Executive Summary
1. (para 1.4) The remit of the Feasibility Study Group was:
"To consider the feasibility of establishing a cost-effective and sustainable Domestic Abuse court for the whole of Glasgow; to identify alternative options for its remit, structure and method of operation, and assess the advantages, disadvantages and likely costs of each; and to report to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice by January 2008."
2. (para 2.3) Our belief is that a strong case can be made for continuing and expanding the initiative of the domestic abuse pilot, and that focussed investment is justified by the particular needs and opportunities which arise in domestic abuse cases.
3. (para 4.3) Having considered a wide range of court process options, the Group believes that the choice for Glasgow effectively lies between two alternatives, which are:
Option I: Operate 2 specialist domestic abuse courts in a fashion similar to the pilot model, one to cover G and A Divisions, and one to cover B Division.
(para 4.7) This option would effectively replicate the pilot model, although on a larger scale and with economies of scale built in. Each court would have approximately 50% more business than the pilot court has had, with each covering about half the caseload for the city. The methods would be expected to be similar to those experienced during the pilot.
(para 4.8 - 4.11) This option is only feasible if an additional courtroom can be found for the purpose. It is possible that over the next 2-3 years a courtroom could become available in Glasgow Sheriff Court, as a consequence either of unification or of the wider summary justice reforms. However, the advice from the Scottish Courts Service is that at this stage, it would be premature to assume that a courtroom will become available in this way. In the short term, therefore, this option could only be pursued by securing an additional courtroom in Glasgow on a commercial basis, to take some of the work of the Sheriff Court.
Option II: Operate 1 specialist domestic abuse court in a fashion similar to the pilot model, to cover G and A Divisions; in B Division, apply enhanced victim support arrangements and deploy specialist staff, facilitated as far as possible by clustering trials in mainstream courts.
(para 4.22) The details of this option cannot be specified in advance but would need to be developed during the initial months of implementation. However, the assumption is that there could be no increase in the court time devoted to domestic abuse cases in B Division. Instead, the benefits would be secured through investment in support services on the ASSIST model, and the deployment of specialist sheriffs and procurators fiscal. We recommend that it should also be accompanied by additional procurator fiscal staffing, so that there could be more time given to preparation of cases and to liaison with ASSIST and the police on safety planning.
4. Option I would incur additional recurrent costs of £1.1m per annum, or Option II £600k per annum, above the current pilot costs of £600k per annum. In addition, Option I would require one-off investment of £1.3m to secure an additional courtroom, unless a courtroom became available as a result of Summary Justice Reform. (Annex, Table 2)
5. (para 4.4) The Group has also carefully considered whether it is possible to devise a further alternative, which applies a consistent approach across all areas of Glasgow and which is feasible within currently available accommodation. We have, however, concluded that any such approach would suffer from fatal drawbacks. This report describes and assesses a third option but we recommend that it should not be pursued:
Option III: Operate 1 specialist domestic abuse courtroom, in which all appearances from custody and intermediate diets would take place, together with sentencing for those offenders who plead guilty; cluster the trials in mainstream courts if possible in order to facilitate enhanced victim support arrangements.
6. (para 4.5) The Feasibility Study Group prefers Option I. However, we are conscious that this is the most expensive option, both in terms of running costs and especially in terms of the requirements for physical space, and we recognise that there will be competition for the use of such resources.
7. (para 5.13) For any of the options, the Group considers that the level of service provision to victims by ASSIST meets the needs of the court pilot in Glasgow and the victims going through the domestic abuse court process. We recommend that a separate and bespoke agency ( ASSIST model) should continue to be used, and that work is continued to ensure effective and transparent protocols with relevant partners.