212.Subsection (1) places a duty on named designated core participants to co-operate in relation to consideration of a death (i.e. the sift stage) and, in cases where the outcome of the sift is that a review is to be held, the actual review itself. This obligation of co-operation requires them to co-operate with the review oversight committee, with a case review panel which is carrying out a review and also with each other.
213.Subsection (2) provides a definition of “co-operation” which clarifies that this includes participating (if asked to do so) in a review, as well as providing such information or assistance as the review oversight committee or the relevant case review panel reasonably considers necessary to allow them to fulfil their functions. Any information or assistance must be provided as soon as reasonably practicable following a request. This duty to provide information under this section is of course subject to the general law, including data protection legislation.
214.Subsection (3) provides that a designated core participant is not required to provide information under this section which they would be entitled to refuse to provide in court proceedings (e.g. legally privileged information). However, this is subject to subsection (4). Subject to some exceptions, the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 allows a person not to provide information to a court about spent convictions (and equivalents like spent alternatives to prosecution). Because subsection (3) is based on what happens in a court, subsection (3) would therefore on the face of it limit the obligation to disclose information to a review so that information about spent convictions did not have to be provided. The effect of subsection (4) is that if an order made under the 1974 Act allows information about spent convictions to be provided to a domestic homicide or suicide review, that provision will trump the restriction which would otherwise have applied under subsection (3).
215.Subsection (5) makes provision for the interaction of this section with the Lord Advocate’s ability to pause review proceedings. The duty to co-operate ceases to apply in respect of a review during any period where it is paused, but is revived again if the pause ends with the review being recommenced (as opposed to the pause ending with the Lord Advocate ordering discontinuation of the review). No equivalent provision is made in respect of the Lord Advocate’s ability to discontinue review proceedings, as in such a case there would no longer be review proceedings for a designated core participant to be required to co-operate with under subsection (1).
216.Subsection (6) lists the designated core participants which are subject to this duty. The extent to which they are called upon to co-operate in practice will depend on the death under review and the extent of their involvement in matters relevant to it. Under subsection (7), the Scottish Ministers will be able to modify this list through regulations (subject to the negative procedure). However, before any such regulations are made, subsection (8) requires Ministers to consult the public authority or other person to which the regulations would relate.
Interpretation Conduct of reviews Section 25 – Duty on designated core participants to co-operate