OFFICE INSPECTION - GLASGOW 'A' DIVISION
November 2006
Background
In accordance with our Business Plan, 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 'A' Division of the Procurator Fiscal's office in Glasgow. The Glasgow office is divided into four Divisions, A, C, E and G, which correspond to the Police divisions covering the city. We have previously inspected `G`Division.
Methodology
Our approach to office inspections involves 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.
- Complaints against the police which are of a criminal nature
The following measures are taken to inform the inspection process.
Sampling of Race Charges
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (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 is 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 2004-05 and 2005-06 [1]. 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 is a 'snapshot' as at date of extraction (current extract relates to 'as at' December 2005).
The General Sample
We are concerned with the statutory race charges, as created by the Crime and Disorder Act 1988. A sample of Section 50A racial charges and charges with Section 96 racial aggravations recorded against them is drawn from the most recent 12 months' worth of data contained in the extract and the related case papers were requested from the office and examined by the team. Those charges are those that appear, 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 are 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).
The Risk-Assessed Sample
Our inspection process is partly based on risk assessment. Therefore, in addition to the general sample referred to above, all case papers containing any charges which appear, as recorded on the database, to have been dealt with in contravention of the guidelines, are specifically requested for examination. Given the potential importance of such cases and since these charges are of particular interest to us, we request the relevant case papers in relation all such charges over a longer time period than that for the general sample (a minimum of 21 months as compared to 12 months).
The contraventions of policy that can be identified from examination of the data extract are charges in respect of which a fiscal fine or warning letter have been issued, or proceedings taken in the District Court. (Note however that revised guidance from Crown Office was issued to staff on 23 June 2004, which thereafter made it possible to issue a warning letter in exceptional circumstances, with the agreement of the Area Fiscal).
Case papers are also requested which contain any charges that are recorded on the database as being unmarked (ie no decision yet taken as to how to proceed), or any charges where no proceedings have been taken (given the policy to always proceed where there is sufficient evidence). Case papers are also requested which contained any charges marked for 'merge' (this is where the marking Depute has decided to amalgamate one or more charges reported by the police, usually for sound legal reasons). Any other charges that appear to have been marked and/or dealt with in an unusual or unexpected manner (eg charges/cases which have been deserted) are also requested for inspection.
Case papers are also requested to be made available for inspection, regarding any deaths which were reported and investigated over the previous 12 month period where:
- special consideration was required, as defined in Annex 3 in Chapter 12 of the Book of Regulations [2] (racial and cultural awareness)
- the ethnicity of the deceased was in some way related to the cause of death (eg 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) is sent to the office in advance of the inspection and returns are analysed to allow exploration of any issues raised in the returns, at the time of the inspection.
The composition of staff in post (numbers, grades and ethnicity) in the office is considered prior to the inspection visit. Similarly considered is the proportion of staff who have 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 race 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 or other supervisor 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. Three-monthly reports from the Areas are considered at the Legal and Policy Forum [3].
Table 1 - Racial Charges and Racial Aggravations reported to Glasgow A Division in financial year (FY) 2004/05 and 2005/06 [1]
| 2004/05 | 2005/6 [1] |
Section 50A(1) (a) charges | 16 | 2 |
Section 50A(1) (b) charges | 178 | 154 |
Section 96 aggravations | 141 | 97 |
The data extracted from the National Database revealed that in respect of the Glasgow office, in FY year 2004/05:
16 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
178 Section 50A(1) (b) charge was reported
141 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were reported.
And in 2005/06 [1]:
2 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
154 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
97 charges with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it was reported.
In relation to the following discussion of the sampling that is carried out, please 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 is conducted at charge level, in some instances, more than one charge from a single case is selected into the sample. This meant that the number of case papers requested is lower than the number of individual charges selected.
The General Sample
A sample of 58 Section 50A charges (58 cases) and 31 charges (30 cases) with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them was drawn. Resulting from the general sample, therefore, a total of 79 case papers (89 charges) were subsequently requested for inspection. Ten of these 79 cases contained both Section 50A charges and charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them.
In respect of the 58 Section 50A charges (58 cases), the office was unable to find 20 cases (containing 20 charges). In respect of the remaining 38 Section 50A charges (38 cases), we found that Crown Office policy in respect of marking had been complied with in all cases as had conduct during court proceedings (in all relevant cases).
In respect of the 31 charges (30 cases) with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, the office was unable to find 11 cases containing 12 charges (while the total number of cases not found in relation to the Section 96 sample was 11, 2 of these cases have already been recorded as missing in relation to the Section 50A charge sample, as these 2 cases contained both a Section 50A and Section 96 charge. Hence the additional number of cases that could not be found for the Section 96 sample was 9.)
In respect of the remaining 19 charges (19 cases) we found that Crown Office policy in respect of marking had been complied with in all but one case where a Section 96 aggravation had been added on to a breach of the peace charge inappropriately. Crown Office policy in respect of conduct during court proceedings was complied with in all relevant cases.
Additional General Sample
Due to the fact that such a high proportion of cases requested could not be found, a second sample of charges was duly selected and requested. For the second exercise, a sample of 47 Section 50A charges (45 cases) and 38 charges (37 cases) with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them was drawn. Resulting from the second sample, therefore, a total of 74 case papers (85 charges) were subsequently requested for inspection. Eleven of these 74 cases contained both Section 50A charges and charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them.
The size of the second sample included an adjustment for 'non-response' based on the proportion of charges which could not be found from the first sample.
In respect of the 47 Section 50A charges (45 cases), the office was unable to find 14 cases (containing 15 charges). Hence in respect of the remaining 32 charges (31 cases) we found that Crown Office policy in relation to marking was complied with in respect of all charges. Crown Office policy in respect of conduct during court proceedings was complied with in all relevant cases but in one case there was a technical breach of policy. The plea however was reasonable in the circumstances.
In respect of the 38 charges (37 cases) with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, the office was unable to find 10 cases (containing 11 charges). (While the total number of cases not found in relation to the Section 96 sample was 10, 2 of these cases have already been recorded as missing in relation to the second Section 50A charge sample, as these 2 cases contained both a Section 50A and Section 96 charge. Hence the additional number of cases that could not be found for the Section 96 sample was 8.)
In respect of the remaining 27 charges (27 cases), Crown Office policy in relation to marking was complied with in all cases, although there were 3 cases where a Section 50A charge could arguably have been pursued instead of the Section 96 aggravation. We found that Crown Office policy in respect of conduct during court proceedings was complied with in all but one case where there may have been a technical breach of policy but again the plea was reasonable in the circumstances. In another case, it was difficult to ascertain conclusively if policy was complied with due to absence of minutes relating to the latest two court dates but policy had been complied with up until then.
The Risk-Assessed Cases Request
A total of 44 charges (37 cases) were selected for inspection. 15 of these 37 cases also contained charges that were selected as part of the general sample. The 44 charges selected consisted of:
The office was unable to find 17 cases (19 charges).
In respect of the 8 Section 50A charges recorded as being marked to receive a warning letter:
In respect of the 11 Section 50A charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', we found that:
In respect therefore, of the remaining 8 charges, we found that:
Of the 13 Section 50A charges recorded as being marked to be merged:
- The office was unable to find 3 cases (containing 3 charges).
- Of the remaining 10 charges we found that:
- The decision to merge charges in all cases was correct.
Of the 2 Section 50A charges recorded as being marked 'deferred':
Of the 7 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings':
- The office was unable to find 2 cases (containing 2 charges).
Of the remaining 5 charges we found that:
- In one case, Crown Office marking policy was not complied with. A breach of the peace charge with a Section 96 aggravation was taken up for one accused but not the other - not only was the Section 96 not taken up for the second accused, but it should in fact have been a Section 50A charge which was proceeded with, as reported by the police
- In 3 cases, a Section 96 aggravation had been incorrectly added by the police and was correctly taken out
- In the remaining case, one breach of the peace charge with a Section 96 aggravation was taken up while another was correctly marked for no proceedings (only one charge needed).
Of the 3 charges (2 cases) with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, recorded as being marked to be merged, we found that:
- The decision to merge charges was correct in both cases
Monitoring of Race Crime
In 'A' Division, Glasgow, once a case has been marked in initial case processing, legal members of staff are required to complete form A of the racist crime monitoring forms. The completed form along with a copy of the standard police report is then passed to the Division PF to check and sign off. Forms are then passed to an allocated depute who is responsible for compiling the division's return and forwarding them to the Divisional PF, 'G' Division who collates the figures for all four divisions in the Glasgow Area and forwards them on to the Legal and Policy Forum.
In instances of non-compliance, the Divisional PF will contact the Divisional Police Commander if the issue relates to the police (eg failure to include or complete a racial incident monitoring form) or will speak to the deputes concerned if non compliance with case marking. If there are any training issues apparent, the Divisional PF will disseminate these to all initial case marking deputes by either e-mail or at team or divisional meetings.
The Division's performance in relation to compliance with case marking policy is fed back to them at area meetings.
It was noted, as with many offices, that form B of the monitoring form is not always completed and that the office could not be sure that all race crime cases are passed on for monitoring. The Divisional PF advised that he hoped to introduce a method a ensuring all race cases are monitored based on the Hamilton model (see Hamilton report), however, this has not happened yet and there is no other management information available from the system that allows such a check.
Interpreters
14 of the cases that were inspected required interpreting services and these requirements were met.
Legal members of staff note requirements for interpreters on case papers and the member of admin staff dealing with the case will notify the Court Liaison Officer in 'C' Division of the requirement. This officer then makes the appropriate arrangements. The ordering of interpreters is a centralised function with one member of staff ordering interpreters for all four divisions in the area.
Figures relating to interpreters ordered are not available at divisional level. We were advised that during calendar year 2005, a total of 587 interpreters were ordered for all four divisions. Figures are not available for the number of times documents were translated during the same period.
Interpreters usually do complete Section 2 of the 'Interpreters monitoring form' and no problems were reported with the use of interpreters.
Deaths
The Deaths Unit in Glasgow is also a centralised function and covers all four Divisions. None of the deaths are categorised into Division and no classification exists to quantify or identify deaths where religious or cultural considerations were a factor.
Around 2500 deaths are reported to the Glasgow office each year and given that it is not possible to extract files without names or a reference number and no time was available to physically look through all the files to identify those within our remit we were unable to review any deaths.
We were advised that Glasgow has significant Jewish and Muslim communities and as a result the processing of reported deaths in a manner consistent with religious requirements is routine in Glasgow. The wishes of the family are considered in all deaths, including where there are race considerations.
Complaints Against The Police
The Procurator Fiscal investigates complaints against the police, which allege criminal conduct. Two such cases were examined originating in the A Division area both involving the same ethnic minority complainer. The complainer withdrew both complaints and proper procedures were followed.
Employment
Latest data [4] shows that just over 95 per cent of the population in the Glasgow Sheriff Court District area is from a white background. Other ethnic groups, of which Pakistani is the largest at 2.3 per cent, account for almost 5 per cent.
As at 1 October 2006, Glasgow A Division had a staff of 74, consisting of:
Legal staff
Administrative staff
8 Precognition Officers
1 Band E staff
1 Band D staff
2 Band C staff
1 Personal Assistant
27 Band B staff
Casual staff
There are 13 members of staff from a minority ethnic background (as self-reported to Human Resources Division in COPFS via survey) in the Glasgow office as a whole (i.e. in all 4 divisions). Small numbers (less than 5) prevent disclosure of the exact number of staff who are from a minority ethnic background in 'A' Division. However, we concluded that minority ethnic representation in 'A' Division was in line with minority ethnic representation in the local population.
Band B vacancies are advertised in the local press.
Diversity Awareness
As at 1 October 2005, over 97 per cent of permanent staff in Glasgow A Division had attended the Departmental Diversity Awareness Programme.
Consultation
The Divisional PF attends Glasgow Area Diversity meetings when he can. A Depute from the division used to be a member of the Area Diversity Team but is no longer, however, it is hoped that another member of staff from 'A' Division will join.
Matters relating to diversity are discussed at Area meetings and feedback from attendance at events such as festivals etc, is given at these meetings particularly from one of the other Divisional PFs who is very involved in diversity issues.
The Divisional PF attends MARIM [5] group meetings for the West End and is heavily involved with the Sub Divisional Commander at Anderston in trying to set up a MARIM group that formally operated in that area.
There have also been discussions about setting up a MARIM group for Central Glasgow (ie city centre) where most of 'A' Division's racist crimes occur. In connection with this the Divisional PF has been in contact with the Divisional Commander, Glasgow City Council and the Business Community Forum to identify whether it would be feasible to highlight race crime issues throughout the city centre eg placing posters etc on shop windows etc as many of the people involved in these crimes may not be residents as there are a lot of visitors to the city.
The Divisional PF also advised that a current theme with members of the MARIM groups throughout the Glasgow area is whether structure of the groups should be changed, for example, should there be a principal MARIM group.
Conclusion
Overall compliance with the prosecution of race offences was very high although we did experience difficulty with the office locating the cases requested. This was due to difficulties with retrieval of cases from a centralised (off site) storage system. Ultimately a statistically relevant sample was obtained and the cases we took issue with were very much in the minority.
Attendance by staff at the Departmental Diversity Awareness Programme was high and outreach activities in the Glasgow office generally are among the most proactive in the country with A Division contributing to the overall programme.
[1] At time of extraction data was only available for the first nine months of FY 2005/06 ie April to December 2005
[2] The Book of Regulations provides guidance and instruction to members of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service on the way Procurators Fiscal should be carry out their duties.
[3] The remit of the Legal and Policy Forum is: To take the lead in the development of prosecution policy and consider legal and operational issues within the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. The Forum also acts as sounding board for wider management issues and a means for all Area Fiscals to have an input into the overall management of the COPFS
[4] General Register Office for Scotland 2001 Census of Population
[5] Multi Agency Racial Incident Monitoring