Undertaking domestic homicide and suicide reviews: draft statutory guidance - consultation

Establishing a Review

Section 3 – Review Oversight Committee and Case Review Panel

3.1. Review Oversight Committee

Section 14 of the 2025 Act establishes the Review Oversight Committee (ROC). The ROC plays a central governance role in the Domestic Homicide and Suicide Review (DHSR) model. The ROC is responsible for overseeing the review process. It is responsible for determining whether a review should proceed, overseeing the consistency and quality of decision-making, and ensuring that processes are transparent, lawful, person centred and trauma informed. The ROC is responsible for the establishment, setting the review terms of reference, conduct, and quality assurance of such reviews across Scotland. Public bodies and relevant others must engage constructively with the review process to support these functions.

3.2. ROC Chair and Deputy Chair

The ROC Chair and Deputy Chair are independent appointments made by the Scottish Ministers. The ROC Chair has a number of duties which collectively support the review process function effectively and independently. The Chair is supported by a Deputy Chair. Where neither the Chair nor Deputy Chair can undertake their role, Ministers may appoint a temporary Chair from the Committee or, if necessary, make a temporary appointment solely to fulfil this function.

3.3. ROC Membership

ROC members, other than the Chair and Deputy Chair, are appointed in two ways:

• through nominations received by those listed under section 14(3) of the 2025 Act and outlined below. Nominations are to be approved by the Scottish Ministers who can choose how many nominated members they want to have and which nominations to accept; and

• through direct appointments made by the Scottish Ministers, which must include representatives from voluntary organisations with expertise in supporting people in Scotland.

The following organisations may nominate individuals to be a member of the Review Oversight Committee:

• a local authority
• a health board constituted under section 2(1)(a) of the National Health Service (Scotland) Act 1978
• the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland
• the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service
• Community Justice Scotland
• The Risk Management Authority
• Social Care and Social Work Improvement Scotland (the Care Inspectorate)
• Social Work Scotland Ltd

Voluntary organisations play a critical role in supporting individuals affected by domestic abuse, trauma, and violence. Their insights and expertise, particularly those relating to lived experience, are essential to high-quality review processes.

Ministers may amend the list of bodies eligible to nominate ROC members, following consultation.

The ROC retains oversight responsibility to ensure that panels are proactive in identifying and incorporating specialist expertise as needed to uphold the integrity and comprehensiveness of the review process.

Scottish Ministers will determine the number of directly appointed members required to ensure the ROC has the appropriate expertise, representation, and capacity.

Nominating bodies should put forward individuals with relevant seniority, expertise, and organisational authority.

Members appointed to the Committee are expected to:

• contribute specialist knowledge and organisational insight;
• act in the public interest and support a consistent national approach;
• participate actively in decision-making and quality-assurance processes;
• promote learning, improvement, and better outcomes for individuals and communities.

3.4. Seeking additional and specialist expertise

The ROC and Case Review Panels must ensure that appropriate specialist expertise is drawn upon where necessary to support a thorough and informed review process. This is particularly important in cases where specific circumstances or protected characteristics of the victim, perpetrator, or relevant agencies warrant expert input.

Specialist expertise may be identified and called upon:

• Following a death notification or referral where the ROC determines from the outset that there is a need for particular expertise.
• Following meetings of the Case Review Panel, where initial scoping of the case reveals the relevance of specialist knowledge not already represented on the panel or where it later comes to light that there is specific expertise required.

Examples where specialist expertise may be required include, but are not limited to:

• Expertise in disability, where the victim or another key individual had a disability.
• Knowledge of child protection systems, in cases involving child victims or significant child safeguarding issues.
• Expertise in adult support and protection, particularly where the death involved a vulnerable adult.
• Mental health expertise, including in relation to homicide perpetrated by individuals with mental disorders.
• Cultural or community-specific knowledge, where relevant to understanding the context of the case.

When such a need is identified, the panel must make arrangements to involve suitable individuals who possess the necessary expertise. This involvement may take the form of:

• Direct participation in panel meetings.
• Written reports or advice commissioned by the panel.
• Attendance at specific sessions to provide evidence or perspectives.

The inclusion of specialist expertise must be documented in the terms of reference or review plan, and the panel must ensure that such input is fully considered in the findings and recommendations of the review.

3.5. Case Review Panels

Case Review Panels are responsible for carrying out domestic homicide or suicide reviews on behalf of the ROC. Whenever a review is required, the ROC must:

• establish a Case Review Panel, and
• maintain it for the full duration of the review unless the Lord Advocate determines a review is not to continue. Maintaining the panel does not mean it must have the same membership throughout as situations may arise where some change in membership is unavoidable.

3.6. Case Review Panel Chairs

Under Section 15, the Scottish Ministers must appoint a pool of at least three individuals who may act as Panel Chairs. These individuals constitute the standing resource from which the Committee must select a chair for each review.

When establishing a panel, the Committee must select the Chair from the pool. Selection should take account of the Chair’s expertise, experience, capacity and any potential conflicts of interest relating to the particular case.

Once a Case Review Panel Chair has been selected the ROC Chair, or where necessary, the Deputy Chair will write to the Case Review Panel Chair to ask them to Chair the review. The Case Review Panel Chair is expected to respond within 10 working days in writing confirming if they will undertake the review.

Ministers may remove a Panel Chair from office where they consider the individual unable to perform the functions of the role, or unsuitable to remain in office. This may include, for example, situations where the individual has taken on a role that would have prevented their appointment initially, has made public statements inconsistent with the ethos of the review model, or has become unwell and is unable to resign.

3.7. Case Review Panel Membership

A Case Review Panel consists of the Panel Chair and such other members as the Committee considers necessary for the effective conduct of the review.

Panels are constituted on a case-by-case basis to ensure appropriate expertise, independence and proportionality. However, each panel is expected to include a COPFS and Police Scotland representative and a relevant victim support organisation.

In addition to COPFS, Police Scotland and a victims organisation, the Committee should identify and invite other agencies that are relevant and appropriate to the circumstances of the case. This may include, for example, a local authority, health board, education provider, specialist equality organisation, or any other body, ensuring there is no conflict of interest.

Depending on the circumstances of the death and agencies involved prior to the death, a representative from an alternative area may be invited onto the panel rather than the local organisation e.g. an alternative health board representative to the health board in which the death occurred/ that the persons involved were patients of. This is to help ensure independence and transparency whilst providing the necessary input and expertise. It also helps to avoid issues of areas ‘marking their own homework’.

Panel members are appointed solely for the duration of the review for which they have been selected. Their appointment ends automatically once the Committee closes the review.

A panel member may resign at any time by notifying the Review Panel Chair who will advise the Review Oversight Committee. The Committee may, with the consent of the Scottish Ministers, remove a panel member where they are unable or unsuitable to perform the functions of the role. This will be reflected in panel members’ terms and conditions of appointment.

3.8. Training

To ensure that reviews are conducted fairly, competently, and with integrity, appropriate training as well as ongoing training will be provided to the Review Oversight Committee Chair, Deputy Chair, Case Review Panel Chairs, members of the Review Oversight Committee and Case Review Panels. Training will also be provided to those providing information for review purposes through their professional roles. Training will be ongoing to ensure those involved in the review process are competent and are able to effectively engage and participate in the review process. In addition, information on the review process will also be available to families, advocates and staff.

3.9. Clinical Supervision and Peer Support

Due to the complex and distressing nature of domestic homicide and suicide reviews, the ROC Chair, Deputy Chair, Case Review Panel Chairs and those working in the Secretariat will have access to package of support measures including, peer support, debriefing, trauma-informed wellbeing measures and clinical supervision.

Peer support will also be available to those involved in the review process including members of the ROC and Case Review Panel members in addition to the support available through their respective organisations.

3.10. Administrative and Logistical Support

Chairs and committee members should be supported by dedicated administrative resources, including:

• Timely access to relevant documentation.
• Support in organising and minuting meetings.
• Technical support for digital platforms used in remote or hybrid reviews.
• Assistance with coordinating engagement with agencies or individuals involved in the case.

Section 4 – Death Notifications and Referrals

There are two routes which a domestic homicide or domestic abuse-related suicide review may be initiated – by notification or referral. These are set out further in this section, however whether a death is notified or referred into the Review Oversight Committee, only deaths that occurred on or after 1 April 2026 will be considered for review under the 2025 Act. This means that deaths that occur prior to 1 April 2026 will not be reviewed.

4.1. Notifying Bodies

Section 17 sets out the notification bodies who must notify the Review Oversight Committee in writing of any death of which it is aware which it believes is a reviewable death. In addition, notifying bodies must also provide the Scottish Ministers with a copy of all notifications. Section 17(5) sets out the three notifying bodies:

• the Chief Constable of Police Scotland;
• the Lord Advocate; and
• the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner

Notifications should be made within seven days following a death where possible. It is recognised this may not always be possible. The timescales outlined is for notifications only. This does not apply for referrals.

It is not for the notifying bodies to determine whether a death is reviewable, only that it believes it is. It is the role of ROC to determine whether a suspected death meets the criteria and whether a review should be undertaken.

4.2 Referral by the Scottish Ministers

The other route by which a domestic homicide or suicide review may be initiated is where the Scottish Ministers become aware of a death which they believe is, or may be, a reviewable death where a notification has not already been received from a notifying body (Police Scotland, COPFS and PIRC). An example where the Scottish Ministers may make a referral is where a Scottish resident dies abroad or where a bereaved family contact the Scottish Ministers following the death of a loved one which has not been investigated by the police.

In such cases, Scottish Ministers need only have sufficient information to suspect the death may be reviewable (i.e. a lower threshold than that applied to notifying bodies). Whenever Scottish Ministers make such a referral to the Review Oversight Committee, they must provide a written copy to each of the notifying bodies.

The person who gives a notification or makes a referral, must provide all information within their possession or control as they consider may assist the Review Oversight Committee in its consideration of the death and whether a domestic homicide or suicide review is to be undertaken. Providing this detail at the outset ensures the ROC has a meaningful foundation for determining whether the death falls within the DHSR remit and, if so, whether a review should be carried out.

As with notifications received from notifying bodies, it is for the ROC to determine whether a death is reviewable following a referral.

Referrals will not be subject to the same timescales as notifying bodies. A template for referrals can be found under Annex 1 and should be sent to dhsrmodel@gov.scot

4.3. Notification or Referral of Death

On receipt of a notification or referral, the Secretariat will:

• Acknowledge receipt in writing within 24 hours.
• Log the notification or referral and inform Scottish Ministers and/ or the notifying bodies.
• Notify the Review Oversight Committee Chair, Deputy Chair and members.
• Discuss with the Review Oversight Committee what additional expertise may be necessary and engage with them.
• Establish a meeting of the ROC and share with its members information received in relation to the death(s).

4.4. Children and Supported Adults

Where known, notifying bodies should include details of any children and supported adults connected to person A and/ or person B. Immediately following a death, notifying bodies may not be aware of the extent of any agency involvement in relation to the person(s) who have died or such other persons. Where known, the following information should form part of the notification:

• any child or young person (an individual under 18 years old, or under 26 if they were in care), living in the household or in regular contact with person A and/ or person B;
• any adults at risk (e.g. adults with disabilities, mental health needs, or other vulnerabilities) dependent on or closely associated with person A and/ or person B;
• whether these individuals were subject to child protection, adult protection, or support plans; and
• identification of potential ongoing safeguarding needs or risks.

4.5. Confidentiality and Information Governance

All information submitted as part of a review request must be handled in accordance with applicable data protection legislation. Personal data must only be shared where there is a lawful basis to do so. Prior to any information being shared with the Review Oversight Committee and Case Review Panels, a confidentiality agreement must be signed by all persons.

Section 5 – Notification of review revocation: Suspension and Discontinuation of Review Proceedings

A notification or referral made to the Review Oversight Committee (ROC) under section 17 may be revoked only where the notifying person believes that the death is not a reviewable death. This may arise where further information becomes available after the original notification, or where the original notification was issued in error.

5.1. Timing of Revocation

A notification or referral may be revoked only up until the point at which the ROC has made its decision under section 19 on whether the death is reviewable. After that stage, discontinuation of the review process is possible only through the Lord Advocate’s power under section 23.

5.2. How a Revocation Must be Made

Revocation must be made in writing to the ROC by the person who issued the original notification or referral. The written revocation must include reasons explaining why the death is no longer considered to be reviewable. The revocation must be copied to the same recipient(s) who received the original notification or referral.

Where a valid revocation is received before the ROC has made its decision on reviewability under section 19(1)(a), the original notification or referral must be treated as never having been given.

If another notification or referral remains in place, the sift continues in relation to that live notification e.g. a notification of the same death by Police Scotland and PIRC but PIRC revokes the notification it submitted, the death would continue to be considered for review as there still remains a notification in place by another notifying body.

A revoked notification must not be counted for the purpose of the ROC’s reporting duties under section 30, which relate only to notifications that remain active.

5.3. Determination on whether to hold a DHSR

The first job of the ROC is to satisfy itself whether a notified or referred death is reviewable. This means that the death needs to meet the criteria under section 12. If the ROC is satisfied that the death falls within the scope of the review model, it can then determine whether or not a review should be carried out as set out in section 19. A determination on whether to establish a domestic homicide or suicide review must be based on:

• the likelihood of identifying lessons to be learned from the death or circumstances leading up to it. The focus should be on learning that will improve Scottish practice and the safeguarding or promotion of wellbeing of victims of abusive behaviour.
• Whether any public authorities or voluntary organisations in Scotland (including victim-support organisations) were, or had the opportunity to be, involved with the individuals or circumstances before the death. Where there was little or no contact with services, this should prompt consideration of why the person(s) did not engage with services, as this may provide important learning.
• Where person A and person B were not partners or ex-partners determination on whether to establish a review must include whether, and to what extent, the death appears to be linked to abusive behaviour between person A and their partner or ex-partner.
• The extent of the apparent connection between abusive domestic behaviour and the death generally. In the case of a domestic homicide, this will be obvious- the death is the direct result of abusive domestic behaviour. But in the case of a suicide which may have multiple and complex causes this will be a significant issue to consider.
• The extent and quality of the information that is likely to be available to the review.
• The strength of the connection that both the deceased and any other individuals involved had to Scotland. For example, if the relationship mainly occurred abroad, opportunities for intervention within Scotland may have been limited.

All of the above should be considered when determining whether a DHSR should be established. If the ROC requires additional information to help inform its determination on whether a death is to proceed to review, the secretariat will support the gathering of this information. It is not the role of the ROC to carry out a review. While additional information may be needed to decide whether a review should take place, the responsibility for conducting the review itself lies with the Case Review Panel.

If consensus among the ROC cannot be reached, the chair of the ROC may wish to refer the decision to the Scottish Ministers for their determination. There is also an option for the Chair to seek advice from Ministers in the course of the committee reaching its determination. In either case, relevant information must be shared with the Scottish Ministers to enable them to provide considered advice or reach a considered decision.

The Chair of the Review Oversight Committee does not require consensus to determine whether a review is to be undertaken. A decision can be taken by majority if the Chair is comfortable with that.

5.4. Decision not to undertake a Review

If the ROC decides not to undertake a review, the ROC Chair must provide Scottish Ministers with the committee’s reasons for reaching the outcome. This will provide an audit trail for the rationale of the decision and will also serve as helpful learning for the review process. The ROC Chair, Deputy and ROC members will receive specific training on this aspect of the process. On receipt of the decision of the Committee and rationale for that Scottish Ministers may step in and direct the committee to carry out a review.

It is recognised that as domestic homicides and suicides are to be notified into the Review Oversight Committee in a timely manner following a death, that there may be additional information that comes to light later that had it been received earlier, may have led the ROC to reach a different determination. Where the ROC determines that a death is not to be reviewed, it can reconsider whether the death should be reviewed following new or additional information. The ROC Chair can still seek advice from the Scottish Ministers or refer the sift decision to them for their determination where there is a lack of consensus, and relevant information must be provided to support advice to be provided or a decision to be reached by the Scottish Ministers. Similarly, should the ROC reach the same outcome as previously that a review should not proceed, the rationale for reaching this outcome should be provided to the Scottish Ministers and the Scottish Ministers may step in and direct the ROC to establish a domestic homicide or suicide review.

Where a previous sift decision not to carry out a review was made by the Scottish Ministers following a referral by the ROC Chair, Ministers equally may reconsider that decision where new information has come to light.

5.5. Reconsideration of Conducting a Review

A decision not to carry out a domestic homicide or suicide review can be looked at again if new information becomes available that wasn’t known at the time. The reconsideration must be done by whoever made the original decision (either the Review Oversight Committee or the Scottish Ministers). Where a decision was made at sift stage previously (i.e. it was decided the death was reviewable, but a review should not be carried out) then it is the decision-maker at the sift stage who must perform the reconsideration. Therefore, if the ROC decided the death was reviewable but then referred the sift decision to Ministers, it is Ministers who must carry out the reconsideration.

A reconsideration can happen if the death was previously judged not to meet the criteria for a review. In order for reconsideration of a death to be undertaken, new information must suggest that the earlier decision not to undertake a review, might need to change.

5.6. How Reconsideration Works

When a death is reconsidered, the same process used for first-time decisions (section 19) must be followed again. Where there has been a previous decision not to review made at the sift stage, this means that there must be reconsideration both of whether the death is reviewable and if so, whether a review should be carried out. In many cases there will be no need to consider reviewability more than briefly, unless there is also additional information relevant to that.

If Ministers are asked to make the determination, they take over the Committee’s role and decide:

• whether the death is reviewable, and
• whether a review should take place.

In reconsidering whether to carry out a review, the Committee may still seek advice from Ministers or refer the matter to them, just as they would during an initial consideration.

The result of a reconsideration is treated exactly the same as a normal section 19 decision. This means:

• any steps that must follow a section 19 decision also follow a reconsideration, and
• the reconsideration decision can itself be reconsidered again if new information later emerges.

If a case is reconsidered more than once, “the previous decision” always means the most recent one.

5.7. Expanding a review beyond the point of death

When a decision has been made to carry out a domestic homicide or suicide review, where relevant the Review Oversight Committee (ROC) must consider whether the remit of a review should be expanded in cases where person A and B were partners or ex-partners and had either a child who was a young person or adult at risk, or another young person living in their household.

If expansion is being considered, the ROC should reflect on whether the review ought to examine the extent to which such a person was able to provide their views during decision-making processes carried out by public authorities after the death. These decisions may include where the child or young person lives, with which family members they have contact, or other decisions where their best interests were a primary consideration. The ROC should also consider whether the review should examine the adequacy of the support provided to that person after the death, whether that was support to provide their views in relation to these decisions or more generally.

A review remit can be expanded in relation to any or all of the individuals who would qualify (e.g. in relation to a child of the victim aged 12 but not one aged 17 if the ROC so decide). It can also be expanded in relation to any or all of the relevant matters e.g. support to provide views but not support more generally. Where the remit of a review is expanded to include support to provide views, the case review panel should consider whether the individual received the support necessary to express their views meaningfully, including any practical, communication, advocacy, or emotional support they reasonably required. Where the remit is expanded to cover support more generally, the panel should consider more broadly whether the individual received the support they reasonably needed following the death, including bereavement support, therapeutic intervention, or trauma-informed assistance.

However, the remit can only be expanded in any of these respects if the Lord Advocate gives consent. This is so as to ensure that a potential criminal investigation or proceedings are not prejudiced by the interaction with a young person or vulnerable adult who may be an important witness.

In practice, the ROC must ensure that the possibility of expanding the remit is considered systematically each time a DHSR is initiated. The reasoning behind the decision, whether or not expansion is recommended, and the outcome of any request for the Lord Advocate’s consent should be clearly recorded. The ROC is expected to approach this part of the process in a trauma-informed, rights-based manner, ensuring that the welfare and views of affected children, young people, and adults at risk are central to decision-making. Where the remit is expanded, appropriate agencies, including those with safeguarding responsibilities, should be included within this aspect of the review. The overarching purpose of expanding a review is to ensure that the state’s response to vulnerable individuals following a domestic homicide or suicide is fully understood, enabling learning that strengthens future practice and better safeguards and supports those affected.