THE removal of corroboration means dock identification in criminal trials could lead to miscarriages of justice, the head of the Law Society of Scotland has warned.
Bruce Beveridge, president of the Law Society of Scotland, has warned the full consequences of removing corroboration on other aspects of the justice system have not been sufficiently examined.
Mr Beveridge said: "We fear there has not been enough consideration of the potential knock-on effects - such as the use of dock identification in criminal trials. Routine reliance on dock identification of an accused person, sometimes years after an alleged offence, is a distinctive feature of the Scottish criminal justice system.
"The requirement for corroboration has been used to justify the procedure but, without it, continued reliance on dock identification of an accused by a single witness runs the risk of mistaken identification leading to a miscarriage of justice."
His concerns follow those of many of Scotland's most high-profile judges and lawyers. Earlier this week former Lords President Lord Hamilton and Lord Cullen warned against removing corroboration.
Lord Cullen said it could be a "safeguard against wrongful conviction".
Scottish ministers and the Lord Advocate want to end the requirement. Proposals to drop it are among a series of reforms contained in the Scottish Government's Criminal Justice Bill.
Ministers believe more rape, sexual offence and domestic abuse cases would be heard if the current need for two different and independent sources of evidence was removed.
A Government spokesman said: "We are focused upon moving to a system based upon the overall quality of evidence available."
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