Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government

egard to the need for certainty and finality, this cannot be justified in amodern system of appellate justice. There is no reason why, in all summarycases, a convicted person cannot avail himself/herself of the ordinary mode ofstatutory appeal by way of an application for a stated case (or appeal, withleave, from a preliminary ruling). If leave is refused, then that ought to be theend of the matter, subject to the jurisdiction of the SCCRC.8.1.39 What should not occur is that petitions to the nobile officium be employed toreview decisions refusing leave to appeal or refusing an appeal. There shouldbe clear statutory provision that a decision that concludes a properlyconducted appeal procedure should not be capable of circumvention,recognising the authority with which that decision was made. This is theintention, in relation to solemn cases, of section 124 of the 1995 Act. It istherefore recommended that, for the avoidance of doubt, a statutory provisionthat applies the same finality to summary case appeal decisions that section124 provides in relation to solemn cases, should be introduced. If the HighCourt has made some error in deciding a case and this has resulted in amiscarriage of justice, the route to go down ought to be to apply to the SCCRC.It is therefore recommended that it be made clear in statute, again for theavoidance of doubt, that it is not competent to review a decision of the HighCourt granting or refusing an appeal, or leave to appeal or an application toappeal late, by use of a petition to the nobile officium.8.1.40 Although the Review considered carefully whether petitions to the nobileofficium should be abolished entirely, it was ultimately persuaded that the351