« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
21. Comments on possible resource implications
21.1 I have been conscious throughout this review of the potential for disclosure requirements to impose very heavy burdens on the police and the Crown, or to have severe resource implications for defence teams, which could at worst have severe consequences for the viability of criminal justice. We have seen this to some extent over the last two years since Holland and Sinclair. The police and the Crown have been devoting considerably more time to disclosure matters, which must have had some impact on their ability to fulfil other parts of their important functions.
21.2 Nevertheless, I do not believe that the requirements of disclosure, which of course derive from the requirement for trials to be fair, need impose unsustainable burdens on the system. Without doubt there is a substantial amount of work involved, but disclosure systems which are well-designed and efficiently carried out can also help to reduce work later on in the process.
21.3 I have not been in a position to make formal cost estimates for the implementation of my recommendations; however, the main additional pressures will arise from the scheduling of material for solemn cases; the implementation (already planned by the Crown Office) of summaries of evidence for summary cases; the need for improved training, especially of police officers; and the need for further development of IT systems. On the other hand, there may be scope for some reduction in the currently-perceived requirements for creating and redacting witness statements in summary cases.
21.4 As always, the key to achieving these goals within the available budget will depend on clarity of the requirements, good organisation and training, and good use of IT. I hope this report has contributed at least to the first of these.
« Previous | Contents | Next »