Joint review of diversion from prosecution

Download PDF

In this joint review, we sought to assess the operation and impact of diversion from prosecution in Scotland. Working in partnership we provided an overview of diversion practice from a policing, prosecution and justice social work perspective, highlighted what was working well and explored any barriers to the more effective use of diversion.

The review was carried out by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS), HM Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland (IPS), the Care Inspectorate, and HM Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland (HMIPS) (the scrutiny partners).

We considered:

  • the extent to which the police, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) and justice social work, alongside other community justice partners, shared a vision for diversion from prosecution and collaborated on a strategy for delivery, while respecting the important principle of independent prosecutorial decision-making

  • the effectiveness of systems and processes that supported diversion from prosecution and the progress made in implementing the national guidelines on diversion

  • the extent to which the impact of diversion was understood and the intended outcomes were being achieved

We considered the individual and collective roles that the justice partners play at the various stages in the diversion process:

  • the Standard Prosecution Report (SPR)

  • the decision to divert

  • the referral to justice social work

  • the suitability assessment and the response by COPFS

  • the diversion intervention

  • the completion report and the response by COPFS

  • communication with the accused

  • communication with the complainer.

In support of our review, we gathered evidence from a range of sources including:

  • a review of relevant strategies, policies, guidance, procedures and other documentation relating to diversion from prosecution

  • analysis of data on diversion

  • a survey of all community justice partnerships in Scotland regarding the operation of diversion from prosecution in their local area

  • extensive interviews with those involved or with an interest in the diversion process

  • a review of cases in which an initial decision to divert the accused from prosecution had been taken by COPFS, as well as some cases in which diversion did not appear to have been considered.

We published a report of our findings in February 2023.

The review report provides more detail on our methods and full details of our findings and recommendations.

Thank you for subscribing!