OFFICE INSPECTION - LERWICK

13-14 FEBRUARY 2007

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 the Procurator Fiscal's Office at Lerwick. The Lerwick office is part of the Highlands and Islands Area.

Methodology

Our approach to the office inspection 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.
• 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 2005-06 and 2006-07 [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' August 2006). Data relating to earlier years (2003-04 and 2004-05) that has been obtained previously is also used to supplement the risk-assessment part of our inspection process (see section below 'The Risk-Assessed Sample' for more details).

The General Sample

We are concerned with the statutory race charges as created by the Crime and Disorder Act 1988. A sample of Section 50 racial charges and charges with Section 96 racial aggravations recorded against them was 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 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).

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 to all such charges over a longer time period than that for the general sample (a minimum of 29 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 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 Lerwick Fiscal Office, 2005-06 and 2006-07[1]

The data extracted from the National Database revealed that in respect of the Lerwick office, in financial year (FY) 2005-06:

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

And in FY 2006-07 [1]:

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

Due to the very small numbers involved, all Section 50A charges reported in financial years 2005-06 and 2006-07 were requested (a total of 2 charges, 2 cases). Likewise, all charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, (a total of 3 charges, 2 cases) were requested. Hence, a total of 5 charges (4 cases) were requested for inspection.

We found compliance with marking policy in all cases. Likewise, in all appropriate cases, policy was followed during court proceedings.

The Risk-Assessed Sample

A total of 4 charges (3 cases) were automatically requested for inspection. These consisted of:

• 2 Section 50 A charges recorded as being marked to receive a warning letter, reported in FY 2003-04

• One Section 50 A charge recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2005-06

• One charge with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it, marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2005-06

The office was unable to find the case containing the charges recorded as being marked to receive a warning letter.

In respect of the Section 50A charge recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', we found that:

• The decision to take no proceedings was correct.

In respect of the charge with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it, marked for 'no proceedings', we found that:

• The decision to take no proceedings was correct.

Monitoring of Race Crime

The District Fiscal at Inverness is responsible for monitoring race crime cases dealt with in Lerwick along with all other offices in the Highlands and Islands Area. Parts A and B of the racial incident monitoring forms are completed by the marking depute in Lerwick and forwarded to Inverness along with a copy of the standard police report which allows a check to determine whether Crown Office policy on race crime has been complied with.

The District Fiscal at Kirkwall [4], who has responsibility for Lerwick, audits marking by checking marking instructions on the computerised system (FOS).

In addition to this the Inverness District Fiscal receives information from the police on all race cases and interrogates the computerised system to check what happened to the cases. This ensures that all relevant cases are checked and monitored.

The Area Business Manager at Inverness is responsible for collating and forwarding race crime figures to the Legal and Policy Forum. Feedback is provided to the District Fiscal [5] at Lerwick on the office's performance in relation to race crime policy.

Interpreters

The Office Manager is responsible for ordering interpreters based on instructions either given verbally or written on case papers by the marking depute.

No interpreters have been ordered in the past twelve months and there have been no problems with the use of interpreters in the past.

Deaths

There were no deaths reported in Lerwick within the past twelve months where racial and cultural considerations were a feature.

Complaints Against The Police

The Procurator Fiscal deals with complaints against Police Officers of a criminal nature and we seek to monitor those with a minority ethnic dimension.

In the relevant period no such complaints were reported.

Employment

Latest data [6] shows that almost 99 per cent of the population in the Lerwick Sheriff Court District area is from a white background. Other ethnic groups, of which a mixed background is the largest at 0.3 per cent, account for the remaining 1 per cent.

As at 1 January 2006, Lerwick had a staff of 2, consisting of:

Legal staff

• 1 Procurator Fiscal Depute (Band E)

Administrative staff

• 1 Band B staff

There are no members of staff who are from a minority ethnic background (as self-reported to Human Resources Division in COPFS via survey) in the Lerwick office.

Given the very low representation of minority ethnic persons living in the area we concluded that it is not untoward that no members of staff are from a minority ethnic background.

There have been no recent vacancies in the Lerwick office, however, adverts would be placed in the local press and job centre if there were any.

Diversity Awareness

Both members of staff have attended the Departmental Diversity Awareness Programme.

Disability and Gender

The Disability Discrimination Act 2005, which came into force in December 2006, requires the public sector to promote equality for disabled people.

The office is located on the ground floor of the building. There is a ramp allowing access to the office but not the court. Alternative arrangements are made for disabled persons to give their evidence elsewhere. There is a hearing loop installed in the reception area of the office, which allows communication with persons with hearing difficulties.

The Gender Equality Act 2006 comes into force in April 2007 and will require public authorities to demonstrate that they treat men and women fairly.

Issues relating to equality are discussed at quarterly District Fiscal meetings.

Consultation

Given the geographical location of the Lerwick office and the very small number of staff, none of them are members of the Area Diversity Team.

The office is represented on the local Racist Incidents Panel, which meets in Shetland twice a year and is attended by the Police, Health Board, Social Work Department, Shetland College and Adult Learning staff. It is felt that this is being part of this group allows the office to remain aware of the issues and needs of the multicultural community. The office also speaks to school students on the role of the Procurator Fiscal.

Conclusions

Although the overall number of cases was small overall compliance with departmental policy on the prosecution of race crime was very high both at the initial decision making stage and during court proceedings.

All staff had attended the departmental diversity programme.

[1] At time of extraction data was only available for the first five months of FY 2006/07 ie April to August 2006

[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] The District Fiscal tries to visit the Lerwick office 4 times per annum. She speaks daily to staff at the Lerwick office by telephone and has monthly team meetings by telephone

[5] The District Fiscal is based at Kirkwall

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