Scotland to abolish centuries-old not proven verdict as justice reforms pass in Holyrood

Scotland’s centuries-old not proven verdict is to be abolished after MSPs backed the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill by 71 votes to 46. In one of the most radical overhauls of the justice system since devolution, the measure will replace the not proven verdict with a binary guilty-or-not-guilty finding and require a two-thirds jury majority to convict, rather than a simple majority. The bill now moves toward royal assent and will become law, marking a major shift in how criminal trials are decided in Scotland.

Supporters described the vote as a milestone for victims and survivors. Campaigner Stewart Handling, whose 13-year-old daughter Grace died after taking ecstasy and who saw the man who supplied the pills acquitted under a not proven verdict, said: “I’m doing this for my daughter Grace. I’m delighted that the Bill has passed and that the not proven verdict has been abolished. It won’t change my situation, but to know that other families will not have to face this in the future brings me great comfort.” Amanda Duffy, whose killer Francis Auld walked free after a not proven verdict and later faced civil action, told supporters that the reform would help avoid similar outcomes. Jo Duffy, Amanda’s father, said: “It was a middle ground that shouldn’t be there – you’re either guilty or not guilty. You deserve that, one or the other.” Kate Wallace, chief executive of Victim Support Scotland, welcomed the change as a step toward a system that more fully considers the needs of victims and families.

The scale of the reform also drew emphasis on victims’ experiences, with Hannah Stakes—whose campaign to end the not proven verdict followed a sexual assault case—saying the abolition would bring “clear resolution” to trials and provide closure for survivors and families who had previously waited for conviction. Stakeholders argued the current verdict sometimes left victims with lingering uncertainty and a sense that justice was not fully served, particularly in sexual offense trials where the not proven verdict has been used.

Critics and legal experts warned that the changes could carry unintended consequences. The Law Society of Scotland expressed concern that the system’s balance could be disrupted by moving to a two-thirds majority, noting that even small changes can have wide effects on fairness and the risk of wrongful conviction. Stuart Munro, convenor of the Law Society’s criminal law committee, said: “Our criminal justice system is finely balanced, and even small changes can have unintended negative consequences. The proposals in the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform Bill will have a profound impact, but it remains essential that we retain the integrity of the system as a whole, with the necessary safeguards to reduce the risk of wrongful conviction.” He added that the society remained unconvinced a two-thirds threshold could achieve that balance.

The bill was approved by 71 MSPs from the SNP, Greens, Liberal Democrats and Alba, plus one independent, and opposed by 46 MSPs from Labour and the Conservatives, along with another independent. Justice spokesman Liam Kerr of the Scottish Conservatives warned that dismantling a system that had worked for more than two centuries required a strong evidentiary basis, arguing that the changes could reduce conviction rates and potentially worsen outcomes for victims if not properly implemented. Justice Minister Angela Constance defended the reform, saying the legislation centers victims and witnesses and would help ensure they are heard, protected and treated with compassion while safeguarding the rights of the accused.

Beyond the binary verdict change, the bill includes measures aimed at strengthening victims’ rights and the administration of justice. It would create a dedicated sexual offences court, establish a Victims and Witnesses Commissioner for Scotland, and begin the process toward Suzanne’s Law, which would require the Parole Board to consider whether a killer has disclosed the location of a victim’s remains when deciding on release.

The package, however, faced opposition from some quarters who argued that other reforms were either overly ambitious or poorly executed. Critics pointed to the removal of several measures that had been proposed at earlier stages of the bill — including a pilot of juryless rape trials that prompted legal resistance and the abandonment of plans to shrink the jury from 15 to 12 members. Critics argued the shift would leave victims less protected and could invite new challenges for juries and prosecutors.

Supporters say the reforms reflect a modern approach to justice, prioritizing victims’ needs while expanding accountability and transparency in the system. Angela Constance highlighted the bill’s emphasis on listening to victims, witnesses and their families and said the measures represent a compassionate path forward for a modern, fair justice system. Still, observers acknowledge it remains to be seen how the changes will interact with Scotland’s broader criminal justice landscape, including potential impacts on conviction rates and how juries weigh complex cases going forward.

In sum, the legislation marks a watershed moment for Scotland’s law and order framework. With the not proven verdict consigned to history, supporters say the justice system will be clearer and more predictable for defendants and victims alike. Opponents warn that speed and certainty must not come at the expense of fairness, and call for ongoing monitoring and safeguards to minimize risk of wrongful convictions. As the bill becomes law, the country will watch closely how the changes unfold in courts, in jury deliberations, and in the lives of those most affected by crime.