cited proposals for wide ranging law reform, and stated "We are building public confidence in the justice system and the workings of government, by making them more open and accountable, and making justice more accessible." [ Working Together for Scotland - A Programme for Government , January 2001, section 2.1.]

9.6 Most recently Building a Better Scotland stated an aim for Crime - "To create a safer and fairer Scotland", with an Objective - "To reduce crime, especially violent crime". [ Building a Better Scotland , page 5.] Objectives under the 'Improving Public Services' headline, include - "To improve public confidence in the justice system" and "To reduce offending", [ ibid ., page 8.] while the 'Closing the Opportunity Gap' Objective for crime is - "To reduce crime, particularly violent and drug-related crime and housebreaking which disproportionately affects disadvantaged areas". [ ibid ., page 9.] There are Objectives for the Justice Department and for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. The former include objectives about making Scotland a place where people are safer and feel safer, having a fair and more efficient criminal justice system that commands the confidence of its customers and the public, reducing offending and providing more and more effective non-custodial penalties. The latter include objectives about improved delivery of justice, securing public confidence, prioritising serious crime such as drug trafficking and persistent offenders, and providing services which meet information needs of victims, witnesses and next of kin. [ See Chapter 4 above and Annex D, which contains extracts from Building a Better Scotland .]

9.7 The agreed approach to this project envisaged the development of a cross-system framework of overarching aims and objectives, but did not specifically contemplate including a statement of values for the system. There is no official statement of values for the CJS in Scotland, nor anything of this nature for the CJS in government plans. Commitments in Building a Better Scotland are, however, value-rich, including elements such as fairness and equality. A key aspect of better joint working in the CJS is co-operation, and it is in an important sense the essence of what this Review is about. Although co-operation may not be a value as such, it would certainly be a guiding principle for working in the system. Developing a statement of values could be of benefit to the system internally and externally, in encouraging a shared approach to guiding principles and behaviours and in helping the public to know what it can expect from the system in the way it operates, separately from what it sets out to achieve or deliver. This is discussed further below.

A SET OF OVERARCHING AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND VALUES FOR THE CJS IN SCOTLAND

9.8 The statements of government policies, priorities, aims and objectives for criminal justice should be reflected in a new framework of overarching aims and objectives for the more effective and efficient operation of the CJS in Scotland.

9.9 That framework should cover the whole system, by which is meant something wider than simply the 'criminal justice process', in the sense of the 'production line' or 'chain of justice' for cases. As in other U.K. jurisdictions the 'Criminal Justice System' in Scotland should include prevention and reduction, while recognising that the criminal justice agencies can only play a part in this, as achievement of these objectives is dependent on other policies and other agencies. Effective joined-up operation of the system would seem most likely to be achieved if all the relevant agencies recognise that they play a part in it, and an overarching set of aims and objectives needs to apply to the whole system. That means that other important agencies or organisations not directly included in this project will be covered.

9.10 A statement of overarching aim needs to contain two elements - one relating to what the system should deliver (outcome) and the other about how it should work (process). The present Review is concentrating, in the time available, on the operation of the system from offence to disposal and is not looking at the comparative effectiveness of different disposals. That may merit a separate exercise. The Review has been covering the adult system, but not the Children's Hearing/juvenile justice system, which deals with a large number of those responsible for the commission of criminal offences in Scotland. The suggested framework of aims and objectives is about the former, so its possible relevance to the latter may require separate consideration.

9.11 There is a question about terminology. As has been seen, different organisations (and different systems) use different terminology - e.g. 'aims and objectives', 'purpose and aims', 'vision', 'mission', 'values' and 'operating principles'. The approach adopted here is to use 'aims and objectives'. The issue of 'values' is discussed further below.

AIMS

9.12 A suggested statement of aim for the CJS in Scotland is:

• To improve the safety and the feeling of safety of the people of Scotland and to deliver justice fairly and efficiently

9.13 The first part would be intended to cover outcomes, including the effectiveness of the system, and the second would relate primarily to the process. The formulation deliberately uses positive message words like 'safety' and 'feeling of safety', rather than 'fear', and language that is about improvement or progress, rather than words such as 'ensure' or 'maintain'.

9.14 This statement of aim would encompass the Building a Better Scotland aim for crime noted above.

OBJECTIVES

9.15 Objectives along the following lines are offered in support of such an aim:

1. To reduce the level of crime, disorder and offending
2. To improve people's feeling of safety and the confidence of the whole community in the criminal justice system
3. To improve the treatment of victims and witnesses
4. To protect the rights of accused
5. To improve efficiency and deal with cases with appropriate speed

9.16 The above set of aims and objectives reflects the approach in the relevant Scottish government material - for example, regarding reducing crime as a means by which safety and the sense of safety are to be achieved, rather than an aim in itself. So objective 1 supports the commitment in the proposed overarching aim.

9.17 Objective 1 would accommodate current SE priorities and reflect the very recent Building a Better Scotland objectives (for example, relating to violence and drugs) noted above. In referring to reducing 'offending' the objective reflects a Building a Better Scotland objective for improving public services. This expression would cover re-offending and could be supported by targets about that. The objective would also permit flexibility and changes in priorities that could occur in light of changing circumstances. The reference to reducing crime, etc., would need to be interpreted as a commitment to contributing to this end, as it is important to bear in mind the earlier point [ At paragraph 9.9.] that this cannot be achieved by the efforts of criminal justice agencies alone. [ It will be recalled that the statement of Purpose and Aims for the CJS in Northern Ireland adopts the expression - "to work together to help to reduce crime and the fear of crime".]

9.18 The foregoing point is also relevant to Objective 2, or at least the first part of it. Making people feel safe from crime needs the assistance of other agencies that are not part of the CJS, but whose responsibilities are relevant - to take but one example, as regards the provision and maintenance of street lighting. Objective 2 also reflects government commitments in Scotland noted above. It incorporates public confidence in the system, as another aspect of the public's feelings about crime and the system for dealing with it. The reference to the 'whole' community covers ethnic minority groups.

9.19 Objectives 3 and 4 cover the main aspects of justice and fairness in the overarching aim. The former reflects existing government policies and strategy and Building a Better Scotland commitments. The latter may be consistent with the part of the aim in that plan that refers to creating a 'fairer Scotland', but more significantly it reflects important action that has already been taken by government, with the 'incorporation' of the European Convention on Human Rights.

9.20 Objective 5 supports the part of the overarching aim about delivering justice efficiently and is consistent with the Building a Better Scotland commitments on faster prosecutions and improvements in court case times.

VALUES

9.21 For an organisation, values or operating principles are about the way the organisation does things, rather than what it does or what it sets out to achieve in aims and objectives. 'Standards of behaviour' is another description, which highlights that these are about the way an organisation or people in it behave.

9.22 Constituent organisations within the CJS in Scotland have statements of values or equivalent. Values statements or operating principles that are common to all three principal agencies covered by this project are integrity and professionalism (although the latter concept only features in some Police Forces' statements). It may also be noted that civil servants in the Scottish Executive are expected to demonstrate the Civil Service values of integrity and honesty, objectivity, political impartiality and fairness.

9.23 The question arises of whether the system, as such, should have a statement of values or whether it suffices for the constituent agencies or organisations to have these. Would having a statement of values for the CJS in Scotland have any significant benefit?

9.24 If better integration is to be achieved in order to ensure the more efficient, effective and joined-up operation of the system, there may be merit in having not only overarching aims and objectives, but also overarching values. This would reinforce the notion that, although separate and in some respects independent, the constituent organisations are contributing to a system and should all be guided by the same standards and principles in doing so. Better joined-up operation will clearly be dependent on enhanced co-operation between the agencies in the system and, while this may not be a value as such, it would appear that it should certainly be a key operating principle.

9.25 It is also important to recognise the wider environment within which the CJS operates, and equality of treatment and respect for diversity, for example, are important values in that regard. In the eyes of the public, there would arguably be something wrong with a justice system which could not state its basic values. For the benefit of the public generally, for the benefit of members of the public who are affected by the system, and in order to assist in improving joined-up working, the balance of argument may be in favour of stating a set of values or operating principles for the CJS in Scotland. Such a set of values or principles having been stated for the system, each organisation in the system could then reach to those values or principles in their own organisational values or principles.

9.26 Values or principles for the system would require to be a matter of consultation, but drawing on stated values or principles for the main agencies in the system the following are suggested for consideration for the system as a whole:

• Integrity
• Fairness and Impartiality
• Equality of treatment and respect for diversity

9.27 As remarked above, [ At paragraph 9.22.] Professionalism is a value that is featured in the three principal agencies covered by this Review. For that reason it should probably be considered for inclusion in the list, but there may be a question about how much it actually adds to the above key values.

9.28 Co-operation should be a key operating principle within the CJS . It is fundamental to achieving more integrated working in order to deliver more efficient and effective operation of the system.

CONCLUSION

9.29 I am in no doubt about the desirability of setting a framework of overarching aim and objectives for the CJS in Scotland - and I believe that a statement of values is also worth considering. The framework of aim, objectives and values suggested above attempts to set out what appear to be the key elements, but it is important to emphasise that it is not presented as the last word, but rather is offered as a basis for further discussion.

9.30 The aim, objectives and values will certainly need to be discussed further with the relevant agencies. They take account of valuable advice and assistance from the project Reference Group and I believe reflect senior views in the main agencies covered by the project, but further consultation with those agencies may well be appropriate. Additionally, other important organisations in or associated with the CJS have not been substantially involved or consulted in the course of this project (whose limitations have already been described). While at the end of the day it is no doubt for the government formally to set such a framework, it will be essential to ensure shared ownership and commitment as well as common responsibility for delivering the system objectives. Consultation and consensus will be vital to achieve that.

9.31 Further, as project findings suggest possible scepticism among staff in the organisations about overarching aims and objectives, an important part of the process will be to ensure that there is appropriate consultation and that organisational communication and training are effective in explaining the relevance and the value of this approach.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS and SUGGESTIONS FOR AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND VALUES

Recommended - a framework of overarching Aim and Objectives should be set for the CJS in Scotland.

(Paragraph 9.8)

AIMS:

For consideration - a statement of Aim in the following terms:

• To improve the safety and the feeling of safety of the people of Scotland and to deliver justice fairly and efficiently

(Paragraph 9.12)

OBJECTIVES:

For consideration - a set of Objectives in the following terms:

1. To reduce the level of crime, disorder and offending
2. To improve people's feeling of safety and the confidence of the whole community in the criminal justice system
3. To improve the treatment of victims and witnesses
4. To protect the rights of accused
5. To improve efficiency and deal with cases with appropriate speed

(Paragraph 9.15)

VALUES:

For consideration - a statement of Values or operating principles for the CJS in Scotland in the following terms:

• Integrity
• Fairness and Impartiality
• Equality of treatment and respect for diversity

and, possibly

• Professionalism

(Paragraphs 9.26 & 9.27)

A key operating principle within the system of:

• Co-operation

(Paragraph 9.28)

Recommended - consultation with relevant organisations on Aims, Objectives and Values.

(Paragraph 9.30)

Recommended - effective organisational staff consultation, communication and training.

(Paragraph 9.31)

10 CJS TARGETS IN SUPPORT OF OVERARCHING OBJECTIVES

10.1 It is appropriate to test how readily suitable targets could flow from the proposed overarching objectives, particularly as regards relevant high-level government targets. The creation of a comprehensive set of specific, detailed targets in support of the objectives is, I believe, for agreement between the government and the relevant constituent agencies in the system. For cross-system targets to work they will require to be jointly 'owned' and they should be set after consultation and discussion with and among the agencies in the CJS on whose actions achievement of the targets will depend. What I have to say in chapter 11 below on co-ordination, integration and liaison mechanisms and bodies will be relevant in this connection.

10.2 However, looking to the terms of reference and agreed approach of the project, and taking account also of the project research findings, it may be helpful to offer some suggestions - in particular, about areas that might be covered by targets in support of the process objective (Objective 5). Regard will be had to the generally recognised need to limit the number of targets, if they are to be effective in improving performance. Also, it may be preferable, at least initially, just to start to measure and monitor some activities, rather than setting targets.

OBJECTIVE 1 - Reducing the level of crime, disorder and offending

10.3 This objective could be supported by targets about actual numbers, about particular types of priority crimes/offences that might be targeted at any time (such as violence, drugs, street crime and youth crime), and about re-offending. It would permit flexibility. It would accommodate SE priorities and recent performance measures, for example those relating to drugs and violence and targets already agreed for the police (and set out in Building a Better Scotland). [ Building a Better Scotland , page 16.] Repeat offending was an issue of concern to practitioners in the Focus Group research. It is a matter of concern to the wider public and reducing re-offending was seen as part of the aim of the summary justice system in some responses to the McInnes Review Consultation on First Order Issues. It is a priority issue for the SE with regard to persistent young offenders. Building a Better Scotland sets a performance measure of reducing the number of persistent young offenders. [ ibid ., page 23.] The setting of an appropriate target for the wider CJS may merit consideration, perhaps as part of an attempt to measure and improve the effectiveness of the system and the various available methods of disposal of convicted offenders. There is considerable interest in such an exercise, but the agreed approach to this project precludes examination of that topic here, as the issue of what works, or what works best in terms of disposal options, relates to the part of the process after the point of disposal. Aspects of the topic that involve procedural matters may fall within the remit of another current Review, as noted above.

OBJECTIVE 2 - Improving people's feeling of safety and the confidence of the whole community in the system

10.4 Objective 2 reflects government commitments in Scotland about people feeling safer and free from the fear of crime. Building a Better Scotland includes a performance measure of reducing the fear of crime or the seriousness of worry about crime. [ Building a Better Scotland , page 16.] Although it may present some difficulties about measurable targets, survey information would no doubt assist.

10.5 The objective also incorporates public confidence in the system, as another aspect of the public's feelings about crime and the system for dealing with it. This is consistent with the recently announced SE objective of improving public confidence in the justice system. The reference in the proposed overarching objective to the 'whole' community covers ethnic minority communities. Building a Better Scotland talks of a commitment to working to secure public confidence, including that of ethnic minorities, in the prosecution system, and that reflects a specific COPFS objective. [ ibid., page 19.] The SE plan objective is, however, a general commitment in relation to the justice system. This project suggests there is also a need for improving the confidence of ethnic minorities in the whole criminal justice system. The COPFS proposal to conduct a public survey to measure confidence in the prosecution would appear to be an appropriate approach as regards confidence in the whole CJS. However, two important requirements will be to ensure common understanding of what is meant by the 'criminal justice system' and to establish a baseline against which specific targets can be set and performance measured.

10.6 Consideration could be given to whether a target of increasing the number and proportion of recorded crimes for which an offender is brought to justice should also be adopted in support of the public confidence objective (as in England and Wales). Arguably 'attrition' or the 'justice gap' is a less serious issue in Scotland than in England and Wales and there is no pressing need to copy the approach south of the border. There have, however, been some concerns and criticisms about the falling level of cases proceeded with here. If such an approach were to be considered appropriate for Scotland it would be important to recognise that cases prosecuted should not be the sole measure, as the question should properly be the wider question of whether the case has been properly dealt with, whether by prosecution or other disposal. So, non-court disposals should also 'count' in measuring the number of criminals 'brought to justice'.

10.7 This area of actual or potential target-setting relates essentially to the police and the PFS, rather than the system more widely. It is primarily about levels of police detection and prosecution action. In the Scottish setting one possible issue for further attention may be the effect on public confidence of the significant numbers of cases reported by the police to Procurators Fiscal which are marked for no proceedings because of insufficient evidence or triviality.

10.8 The former category will always be a feature of our system as it is for the public prosecutor to make a professional judgement about the adequacy of evidence in law to support prosecution, but it seems likely that better joined-up working between the police and the prosecution could result in a lower level of reporting of cases in which the evidence is clearly insufficient. This might have a positive effect on public confidence, but in another respect it could also have the opposite effect, for it might in practice adversely affect police 'clear-up' rates. [ Police detection and clear-up rates is in fact a matter that is currently receiving attention nationally - with the aim of achieving greater consistency in the recording of crime.] Addressing the issue by target setting could also be controversial, if it appeared to undermine the role of independent professional prosecutors mentioned above.

10.9 A more suitable candidate for targets may be 'no pros' for triviality. Public attitudes to minor offences may suggest that reducing the number of cases in which no action is taken because of triviality may be beneficial in public confidence terms. Attention has already been given to this issue jointly by ACPOS and COPFS. A relevant issue is the availability and constructive use of alternatives to prosecution - whether by the police or the Procurator Fiscal. There was some criticism of the adequacy of the existing range of non-prosecution disposal options in the project research - and also, it is understood, in a McInnes Review consultation. That issue is not, however, for this project.

10.10 In order to maintain and, if necessary, improve public confidence the COPFS and ACPOS should give further attention to the levels of reported cases in which no proceedings are taken because of insufficient evidence or triviality. This should include ensuring that there is adequate measurement and monitoring and that appropriate arrangements are agreed (for each category) to ensure clarity and consistency of practice, as well as considering agreeing suitable joint targets or indicators.

OBJECTIVE 3 - Improving the treatment of victims and witnesses

10.11 This is, of course, an aspect of justice and fairness in the overarching aim. Building a Better Scotland contains a commitment to more support for victims and a performance measure of increasing the availability of such support. There may be a question about the baseline for measuring improvement, but there are important initiatives under way in this area and relevant Justice Department and COPFS targets are included in the above plan. Customer satisfaction is to be monitored by survey. Possible measures for reducing the need for court attendance by witnesses may fall within the scope of one of the other current Reviews, but consideration could be given to addressing witness waiting time at court by accurate and comprehensive monitoring and consideration of appropriate standards and targets. Improvement in this area of widespread complaint would be dependent on effective joint working by the various agencies, and not just the actions of any single agency.

OBJECTIVE 4 - Protecting the rights of the accused

10.12 This objective covers the other main aspect of 'delivering justice fairly' in the aim. Arguably the most important relevant action has already been taken, with the 'incorporation' of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It is also relevant to note the establishment of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) as a 'long stop', independent miscarriage of justice review body. Setting a supporting target or targets for this objective is not easy. If protection of ECHR rights were to be the test one approach might be to monitor and measure this by successful ECHR devolution issue or Human Rights Act challenges . The outcomes of SCCRC applications could be another area for monitoring. One aspect of the protection of the rights of the accused is the availability of adequate legal representation, so legal aid targets will be relevant here. (The Scottish Legal Aid Board already has performance indicators in support of its strategic objective "to achieve consistent, timely and sound decision-making at all stages of an application for legal assistance".)

OBJECTIVE 5 - Improving efficiency and dealing with cases with appropriate speed

10.13 This objective, so worded, conveys a positive message and allows for flexibility of approach. It fits with recent SE commitments. Building a Better Scotland asserts that "making Scotland safer means faster prosecutions" [ Building a Better Scotland , page 5.] and includes a performance measure for sustaining improvements in court case times. [ ibid ., page 16.]

10.14 Faster prosecutions and improved court times may help to deliver better quality justice, with reduced inconvenience and anxiety being caused to victims and witnesses, recent recollection of events ensuring more reliable evidence and more just outcomes, and resources being used more cost effectively. However, in addressing the question of appropriate targets to support the efficiency/speed objective it is important to note and to have regard to the fact that this objective does not stand alone. Any target or targets set under this objective must take account, as appropriate, of other relevant overarching objectives. For example, as noted, Objective 4 is about protecting the rights of accused. Important elements of such protection include the entitlement of the accused to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence and to representation. It is possible that excessively speedy processing of a case and setting of very tight time targets for the completion of cases could operate in conflict with that other overarching objective. Similarly, proposed Objective 3 about improving the treatment of victims and witnesses would, no doubt, include ensuring adequate notice of a requirement to appear at court as a witness, so again excessively tight time targets could operate in conflict with that objective. Finally, proposed Objective 2 about improving the confidence of the whole community in the system could not be achieved if efficiency and time targets were set which could only be met by, or perversely encouraged, inappropriate disposal of cases - for example, marking of large numbers of cases for no proceedings or abandoning of large numbers of cases in court in order to meet time targets. So, while the quality of justice delivered by the CJS may be assisted by speedy processing of business, speed in itself does not equal quality and may in some circumstances have a negative impact on it.

10.15 Process time is the most obvious measure for target setting in relation to an objective about efficiency and speedy disposal. At the start of this Review the key targets in the plans of the COPFS and SCS included targets for timely case processing. Building a Better Scotland now includes a target for the COPFS to agree targets covering the progress of cases through the criminal justice system and an extended process period target for the SCS. [ ibid ., page 20.] Two Police Forces now have targets about timely reporting, that are relevant to the speedy processing of criminal cases, and a third has a supporting strategy about this.

10.16 Under a joined-up approach to the efficient operation of the CJS it would be appropriate to set an overall time target for the duration or 'lifespan' of a detected criminal case. Such a target would support an overarching objective about dealing with cases with appropriate speed and should be 'owned' and shared by all the relevant CJS agencies.

10.17 The period should run from the date of the offence coming to the attention of the police until the date of disposal of the resultant criminal case. It would only apply, of course, to detected cases in which there is a police report to the Procurator Fiscal for consideration of proceedings.

10.18 There should probably be a standard time target of general application for summary cases, but adopting an objective which is stated in terms of "dealing with cases with appropriate speed" would allow flexibility to set different overall time targets for different types or levels of case. The 'appropriate speed' that might be considered right for some classes or category of case might involve fast-track time-scales, shorter than the general overall time-scale. There should also be consideration given to an overall target for solemn [ Sheriff and Jury and High Court cases.] cases, as well as summary cases, particularly having regard to recent problems with the processing of High Court cases. While the Bonomy Review has addressed issues of time limits for proceedings and measures for speeding up the processing of cases, it is not expected to make proposals for the overall duration of cases as such.

10.19 The proposed adoption of an overall time target for summary cases is not new, as the Criminal Justice Forum's Working Group on Efficiency produced a recommendation for summary cases that attracted considerable support. [ The proposal was for an overarching target of 90% of summary cases being completed within nine months.]

10.20 It is essential, however, to recognize the dependencies within the process. Various contributions of the different agencies are critical to the path of a criminal case through the process. Failure in any of these could prevent achievement of the target. Each agency needs to recognize and act on the recognition that achievement of an overall time target depends on the timely and regular performance of the process activities falling within the responsibility of the particular agency. A summary of such activities is outlined in Annex B. It does not seek to be exhaustive, but although it may not be complete in all respects it does serve to demonstrate the complexity of the process and the extent to which it depends for its successful operation on the timely and accurate performance of a wide range of tasks by the various agencies.

10.21 The importance of all these contributions to the process must be recognized and appropriate standards should be agreed between the partner agencies - probably most conveniently in protocols. A set of more detailed, integrated individual targets should result. Such standards would have to be about quality as well as timeliness. A potentially useful model may be the Blueprint for the Processing of Children's Hearings Cases. [ Scottish Executive Education and Young People's Department Blueprint for the Processing of Children's Hearings Cases Second Edition, 2001.]

10.22 Any issue or uncertainty about where responsibility for carrying out particular tasks or activities rests must be addressed, discussed and resolved in a joined-up way by the main CJS agencies.

10.23 For completeness, not only cases which proceed through the court system, but also cases which are dealt with by active alternatives to prosecution, should also be covered by an overall time target and supporting protocols and individual targets.

10.24 At a time of congestion, delay and backlogs in parts of the CJS in Scotland it is of interest to note an approach being followed in Sweden, where current objectives set down by the Government and Parliament for increased prosecution and more rapid case flow are supported by a very basic input/output target of the number of outgoing cases exceeding the number of incoming cases. This sort of approach may appear overly simplistic and possibly open to abuse, but it does at least highlight a simple point about the process and serve as a reminder that initiatives or system changes that have the result of increasing the caseload or workload of the CJS affect its ability to meet system targets and may not be capable of being accommodated by the system without adjustment to targets or resources. In this context it is probably worth noting that although an objective about reducing the level of crime may look as if it should reduce the work of the system, to support such an objective with targets which are about increasing detection (and consequently reporting) is likely to have precisely the opposite effect, with more work being created. The need for consultation and a joined-up approach to adoption and implementation of new initiatives, priorities and changes is clear. It may be for consideration whether a higher output than input target ought to be considered for the CJS in Scotland - even if only temporarily.

10.25 Other measurements of system efficiency are more difficult to identify and set targets for than input/output or process times. There may be a question for consideration as to whether an 'efficiency' objective should be supported by targets about cost or value for money, but there would be difficulties in, for example, calculating unit costs and setting relevant targets. The point already made about the need for quality as well as speed also needs to be borne in mind and that is why the objective is framed in terms of 'appropriate' speed.

10.26 Two features of the way the system currently operates about which there are widespread complaints and criticisms (and substantial frustration among practitioners in the principal agencies) are firstly the number and frequency of adjournments of cases, and secondly the fact that although a high proportion of cases are disposed of on guilty pleas many of these are at a late stage of proceedings. These features are regarded as prime examples of the inefficiency of the system in dealing with its business.

10.27 Setting an overall time target may well influence the adjournment rate and help to deal with this problem, but it may still not eliminate excessive adjournments. In terms of efficiency there may be advantage in specifically targeting the rate of adjournments. That would require comprehensive and accurate monitoring and measurement of the rate and the reasons for adjournments. The former SCS target for lack of court time adjournments was intended to help to achieve the objective of timely processing of cases - so far as that is within the power of the court administration. To avoid excessive adjournments what would be needed, though, would be an agreed approach that reflected shared commitment and encouraged proper and timely performance of responsibilities by the various 'agencies' (which would include the defence). Tackling this problem by setting a target may be difficult because lack of co-operation by witnesses and accused persons would be hard to predict and calculate. Consideration of procedural or practice measures for overcoming or limiting such problems is for other current Reviews. There would need to be consultation with the judiciary as their commitment to a consistent and robust approach to testing adjournment motions would be an essential element. Indeed, the importance of their role in relation to overarching time targets also needs to be recognised and their support secured.

10.28 As for guilty pleas, the system would work more speedily and efficiently if more guilty plea cases were disposed of at an earlier stage. The proportion of guilty plea cases which are disposed of earlier could serve as a measure of the efficiency of the system. Increasing the percentage should demonstrate improved efficiency. Again, this is an aspect of the process that could usefully be monitored, and consideration might be given to a target. This may encourage timely and accurate performance of tasks by all the relevant players (including defence practitioners). As there may be concerns about the interests of justice it is important to emphasize that the issue is the timing not the making of the guilty plea. This is about bringing forward the stage in the process at which a guilty plea is tendered, not about forcing accused persons to plead guilty. The point about proper and timely performance of responsibilities is also relevant. There is no doubt an objection that the timing of a guilty plea is very largely dependent on the accused, but this can be met, at least in part, by recalling that existing statutory provisions offer not only the procedures for early pleas but also incentives to encourage them. How these operate or could be improved is again a matter for other Reviews.

CONCLUSION

10.29 I think it useful to repeat the point made at the beginning of this chapter that CJS targets should be discussed and agreed with and between the agencies in the system. The foregoing are offered as what I hope will be a useful basis for discussion. Proliferation of targets is to be avoided at a time of concern about the growing bureaucracy generated by increased numbers of performance measures allegedly distracting from effective operational activity. I have offered a limited number for consideration and otherwise made suggestions about measuring and monitoring. The approach has been to try to suggest an integrated cross-system approach to ensure shared commitment to key system targets that will improve the overall efficiency of the system and the delivery of government priorities.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS and SUGGESTIONS FOR TARGETS

OBJECTIVE 1 - Reducing the level of crime, disorder and offending

• For consideration - wider CJS target for reducing persistent offending.

(Paragraph 10.3)

OBJECTIVE 2 - Improving people's feeling of safety and the confidence of the whole community in the system

• Recommended (in support of Building a Better Scotland objectives) - target for increased public confidence in the whole CJS, including target for increased ethnic minority groups' confidence

(Paragraph 10.5)

• For consideration - target for increasing number and proportion of recorded crimes for which action is taken against the offender

(Paragraph 10.6)

• For consideration - further attention by ACPOS and COPFS to the levels of reported cases in which no proceedings are taken because of insufficient evidence or triviality, including:

• ensuring that there is adequate measurement and monitoring and that appropriate arrangements are agreed to ensure clarity and consistency of practice
• considering agreeing suitable joint targets or indicators

(Paragraph 10.10)

OBJECTIVE 3 - Improving the treatment of victims and witnesses

• For consideration - addressing witness waiting time at court by accurate and comprehensive monitoring and consideration of appropriate standards and targets

(Paragraph 10.11)

OBJECTIVE 4 - Protecting the rights of the accused

• For consideration - monitoring successful ECHR devolution issue or HR Act challenges

(Paragraph 10.12)

OBJECTIVE 5 - Improving efficiency and dealing with cases with appropriate speed

• Recommended - overall time target for the duration or 'lifespan' of detected criminal cases, whether summary, solemn or dealt with by alternative to prosecution

(Paragraphs 10.16 & 10.23)

• Recommended - supporting process standards and targets, in agreed bilateral protocols where appropriate

(Paragraphs 10.21 & 10.23)

• Recommended - speedy joint resolution of any issues or uncertainties about responsibility for particular essential process tasks

(Paragraph 10.22)

• For consideration - target for higher output than input of cases

(Paragraph 10.24)

• For consideration - monitoring of rates of adjournments and of time of disposal of guilty plea cases and possible targets for reduced levels and earlier disposal

(Paragraph 10.28)

« Previous | Contents | Next »