Seòmar agus comataidhean

So, MAPPA is the best vehicle for sharing data to ensure that the various appropriate bodies are aware of those individuals who come under the notification scheme, know their location and know what support is needed. However, nothing under MAPPA removes from the chief constable the administrative obligations that exist under SONR. Those remain with the chief constable, although they delegate them, as you have said. Therefore, the final responsibility with regard to matters such as the indefinite period still rests with Police Scotland and the chief constable.

Therefore, although the wording “indefinite period” is used, the period of time that an individual spends under the notification is reviewed and, if the individual remains in a notification situation, it is because the police have reviewed the situation and assessed that individual as posing a continuing risk.

What test do the police use to decide whether the notification period should come to an end? Is a set of tests applied?

Under the notification system, the interaction between the police and the individual in front of them is a bespoke—to use your word—process.

Under a civil order, once the formal notification is made, the individual is required, as you said, to notify the police of their name, address and various other details, and to keep that information up to date if circumstances change. Are the police made aware in any other way of individuals who should update the register, or is the obligation on the individual?

For the purposes of the bill, we are looking at registration. Registration could have been occasioned through a civil case, which involves a different burden of proof and such things, but Police Scotland would treat individuals who were subject to notification requirements in exactly the same way, irrespective of why the notification arose. Does that make sense?

That is a parallel of chief constables’ responsibility to review indefinite notification requirements and to actively remove orders that cease to be needed. If a chief constable chooses not to remove an order, the decision could still be sent for review to a sheriff at the request of the individual to whom the order applies.

Do members have any other questions or comments?

Yes—that makes sense.

Just for confirmation, that is the letter from the Scottish Government to the committee in which it outlines its thinking on amendments that it might lodge.