Natural Justice: A Joint Thematic Inspection of the Arrangements in Scotland for Preventing, Investigating and Prosecuting Wildlife Crime

Recommendation 1 - that the Scottish Government creates a wildlife crime reduction strategy or equivalent policy statement. (Page 13)

Recommendation 2 - that the Wildlife and Habitats Crime Prosecution Forum be constituted so that the maximum operational and policy benefit can be gained from open and forthright debriefing of cases between the relevant agencies. (Page 15)

Recommendation 3 - that there is full implementation of the stated specialist wildlife prosecutor role within COPFS. (Page 16)

Recommendation 4 - that there is increased communication within COPFS on the role of specialist wildlife prosecutors. (Page 16)

Recommendation 5 - COPFS provide more information on the role of specialist wildlife prosecutors to partner agencies and to each police force area wildlife crime co-ordinator. (Page 16)

Recommendation 6 - that in each COPFS area the specialist wildlife prosecutor ensures there is liaison and communication between them and the police wildlife crime co-ordinator. (Page 16)

Recommendation 7 - that all reporting agencies indicate at the start of each report to COPFS that the case should be considered and marked by the area specialist wildlife prosecutor. (Page 19)

Recommendation 8 - that there is set up and maintained a properly constituted sub-group of PAW (Scotland) 'Legislation, Regulation & Guidance' with representation from relevant wildlife and rural agencies to review existing legislation and regulation and make recommendations. (Page 23)

Recommendation 9 - that in order to produce clear and consistent guidance the Legislation, Regulation & Guidance sub-group of PAW (Scotland) take responsibility for such publications. The sub-group should work with the various wildlife and rural agencies to oversee and produce these under PAW (Scotland) branding, thus promoting the PAW (Scotland) partnership and demonstrating that the guidance has the approval of the Scottish Parliament. (Page 23)

Recommendation 10 - that the PAW (Scotland) Legislation, Regulation & Guidance sub-group consider whether it would be appropriate to place any provision for criminal vicarious liability before Parliament for its consideration on this matter. (Page 24)

Recommendation 11 - that PAW (Scotland) consult upon, agree and publish comprehensive guidance on the various measures that can be used to deter or ultimately be applied as sanctions in relation to wildlife crime. (Page 24)

Recommendation 12 - that COPFS carry out a training needs assessment for specialist wildlife prosecutors and provide a suitable training package for both newly appointed specialists and ongoing training. (Page 26)

Recommendation 13 - that forces have a formal interview process for appointing WECOs that includes the force co-ordinator or force lead on wildlife crime. (Page 28)

Recommendation 14 - that a generic national role description for WECOs be agreed to allow training needs to be assessed. This could be carried out through the relevant PAW (Training and Awareness) sub-group structure. (Page 28)

Recommendation 15 - that a national training programme for WECOs be agreed, based substantially on existing arrangements and following good practice as identified by the Wildlife and Habitats Crime Prosecution Forum. (Page 28)

Recommendation 16 - that relevant Scottish Government Directorates consider whether they could benefit from the secondment of a WECO as takes place elsewhere within the United Kingdom. (Page 28)

Recommendation 17 - that those forces that do not already have a full-time wildlife crime coordinator post, create one and appoint a police officer to the role. (Page 29)

Recommendation 18 - that PAW (Scotland) assumes the strategic and pivotal role in reducing wildlife crime in Scotland and adopts the series of actions set out at pages 31/32 of this report.

Recommendation 19 - that the chair of PAW (Scotland) through an appropriate sub-group, administers a fund to support certain high priority investigations and the development of more effective practices to combat wildlife crime. (Page 33)

Recommendation 20 - that PAW (Scotland) consider the greater use of Crimestoppers as a means of reporting wildlife crime. (Page 36)

Recommendation 21 - that ACPOS work with the proposed PAW (Scotland) structure to develop a common minimum standard of investigation for wildlife crime. (Page 37)

Recommendation 22 - that the Wildlife and Habitats Crime Prosecution Forum initiate debriefs following significant wildlife crime investigations and prosecutions, either locally with partners or where appropriate nationally. (Page 37)

Recommendation 23 - that where a specialist agency has played a significant part in an investigation the reporting officer will confirm to the agency whether or not a report is being submitted to COPFS. If one is being submitted the reporting officer will confirm with the agency that the report accurately reflects its involvement. The report will confirm the agency has been advised of the submission of the report and that the agency agrees the report accurately reflects its involvement. (Page 39)

Recommendation 24 - while the independence of COPFS to decide on proceedings emanating from a report is not questioned, it is recommended that where a specialist agency has played a significant part in an investigation and COPFS take proceedings, they will discuss charges and any proposed plea resolution with the specialist agency. (Page 39)