Scotland’s justice system stands on the brink of historic transformation as the Scottish Parliament prepares for a decisive vote on the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. The legislation, set for its final debate and vote on September 16, 2025, aims to abolish the centuries-old “not proven” verdict, overhaul jury requirements, and introduce sweeping measures to support victims and witnesses, especially in cases of sexual offences.
The bill, described by Justice Secretary Angela Constance as a “landmark” reform, has ignited passionate debate across the political spectrum. More than 160 amendments have been tabled for consideration in a marathon parliamentary session that could extend into the early hours of September 17. Although the Scottish National Party (SNP) lacks a majority, the bill is widely expected to pass with support from some opposition Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs), according to reporting from BBC and Sky News.
At the heart of the reform is the proposal to scrap the not proven verdict—a uniquely Scottish legal option that has existed since the 17th century. In Scots law, juries have long been able to return one of three verdicts: guilty, not guilty, or not proven. While both not guilty and not proven result in acquittal, critics argue that the latter can leave a lingering stigma for the accused and fail to provide closure for victims.
Justice Secretary Constance summed up the government’s position, stating, “This landmark bill, if passed by parliament, will transform the experiences of victims and witnesses within Scotland’s justice system. Victims will be heard, supported, protected and treated with compassion, while the rights of the accused will continue to be safeguarded.” She added that abolishing the not proven verdict will ensure a “clearer, fairer and more transparent decision-making process.” (Sky News)
The move to eliminate the not proven verdict follows years of campaigning by victims’ groups and legal reformers. According to a 2019 study cited by the BBC, removing this verdict might incline more jurors toward guilty verdicts in closely balanced trials, highlighting its potential impact on justice outcomes. However, the study also found inconsistent views among jurors about what not proven actually means, underscoring its controversial and confusing nature.
Under the new bill, the jury system itself is set for reform. While initial government proposals suggested reducing jury size from 15 to 12, this idea was dropped after consultation. Instead, the current 15-member jury will remain, but the threshold for a guilty verdict will be raised from a simple majority (eight out of 15) to a two-thirds majority. This change aims to address concerns from defence lawyers, who worry that abolishing not proven could make convictions easier, while prosecutors fear that a higher threshold could make securing convictions more difficult (BBC).
Another headline provision is the creation of a specialist sexual offences court, designed to streamline cases and reduce traumatic delays for victims. The bill also calls for a new victims and witnesses commissioner, who will be charged with ensuring high standards of care and support for those navigating the justice system. Trauma-informed training for judges and legal staff is also included, aiming to improve the treatment of victims, particularly in sensitive cases.
Additional measures in the bill are wide-ranging. They include an automatic lifelong right to anonymity for victims of sexual offences and some other crimes; automatic independent legal representation for complainants when their sexual history or character is raised in court; and easier access for vulnerable witnesses to give evidence remotely or from behind screens. The Victim Notification Scheme, which informs victims about the release of offenders from prison, is set to become more trauma-informed and person-centred.
The bill also addresses the parole process in so-called “no body, no release” cases. Currently, the parole board may consider whether a convicted killer has refused to reveal the location of their victim’s body when deciding on release. The proposed legislation, known as Suzanne’s Law—named after Suzanne Pilley, whose body was never found after her 2010 murder—would require the parole board to take such refusals into account, though some campaigners and opposition MSPs are pushing for even tougher measures to ensure killers cannot be released without cooperating (Sky News).
Opposition parties have played a significant role in shaping the bill, with a flurry of amendments aimed at strengthening victims’ rights. These include proposals to ensure victims are notified of plea deals, given the right to make statements in court, and informed if prosecutors decide not to pursue a case. The Scottish Conservatives have also called for a Scotland-specific inquiry into grooming gangs and for the parole board to be compelled, not just encouraged, to deny release to killers who withhold information about victims’ remains.
Scottish Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and the Greens have each contributed amendments focused on improving the experience of victims and witnesses, particularly women and those involved in domestic abuse cases. Justice Secretary Constance has signaled support for several opposition proposals, including the creation of a victims’ charter and expanding the right for victims of serious sexual assault to receive free court transcripts.
Despite broad agreement on some elements, the bill has not escaped criticism. Russell Findlay, leader of the Scottish Conservatives, argued, “Without changes, the bill will not meaningfully change the justice system. It’s a victims’ law in name only.” Conservative MSP Liam Kerr echoed this sentiment, saying, “Parliament has the chance to reboot Scotland’s justice system so that it finally gives crime victims the rights they need and deserve. But the SNP bill, as it currently stands, fails to deliver that, so we can’t vote for it. At the moment, it’s a victims’ bill in name only—a wasted opportunity.” (Sky News, BBC)
These debates come against the backdrop of sobering statistics about sexual offences in Scotland. In 2022-23, Police Scotland recorded 2,529 rapes and attempted rapes, but only 372 cases reached court, with a conviction rate of just 48%—far lower than the 80% conviction rate for all crimes (BBC). Last year, following a request from Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain, judges overturned an 87-year-old corroboration rule for sexual offence cases, allowing distress evidence from victims to be admitted in court. This change was intended to make it easier for cases to meet the legal threshold for prosecution, but the new bill could bring about an even more significant transformation.
As MSPs prepare for what promises to be a lengthy and contentious debate, the stakes are high. The outcome could reshape the Scottish justice system for generations, affecting how victims, witnesses, and the accused experience the courts. Whether the reforms will deliver on their promise to make justice clearer, fairer, and more compassionate remains to be seen—but one thing is certain: change is coming, and all of Scotland will be watching.
