Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a couple of questions. The first is about the governance of the PIRC and the second is a more general question around the existence of commissioners, which I will explain in a moment.

On governance, I note that the Angiolini review stated:

“the Commissioner has confirmed that she is planning to transform the Audit and Accountability Committee into a more formal Board structure with non-executive members being appointed through a transparent public appointments process”.

Do you have an update on that recommendation? Have those changes been made? If so, are they sufficient? Are they working?

I confirm that we are looking at the LCMs.

Not at all. These things happen. Back to you, cabinet secretary.

Thank you, cabinet secretary.

I think that Katy Clark would like to ask a question. No? That is fine. Do any other members have any questions?

I thank the cabinet secretary for joining us. I briefly suspend the meeting to allow for a change of witnesses.

Thank you, cabinet secretary. I invite questions from members.

I am sure that there is a very small chance of it happening, but is there a risk that an officer’s status could change from being a witness to a suspect? That might present a slight challenge in relation to the duty of candour and compliance with a co-operative approach.

It was criminal.

I welcome to the meeting Mr Justin Farrell, who is head of the criminal allegations against the police division of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. I thank Mr Farrell for providing written evidence. We are looking to spend an hour or so on this evidence session.

I will kick things off by following up on Sharon Dowey’s line of questioning with the PIRC a short time ago. This relates to criminal allegations against police officers. We are aware that a criminal allegation against a police officer would be reported to the Crown Office based on “a reasonable inference” that they have committed an offence—that is different from what happens with ordinary members of the public. How do you identify potentially malicious or vexatious complaints within the system, and how is it ensured that that identification takes place as early as possible in the process, so that officers are not subjected to lengthy and unnecessary investigations?

That is interesting. Perhaps we underestimate the number of occasions when officers from outside the Police Scotland area are on duty in Scotland for a variety of reasons.

My final question relates to the duty of candour, which we discussed with the witnesses from the PIRC. You have responded to some questions on the delays experienced with investigations, and the PIRC has suggested incorporating a duty to co-operate into the duty of candour, under which officers would be required to provide operational statements timeously where their status is clearly that of a witness.

In relation to the introduction of a statutory duty of candour, can you advise whether CAAPD currently experiences issues arising from delayed statements—I think that the answer to that will probably be yes—or other information from Police Scotland, and whether the PIRC’s proposal on incorporating a requirement to produce operational statements would be helpful for CAAPD?