LEGAL experts have warned that plans to try those accused of sexual offences in new specialist courts with “inferior sentencing powers” could “lead to the downgrading” of serious crimes.

The Faculty of Advocates has issued the alarm after a cross-justice review group led by Lady Dorrian recommended that a new, national specialist court be created to deal with serious sexual offences cases.

Speaking after setting out the recommendations in March, Lady Dorrian said the actions “will fundamentally change and improve the way sexual offences are prosecuted in Scotland”.

If plans are pushed forward, the new specialist court would include those involved in the proceedings informed on trauma, including support staff – with all parties undergoing accredited courses in dealing with vulnerable witnesses and the use of examination techniques.

The cases would be presided over by a combination of High Court judges and sheriffs.

But concerns have been raised about the specialist court having its sentencing powers limited to 10 years imprisonment, although the plans set out include a provision for the High Court to sentence higher than 10 years if required.

In evidence submitted to Holyrood’s Criminal Justice Committee, ahead of a round table discussion on priorities for domestic abuse, gendered violence and sexual offences this morning, the Faculty of Advocates has raised “the danger of a two-tier system” warning “one rape trial could be tried in the specialist court, but another prosecuted in the High Court”.

READ MORE: 'Legal challenge' on coronavirus delays to rape case trials

The submission adds: “It is difficult to see how this can be regarded as satisfactory for complainers and genuine victims of crime where the practical effect will be that similar crimes will be treated and graded differently.”

The Faculty of Advocates has stressed that the organisation does "not oppose the setting up of such a specialist court out of any special interest”.

But it warns: “We oppose the specific proposal of the setting up of specialist courts because we believe that this in effect would lead to the downgrading of such offences, and this must be so if they are to be prosecuted other than in the High Court.

“If such cases are not to be tried in the High Court but the new specialist court, then they will be prosecuted in an inferior court, of that there can be no doubt.

READ MORE: Lawyers voice concerns over plans for trials without juries

“Lady Dorrian’s proposed variation of a specialist court would have inferior sentencing powers to the High Court, and so would be more like a specialist super sheriff court.

“This demotion of sexual offence prosecution undermines the great strides made in recent years in recognising the enormous harm such offending represents in modern society.”

Rape Crisis Scotland’s Sandy Brindley is also taking part in the roundtable discussion at Holyrood.

She has insisted that Lady Dorrian’s review includes “a number of recommendations which have the potential to transform justice responses to sexual crime in Scotland”.

In her evidence, Ms Brindley has insisted that “urgent and radical reform” is needed “if complainers of sexual crime in Scotland are to have meaningful access to justice”.

But she has warned: “We have one note of caution in relation to the proposed specialist court. We are concerned that applying a 10-year sentencing limit could be seen to reduce the seriousness with which rape is treated, given that it is currently only able to be prosecuted in the High Court, which has unlimited sentencing powers.

“We recognise that the vast majority of rape cases where there is a conviction result in sentences below 10 years, however, we have some cases where we are supporting complainers which result in orders for lifelong restrictions, for example cases involving serial rapists, and have some concern that if cases such as these are heard in the High Court rather than the specialist court, then complainers in these cases will not have the full benefit of a specialist court where every member of staff has been through trauma training.

“While we appreciate that under the proposals there is scope for the High Court to remit cases to the specialist court, we have some concern that complainers who cases are likely to attract a sentence over 10 years would have a poorer experience than those going through the specialist court.”