Voices in Justice: parole reform consultation

2. Transparency And Communication

2.1 Background

Parole is a system that enables some people in custody to be released from prison to serve the remainder of their sentence in the community under licence conditions. These individuals are supported and supervised by community-based justice social workers.

The Parole Board for Scotland is a Tribunal Non-Departmental Public Body and a court when deciding whether to direct an individual’s release for the purposes of articles 5(4) and 6(1) European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It was established in 1967 as an advisory body which now operates independently from the Scottish Ministers, as required for ECHR compliance. The Parole Board has a number of statutory functions, largely set out in the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993.^[4] The specific procedural rules that govern the parole process are set out in secondary legislation, the Parole Board (Scotland) Rules 2022^[5] (“the Parole Rules”).

The Parole Board for Scotland aims to protect the public by considering if a person in prison can be released into the community on licence. The Parole Board will also consider any licence conditions that should be imposed on a person on their release into the community, to minimise any risk associated with that. The Parole Board will assess risk and the evidence before them and will prioritise matters of public protection when making decision on release.

A person in prison does not apply for parole. The type of sentence imposed by the court determines the point in the sentence that the Parole Board will consider the prisoner’s release and the procedures that will be followed during that consideration.

The Parole Board consists of members appointed by the Scottish Ministers. There are currently 43 Parole Board members including the Chair of the Parole Board. Members are drawn mostly from the legal, social work, prisons, police, medical and mental health professions.

2.2 Purpose of Parole

This consultation invites respondents to consider the purpose of parole and how and where this may be defined for the Scottish system. Currently, there exists varied descriptions of what parole is, what it is used for, and descriptions and explanations of the various processes, including legal definitions of the parole system’s function. We invite respondents to take a step-back, and to reflect and consider what the purpose of parole should and could be; where consensus on the parole system’s purpose may be clear, consistent and accessible.

Other jurisdictions provide definitions of the purpose of parole, including the Parole Board for Victoria’s (Australia)^[6] common purpose which sets out, clearly (though not legislatively) the objectives of the parole system:

“Parole provides prisoners with a structured, supported and supervised transition so that they can adjust from prison back into the community, rather than returning straight to the community at the end of their sentence without supervision or support. By supporting prisoners to return to the community under supervision toward the end of their sentence, parole’s main purpose is to increase community safety”.

Parole’s purpose is shown in Canada^[7] with principles set out in legislation:

“To contribute to the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by means of decisions on the timing and conditions of release that will best facilitate the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens.”

Question 1. Would you support the introduction of a definition that clearly states the purpose of parole in Scotland?

• Yes
• No
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

Question 2. If the purpose of parole were to be defined in Scotland, what do you feel the defined purpose should include?

2.3 Decisions publication

The Scottish Government is committed to working with the Parole Board for Scotland to improve communication and transparency in the parole system. We want to ensure that people are informed, heard, and understand what is happening and why.

At the same time, we recognise that full transparency is not always appropriate. In some cases, sharing sensitive information - such as personal histories, risk assessments, or victim details - could compromise the privacy, safety, or rehabilitation of individuals. A careful balance must be struck between openness and the need to protect people including victims, privacy rights with managing risk effectively.

We have taken several steps to improve the transparency of the parole system over the past few years including: the publication of release decision summaries for certain hearing types on the Parole Board for Scotland website and the ability for victims to observe certain types of oral hearings. We are seeking views on where further improvements can be made.

We are also keen to learn from other jurisdictions. For example, the Rook & Topolski Transparency Review (2025)^[8] in England and Wales recommended publishing redacted parole decisions, expanding victim access to hearings, and exploring more open and accessible hearing formats to improve public understanding and trust. As before, we have already implemented many improvements in these areas and are committed to developing new, creative and progressive ways of enhancing the system of parole.

Similarly, the Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland^[9] report on the governance and operation of the Parole Commissioners for Northern Ireland (2024)^[10] recommended increased transparency on the duration of cases, costs, reasons for delays/adjournments and release considerations. It highlighted the need for better data, clearer oversight, and more accessible information in Northern Ireland to ensure that parole decisions are understood and trusted by those who experience the system.

Currently, the Parole Board for Scotland^[11] publish short, anonymised decision summaries^[12] in indeterminate sentence cases where release has been directed. We are seeking views on what other changes could be made in Scotland to enhance openness and build confidence in the parole process - while ensuring that sensitive information is protected where necessary.

Question 3. Should the Parole Board publish full versions of its decision minutes, including detail on the reasons for the decision and the evidence which was heard at the oral hearing, in release and non-release cases?

• Yes – in all cases
• Yes – but only in certain types of cases (e.g. indeterminate cases, high-profile or public interest)
• No – decision summaries are sufficient
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

Question 4. To what extent do you feel that information published by the Parole Board (e.g. decisions, summaries, case examples) should be anonymised/redacted?

• Not anonymised – decisions should be published in full, including the names of relevant individuals (if appropriate), to promote transparency (this would not be absolute, and redactions considered on a case-by-case basis)
• De-identified – decisions should be published with straightforward identifying details like names and addresses removed.
• Anonymised – decisions should only be published with all potentially identifying information removed, so that nothing about the case, evidence or sentence mentioned in the decision could be used in combination with information from other sources, to identify anyone.
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

Question 5. Should the Parole Board publish more detailed information about how their decisions are reached (e.g. guidance, criteria, case studies)?

• Yes
• No
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

2.4 Information provision for victims

Under the Victim Notification Scheme (VNS), as established by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003^[13], victims who choose to join the scheme^[14] have the right to receive certain information about the person in their case, and the right to make representations when certain decisions are made. Where a victim has died, certain family members may be eligible to join the VNS instead.

The information available under the VNS includes decisions by the Parole Board for Scotland about whether it has recommended or directed release, and about any licence conditions which relate to contact with the victim or the victim’s family.

People in custody are entitled by law to be considered for parole once they have served part of their sentence - this is known as the Parole Qualifying Date (PQD). Under Section 17 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003, the Scottish Ministers have an obligation to provide victims with guidance about making representations and in practice this is done by the Scottish Prison Service (SPS). Where a victim has registered to make representations under the VNS, information about how to do that is normally provided by the SPS in writing six months in advance of the PQD. After that, victims are supported by the Parole Scotland Victims’ Team, which offers a personalised and trauma-informed approach.

The VNS was recently independently reviewed^[15], with the Scottish Ministers accepting the majority of its 22 recommendations. We are committed to ensuring that the VNS works in a more trauma-informed way for victims and have already taken steps towards transformative change of the scheme through a range of provisions in the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill which deliver recommendations from the review.

On parole specifically, the review made one recommendation: that the Parole Board for Scotland should provide victims with an explanation as to why their application to observe a hearing has been rejected. The Parole Board already does this, under Rule 30 of the Parole Rules and we are open to views on whether the current approach could be enhanced, or practice in this area improved.

The Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill includes provisions that will underpin the operation of a new contact team which will be established to deliver a more person-centred and trauma-informed VNS. Eligible victims will be referred to this team who support victims in making an informed choice on whether they wish to be part of the VNS. The contact team will also deliver ongoing information entitlements to victims who choose to join the scheme.

Our approach to supporting victims in the parole context is aligned to the overarching principles which underpin the wider programme of VNS reform and the policy intentions of the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: to improve the experiences of victims and witnesses within the justice system.

With that in mind, we are seeking views on whether the current information provision on parole meets victims’ needs, and any areas where it could be improved to ensure victims feel informed, supported, and empowered.

Question 6. Which format do you feel is the most appropriate for victims/survivors to receive initial information about parole eligibility of the person in the case?

• Letter
• Email
• Phone call
• Video call
• In person
• Not sure / No opinion
• Other, please specify

Question 7. Are there any changes you would you like to see in how much information in parole cases is shared with victims?

2.5 Hearing attendance

Currently, victims of individuals serving a Life Sentence, Extended Sentence, or Order for Lifelong Restriction, who are registered to make representations under the VNS, can apply to observe the parole hearings for their case. Persons serving other types of sentences may have their case determined without an oral hearing, through a casework meeting. If an oral hearing is held for those cases, there is no direct entitlement or specific procedure for a victim to request to attend. However, they may still request to attend, as an observer, at the panel’s discretion.

In the context of trauma-informed practice, we are mindful of the risks to victims and survivors of observing oral hearings. We appreciate how important being able to do this might be to some individuals, and that what is perceived as a serious offence by the criminal justice system may not necessarily reflect the impact an offence has had on a victim or survivor.

Question 8. Should victims/survivors, who are registered under the VNS, have the automatic right to attend and observe oral hearings?

• Yes, there should be automatic rights to attend and observe oral hearings.
• No, the current arrangement where victims/survivors request to attend is appropriate.
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

Question 9. Should all victims/survivors - regardless of the type of sentence the person in custody is serving — have the right to request to observe a parole board oral hearing if one is held?

• Yes – every victim/survivor should have the right to request to observe an oral hearing relating to the person who committed the crime against them.
• No – Only victims/survivors in the most serious cases should have the right to request to observe an oral hearing.
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

Question 10. Who else, if anyone, do you think should have access to parole hearings? (Select all that apply)

• No-one beyond the victim (or, where a victim has died, specified members of their family)
• Members of the public
• Accredited journalists or media
• Legal professionals and researchers
• social workers
• Other professionals for training purposes
• Other, please specify
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

2.6 Victims’ representations ahead of Parole Board considerations

Under Section 17 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003, all eligible victims, or, where a direct victim has died, certain family members, can provide written representations to the Parole Board for Scotland. Eligible victims of individuals serving a life sentence can give oral representations to a board member of the Parole Board for Scotland (not a member on the case panel) ahead of the parole hearing via a victim interview.

We appreciate how important being able to make representations might be to some victims and survivors, or their families, and we are seeking your views on options for ensuring this aspect of the parole system reflects that.

Question 11. Should all victims - regardless of the type of sentence the person in custody is serving - have the right to give oral representations to the Parole Board for Scotland ahead of the Parole Board considering a case?

• Yes – every victim should have the right to give oral representation to the Parole Board for Scotland
• No – the current approach is appropriate. Only victims in the most serious cases should be able to give oral representation to the Parole Board for Scotland
• Other
• Not sure / No opinion
• Please explain your answer:

2.7 Transparency

We recognise that victims and survivors can find the criminal justice system confusing and difficult to navigate. In some cases, this can compound trauma and cause distress. We also understand that victims’ experiences with one aspect of the system or one particular agency can influence how they see the whole system. These concerns are of relevance to parole, given that it can be one of the final parts of a victim’s interaction with the criminal justice system.

We are committed to ensuring that victims feel listened to and are fully informed when they engage with the parole process. We recognise that there are opportunities to do more to achieve this through greater transparency and improvements in information sharing.

Question 12. What information do you feel is most important for victims to receive, in order to support their understanding of, and engagement with, the parole process?

Question 13. How could digital tools (e.g. videos, podcasts, online updates) be used to improve people’s understanding and experience of the parole process?

Question 14. Do you have any other suggestions for improving communication, transparency, or information sharing in the parole system?