The Scottish Government

OFFICE INSPECTION - AIRDRIE

2 MARCH 2005

Background

We are committed to regular audits of district and area offices to ensure compliance with race relations, policies and strategies.

This is our report of the Procurator Fiscal's office at Airdrie. The Airdrie office is part of the Lanarkshire Area.

Methodology

Our approach to the office inspections involved consideration of the following areas:

• Adherence to policy guidelines in relation to prosecution of racist crime
• Use of interpreters and translation issues
• Employment issues
• Consultation with communities
• Deaths involving racial and/or cultural awareness issues

The following measures were taken to inform the inspection process:

Sampling of race charges

COPFS has a single corporate database (herein referred to as the National Database) that connects all Procurator Fiscal offices and Crown Office units, and facilitates the transfer of legal casework. An extract of data from the National Database was obtained from Management Information Division in Crown Office, containing details of all charges with a racial element reported to fiscal offices over the course of financial years 2002-03 and 2003-04. It is worth noting that the database is an operational one, not statistical, and hence is 'live', being constantly updated as cases progress. As such the extract was a 'snapshot' as at January 2005.

A sample of Section 50 racial charges and charges with Section 96 racial aggravations recorded against them was drawn from the data for 2003-04 and the related case papers were requested from the office and examined by the team. The charges in the sample drawn were charges that appeared, as recorded on the database, to have been dealt with in accordance with the guidelines - this part of the sampling exercise was designed simply to be an independent check on compliance with policy.

The charges were drawn using a stratified random sampling method.For details on the sampling methodology employed, please contact Kirsty MacLean (e-mail kirsty.maclean@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or telephone 0141-229-6203).

Additionally all case papers containing any charges which appeared, as recorded on the database, to have been dealt with in contravention to the guidelines, were specifically requested for examination. Since these charges were of particular interest to us, we requested the relevant case papers in relation any such charges from both 2002-03 and 2003-04.

The contraventions of policy that can be identified from examination of the data extract from the database are charges in respect of which a fiscal fine had been issued, or a warning letter. (Note however that revised guidance from Crown Office was issued to staff on 23rd June 2004, which thereafter made it possible to issue a warning letter in exceptional circumstances, with the agreement of the Area Fiscal).

Case papers were also automatically requested which contained any charges that were recorded on the database as being unmarked, or any charges where no proceedings had been taken due to a delay by any agency.

Similarly, charges reported to the fiscal office in 2003-04 that were recorded as being marked for no proceedings were specifically requested for examination, because the way in which the coding system employed by the National Database operates does not allow for recording of reason for a marking of 'no proceedings' at charge level.

Case papers for cases that were included in in-house statistical returns (covering the 3 month period from September - November 2004) on racist crime to the Crown Office Legal and Policy Forum meeting in January 2005 were also requested for examination.

Case papers were also requested to be made available on the day of inspection, regarding any deaths which were reported and investigated in the offices over a 12 month period where:

• special consideration was required, as defined in Annex 3 in chapter 12 of the Book of Regulations (racial and cultural awareness)

• the ethnicity of the deceased was in some way related to the cause of death (e.g. the murder of someone from a minority ethnic background)

A questionnaire covering a number of issues related to the areas for consideration (as outlined above) was sent to the office in advance of the inspection and returns were analysed to allow exploration of any issues raised in the returns, on the day of the inspection.

The composition of staff in post (numbers, grade and ethnicity) in the office was considered prior to the inspection visit. Similarly considered was the proportion of staff that had attended the Diversity Awareness programme.

2001 Census data was obtained from the General Register Office for Scotland (GROS) showing Sheriff Court Districts (which equate to fiscal office area) by ethnic group, to allow us to consider the staff ethnicity information in the context of local population ethnic mix.

Race Crime

Crown Office policy on the prosecution of racist crime is a robust one and the execution of the policy is closely monitored by the Department. A member of legal staff decides what course of action to take in each case, this is then checked by the District Fiscal for compliance with the Departmental policy and a copy of the case is then sent to the Area Fiscal. Responsibility for the monitoring of compliance in such cases lies with the Area Fiscal. 3 monthly reports from the Areas are considered at the Legal and Policy Forum.

Table 1 - Racial charges and racial aggravations reported to Airdrie fiscal office, 2002-03 and 2003-04

The data extracted from the National Database revealed that in respect of the Airdrie office, in financial year (FY) 2002-03:

• 5 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
• 53 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
• 19 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were reported

And in FY 2003-04:

• No Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
• 64 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
• 35 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were reported

A total of 5 charges (5 case papers) were automatically requested for inspection. These consisted of:

• 2 charges recorded as requiring to be marked, one reported in FY 2002-03 and the other reported in FY 2003-04
• 2 charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings' (the coding system employed by the National Database does not allow for recording of reason for a marking of 'no proceedings' at charge level), reported in FY 2003-04
• 1 charge where the last marking recorded indicated that a time bar had been applied; hence no proceedings to be taken, reported in FY 2003-04

A sample of 24 Section 50A(1) charges and 8 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them was drawn, in addition to the 5 charges which were automatically selected. Resulting from the sampling exercise therefore, a total of 32 case papers were subsequently requested for inspection.

Note that the number of case papers requested is not the same as number of charges drawn for sampling because a case can (and frequently does) contain more than one charge. Since the sampling was conducted at charge level, in some instances, more than one charge from a single case was selected into the sample. This meant that the number of case papers requested was lower than the number of individual charges selected.

A further 7 case papers (each containing at least one charge of interest) that were reported in the statistical return to the Legal & Policy Forum meeting in January 2005 were also requested. An overall total of 39 case papers, therefore, were requested for inspection by the team on the day of the inspection visit.

In respect of the 5 charges that were automatically selected (detailed above), we found that:

Of the 2 charges recorded as requiring to be marked:

• The charge reported in FY 2003-04 was unmarked, and as such, still required to be marked
• Only a copy of the case in which the charge reported in FY 2002-03 was contained was available and as such there was insufficient information to form a view

Of the 2 charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings':

• In the case containing one of the charges, the accused received a substantial prison sentence for other serious offences, which in our view would have justified a decision to take no proceedings on the racial charge
• The case containing the other charge was not found by the office and was therefore not available for inspection

In respect of the charge where the last marking recorded indicated that a time bar had been applied and hence no proceedings were to be taken, we found that in fact the marking should have been recorded as no proceedings to be taken due to time delay by reporting agency (the Police).

Of the other 27 cases requested as part of the sampling exercise, 2 cases were not found by the office and were therefore not available for inspection.

The office indicated that the major fire in 2003 that largely destroyed the office, and hence a substantial amount of paperwork also, may account at least in part for the requested case papers that could not be found.

However, the office made an additional 3 cases (which had not been requested) available for inspection. We found that there was compliance with Departmental policy in respect of marking and court proceedings in these 3 cases.

In respect of the remaining 25 cases (30 charges) that we had requested, we found that the office complied with Departmental policy on marking and conduct of court proceedings in all cases.

The further 7 cases which were reported in the return to the LPF had already been checked by the Area Fiscal for compliance with Departmental policy and found to be compliant at marking stage. Upon inspection, we too found compliance with Departmental policy in respect of these cases.

Victim Information and Advice Division (VIA) was only rolled out to the Airdrie office in 2004 so in the relevant 12 cases 9 were correctly referred to VIA. In the remaining 3 cases it was not possible to tell if there had been an appropriate referral made.

Interpreters

When considering if the interpretation and translation needs of victims and witnesses were met, there were no such needs in 24 out of the 39 cases we audited. In the remaining 13 cases, attempts had been made to meet the interpretation and language needs of victims and witnesses in 10 cases, in 2 cases which were not prosecuted this was (appropriately) not addressed and in the remaining case it could not be ascertained from the information available.

We spoke to the member of staff most directly involved with the requesting of interpreters. We learned that interpreters are normally requested through the Area Office and that generally this works well although there can be some problems when the person at the Area Office who normally does this is on leave. When this happens the Office Manager at Airdrie steps into the breach in respect of Airdrie cases.

Otherwise there are no reported problems.

Deaths

During the course of the audit we looked at the one death case in the Airdrie office where the deceased and the next of kin were from a minority ethnic background, in order to check compliance with policy. We found an excellent example of how appropriately to deal with next of kin involving a member of legal staff and a seconded worker going out of their way to provide an excellent service to the family.

Employment

Latest data [1] shows that 99 per cent of the population in the Airdrie Sheriff Court District area is from a white background. Other ethnic groups, of which Pakistani is the largest at 0.4 per cent, make up the remaining one per cent.

As at 1st January 2005, Airdrie had a staff of 43, consisting of:

Legal staff

· 1 member of the Senior Civil Service

· 2 Principal Deputes

· 11 Procurator Fiscal Deputes

· 2 Trainee solicitors (who are super numery)

· 5 Precognition Officers

Administrative staff

· 1 Band D manager

· 1 Band C manager

· 1 Personal Assistant

· 19 Band B

Casual staff

· 2 Band B staff

Small numbers (less than 5) prevent disclosure of the exact number of staff who are from a minority ethnic background (as self-reported to Human Resources Division in COPFS via survey) in the Airdrie office. However, we concluded that minority ethnic representation in the office was in line with minority ethnic representation in the local population.

As at 19th January 2005, 95 per cent of staff in the Airdrie office had attended the Departmental Diversity Awareness Programme; of the 2 members of staff remaining one is on maternity leave.

3 members of staff have undertaken the University of Paisley course on Professional Practice on Race Equality for which both the Office and the staff concerned should be commended as this is an evening course with a substantial effort required in time and course work for the staff involved.

Two members of staff are on the Area resource team and one member of staff is a Departmental trainer for the Diversity Awareness Programme. Again the members of staff concerned are to be commended for their efforts in this area, which are likely to impinge into their free time.

Of particular benefit to the office seems to be the services on a part time basis of a member of staff seconded from the West of Scotland Racial Equality Council (WSREC). This staff member has already reviewed service delivery and made recommendations. This same member of staff was also involved as interpreter and bridge to the family in the deaths case already mentioned and has been involved in the newly established Lanarkshire Minority Ethnic Representative Committee and alerted Crown Office to difficulties in the wording of the oath as appropriate to Muslim witnesses.

Consultation

The Airdrie office appears to have good links into the community with evidence of this being provided in:

• Involvement in the Lanarkshire Minority Ethnic Representative Committee
• A shopkeepers seminar (and spin off sessions and a training DVD) which are planned
• One particular case where local difficulties between various interests in the community were explained and difference resolved by the Fiscal

Conclusions

The Airdrie office is to be commended for reaching a high standard of service both in meeting departmental policy on race issues and on outreach and links to the community. There has been demonstrated real commitment to Departmental objectives and policy and to the community at large.

There is a high level of compliance by legal staff in complying with Departmental policy on dealing appropriately with cases and in referrals to VIA for witnesses to receive additional information and support. Additionally the language needs of victims and witnesses appear to be well met.

[1] General Register Office for Scotland 2001 Census of Population