Are detainees in Scotland getting a fair trial? An interdisciplinary and empirical evaluation of the treatment of suspects in police custody in Scotla

由于《欧洲人权公约》对英国刑事司法制度的影响，苏格兰最近发生了相当大的变化，最显著的是在对待在押嫌疑人方面。根据第6条和欧洲人权法院大分庭在Saladuz诉土耳其一案中的裁决，这一变化将嫌疑人获得免费法律咨询作为公平审判的一项基本原则，最近于2010年在苏格兰通过最高法院对Cadder诉HM Advocate的裁决实施。这一裁决促使制定了紧急立法，以纠正现有立法框架中的明显错误。然而，这些重大变化的仓促过去往往不是积极的改革，而是扰乱了适当的司法。正是在这种情况下，委托编写了一些报告，包括《卡洛韦审查》。审查的重点是审查苏格兰立法立场的这一重大变化的实际影响。最后，据指出，这些新措施的实施干扰了司法工作，给第6条保障措施的适用留下了不确定的余地，因此存在不一致之处。尽管卡洛威勋爵由此提出的许多建议在2016年《刑事司法(苏格兰)法》中得到了实现，但这些立法保护并没有全面支持获得公平审判的机会，嫌疑人在被拘留期间继续得不到法律咨询或代理的比例高得惊人。苏格兰司法与这项研究合作在2018年发布了另一份报告，报告得出结论，没有采取足够的措施来确保个人得到适当的法律建议。这一结论是通过审查所提供的法律咨询的质量、如何将选择权传达给嫌疑人以及影响放弃权利决定的原因等因素得出的。虽然当局提出了另一系列建议，并已采取行动，但问题仍然是被羁押人士接受法律意见的程度偏低。这项研究旨在纠正这个问题，并在先前研究的基础上，对哪些其他因素继续影响被羁押人士接受法律意见的趋势，作出全面及跨学科的分析。首先，通过对审讯过程的心理分析。这样做的目的是为了更多地关注为易受伤害的证人和在获得法律代表方面有特殊需要的人提供服务；上述研究只是简单地谈到了这一点。此外，更详细地考虑拘留环境对嫌疑人决策过程和有效参与权行使的心理影响。这项跨学科研究的最后一个要素是通过实地调查来实现的。这将在拘留环境中进行，直接观察审讯过程的性质、持续时间、律师或适当成年人在场的影响、在没有法律顾问在场的情况下唤起约谈的特殊权利等问题。预期的结果是产生必要的理解，以便制定程序措施，直接回应嫌疑人在拘留期间的经历，从而使他们有切实的机会获得公平审判，并使凯迪德的判决得到充分执行。由于司法工作在影响这一领域的政策方面已经产生了重大影响，这项研究可能侧重于直接影响嫌疑人的经历，这些嫌疑人虽然被剥夺了自由，但可能无法以其他方式适当地行使其权利。

Owing to the impact of the European Convention of Human Rights on the criminal justice system in the UK, Scotland has undergone quite recent and radical change, most notably in the treatment of suspects in custody. This change, in line with Article 6 and the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Saladuz v Turkey, has enshrined suspects' access to free legal advice as an essential tenet of fair trial.This was implemented in Scotland as recently as 2010 through the Supreme Court decision of Cadder v HM Advocate. The ruling prompted the enactment of emergency legislation to right the apparent wrongs in the existing legislative framework. However, the hasty passing of these significant changes tended away from positive reform and instead served to disrupt the proper administration of justice. It is in this context that a number of reports were commissioned, including the Carloway Review. The focus of the review was to examine the practical impact of this radical alteration of the legislative position in Scotland. Ultimately it was observed that the implementation of these new measures had interfered with the administration of justice, leaving room for uncertainty and therefore inconsistency in the application of the Article 6 safeguards. Despite many of Lord Carloway's resulting recommendations being realised in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2016, it has nonetheless remained the case that these legislative protections have not comprehensively supported access to fair trial, with an alarmingly high percentage of suspects continuing not to receive legal advice or representation whilst in custody.A further report was carried out by JUSTICE Scotland in 2018, with whom this study is in collaboration, which concluded that inadequate measures were being taken to ensure that individuals were properly having legal advice offered to them. This conclusion was reached by an examination of the quality of legal advice on offer, how the option was communicated to suspects and the reasons influencing the decision to waive the right amongst other variables. Whilst a further list of recommendations was made and many of them acted upon, the issue still remains of a low uptake of legal advice by individuals in custody.This study aims to remedy this and build on previous research by making a comprehensive and interdisciplinary analysis of what additional factors continue to influence the trend in low uptake of legal advice in custody. First of all, through a psychological analysis of the interrogation process. The intention in doing so is to allow a greater focus on provision for vulnerable witnesses and those with special needs in accessing legal representation; something that the research aforementioned has only briefly touched upon. In addition to this, to consider in greater detail the psychological impact of the custody environment upon suspects' decision-making process and the exercise of the right to effective participation.The final element of this interdisciplinary study is to be achieved through fieldwork. This will be carried out in custody environments, directly observing the nature of the interrogation process, its duration, the impact of a lawyer or appropriate adult's presence, the circumstances of evoking the exceptional right to interview without the presence of a legal advisor amongst other issues. The intended outcome is to generate the understanding necessary to formulate procedural measures that directly respond to the suspects' experience in custody and therefore offer them tangible access to fair trial and for the dictum in Cadder to be fully implemented. Owing to the already significant impact of the work of JUSTICE in influencing policy in this area, this research may be focused on directly impacting the experience of suspects who, whilst deprived of their liberty, may have not otherwise been able to properly exercise their rights.