Scottish parliament backs scrapping 'not proven' verdict and other justice reforms

Members of the Scottish Parliament have approved wide-ranging justice reforms that include abolition of the distinctive "not proven" verdict, a higher threshold for guilty jury verdicts and measures to create a specialist sexual offences court.

The Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform Bill, steered through parliament by Justice Secretary Angela Constance, removes the third verdict that has been a feature of Scots law since the 17th century. Under existing practice, juries can return guilty, not guilty or not proven; the latter has the legal effect of an acquittal but has long been criticised as confusing and distressing for victims and accused people alike.

Constance described not proven as a "widely misunderstood" verdict that "traumatises" victims and leaves a "lingering stigma on the accused." Supporters of abolition say removing it will provide clearer outcomes and help victims find closure. Critics, including the Law Society of Scotland, warned the change could increase the risk of wrongful convictions, citing research that suggested jurors in finely balanced cases might be more inclined to convict if the third option were removed.

The bill also changes how guilty verdicts are reached in Scotland's 15-member juries. The current simple majority requirement of eight jurors will be replaced by a two-thirds threshold, meaning at least 10 of the 15 jurors must agree on guilt. Ministers said raising the threshold is intended to address concerns from defence lawyers that abolition of the not proven verdict could tip close cases toward conviction.

Other measures in the legislation include provisions to create a specialist sexual offences court with "trauma-informed" training for judges and court staff, the establishment of a victims and witnesses commissioner answerable to parliament, and a requirement that the parole board consider whether a murderer has refused to disclose the location of a victim's remains when assessing release. The bill also extends restrictions on what can be said in court about a complainer's sexual history and makes permanent a trial scheme giving victims of rape and serious sexual assault free access to court transcripts.

Ministers have not set a timetable for when the not proven verdict will be officially removed or when the two-thirds majority rule will be introduced. Both changes will require training for judges and court personnel, and officials cautioned that setting up a specialist sexual offences court and the independent victims commissioner could take considerably longer.

A pilot scheme that would have allowed some serious sexual offence trials to be decided by a single judge without a jury was dropped from the bill after opposition from lawyers and members of the judiciary.

Statistics published by the Scottish government for 2022/23 show 1% of people facing criminal charges in court were acquitted with a not proven verdict, compared with 4% acquitted as not guilty. A 2019 academic study cited during debate warned that abolishing not proven could alter juror behaviour in close cases, while campaigners and victims' groups have repeatedly called for its removal following high-profile cases that left families feeling aggrieved.

Victim Support Scotland chief executive Kate Wallace described passage of the bill as a "momentous occasion," saying it marked a significant step toward creating a justice system that prioritises the needs of people affected by crime. The Law Society and other defence organisations continue to call for safeguards and careful implementation to avoid unintended consequences.

Parliamentarians and ministers said further work will be required to prepare courts and staff for the changes, including detailed guidance for juries, and stressed that the legislation represents the start of a period of reform rather than the immediate implementation of every measure. The bill's passage marks one of the most significant overhauls of Scotland's criminal justice rules in decades and is likely to prompt further legal and public debate as the reforms are rolled out.