OFFENDERS sentenced to up to four years in prison should be allowed a "clean slate" under proposed reforms to Scotland's rehabilitation laws.
Respondents to the Scottish Government's consultation favoured raising the threshold where criminals are considered capable of rehabilitation from 30 months currently to 48 months, bringing Scotland into line with changes planned for England and Wales.
It means anyone handed custodial sentences of up to four years would have their convictions expunged at a certain point after completing their sentence, as long as they did not reoffend. Recent cases which saw offenders jailed for four years include Andrew Duffy, who was convicted of causing death by dangerous driving after he struck and killed a pensioner in Greenock.
Susan Hamilton, from Edinburgh, was imprisoned for four years for poisoning her eight- year-old daughter with salt, causing brain damage, as was ex-policeman Khalid Anwar, who was convicted of rape and breach of the police over an attack on a woman he met on a dating site.
Other respondents to the consultation favoured axing a cut-off altogether and making all crimes capable of rehabilitation.
Most also backed prosecuting employers suspected of discriminating against job applicants on the grounds of spent convictions.
The Scottish Government launched its consultation on the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act in August last year. It received feedback from eight individuals and 33 organisations, including public sector bodies, children's charities, and prisoners' groups.
An analysis of the responses found that most stakeholders feel the act "places too much emphasis on public safety and too little emphasis on rehabilitation".
The report states: "Several commented that, as sentence lengths have increased in the years since the 1974 Act was introduced, the length of sentence beyond which an offender will never become rehabilitated under the 1974 Act should also increase.
"More specifically, some felt 48 months should be the cut-off point whereas others felt all convictions should be included within the scope of the Act."
It added: "There was a general feeling, especially from offenders' organisations and individuals, that rehabilitation periods should be shorter to allow ex-offenders to access employment more easily."
At present convictions carrying a sentence of six months or less take seven years to lapse, while offenders imprisoned for more than six months but less than 30 are required to declare previous convictions for 10 years after completing their sentence. These periods are halved for offenders aged under 18 when convicted.
A hardline should also be taken against employers who flout the rules, said respondents.
"Most of those who replied said employers should be prevented from using spent convictions against an employee and many said it should be a criminal offence if an employer does not comply," stated the report, putting discrimination against ex-offenders on a footing with bias against disabled applicants or women of childbearing age.
But there was a feeling among many that certain crimes - sexual offences, homicide and other violent crimes - should "never be rehabilitated".
A spokesman for Victim Support Scotland said: "It is crucial that victims, children and vulnerable adults are protected from harm as far as is practicable while ensuring that as much as possible is done to help offenders move away from their previous criminal activity."
A spokeswoman for the Scottish Government said: "We are still considering the findings of these reports and will provide a full response in the summer that will allow us to develop a response which strikes the right balance between supporting the rehabilitation of offenders and protecting the public."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article