Annabelle Ewing’s response to Crown Office sentencing guidance

Scotland needs sentencing rules that are consistent, transparent and rooted in the harm caused to victims. Annabelle Ewing believes communities deserve confidence that serious offences will receive serious consequences while lesser offences are treated proportionately.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has issued new sentencing guidelines under the Sentencing (Scotland) Act 2020. These provide courts with structured guidance for particular offences. They guide judicial decisions but do not allow prosecution lawyers or campaigners to dictate a sentence.

Annabelle Ewing’s response to the Crown Office’s new sentencing guidelines reflects her background in law and previous parliamentary service. She wants the framework to strengthen public trust without sacrificing judicial independence, individual circumstances or the needs of victims across Scotland.

Clear guidance with room for judgment

Sentencing guidelines are intended to reduce inconsistencies between cases. Without a shared framework, comparable offences can attract noticeably different penalties depending on the court, the prosecutor or the circumstances presented by an accused person.

That does not mean sentencing should become a mechanical exercise. Judges must consider the offence, the defendant’s role, the impact on victims and any mitigating factors. If a court departs from the relevant guidance, the reasons should be stated clearly so the decision can be understood and challenged.

Protecting victims while keeping justice fair

Victims should be at the centre of the criminal justice process. Police, prosecutors, courts and victim support services need to communicate clearly, avoid unnecessary delays and treat survivors with dignity. Ewing supports stronger protection for victims and better support while cases are being prepared and heard.

Fairness also matters for those accused of offences. People should receive a fair trial, access to legal representation and a proper opportunity to answer the case against them. Custody should never be imposed simply to create an impression of toughness.

Rehabilitation belongs within this approach. A sentence can punish an offence while still supporting a person’s return to work, family life and community. For people dealing with addiction, trauma or mental illness, treatment and sustained support can be more effective than repeated short periods in custody.

Rural justice cannot be an afterthought

Ochil and South Perthshire include busy market towns, villages and extensive rural communities. People living outside the largest population centres may have to travel considerable distances to reach a solicitor, court, treatment service or prison visit. That is a familiar issue for Australians in regional areas, including communities outside Perth where a short journey on the map can mean hours behind the wheel.

Justice policy should account for those distances. Access to legal advice, mental health treatment, substance misuse services and specialist support should not depend heavily on whether someone lives in an urban or rural postcode. Local courts and properly funded community services can also help reduce the pressure that brings vulnerable people into repeated contact with the justice system.

Consistency is not the same as severity

Australian conversations about punishment often use blunt phrases such as “law and order”, while many people also expect “a fair go”. Both principles matter here. Sentences should be firm enough to protect the public, yet fair enough to reflect the particular circumstances of each case.

Ewing’s position is that consistent guidelines should support proportionate decisions, not encourage judges to choose the maximum available penalty by default. The number of previous convictions, the defendant’s role in an offence, remorse, coercion and the harm caused must all carry proper weight.

A guideline can make courts more consistent while preserving the human reality of a case. Sentence ranges provide a framework, but the facts still require judgment. Public confidence grows when that judgment is explained rather than hidden.

A fair settlement for Scotland and its economy

Economic recovery depends on people believing that public institutions work fairly. Businesses considering where to invest also care about stability, competent administration and an absence of avoidable legal disputes. A transparent justice system helps create those conditions.

Scotland already has devolved responsibility for criminal law, the Crown Office and much of the justice system. Independence would not automatically solve every sentencing problem, but it would place more decision-making power in the hands of a Parliament elected to represent Scotland rather than the United Kingdom as a whole.

Ewing would continue using representation at Westminster to press institutions where decisions affect Scotland, including justice funding, prison capacity, youth services and support for victims. Scottish self-government and effective Westminster representation can advance the same goal: a justice system accountable to the people who live here.

Lessons from an Australian perspective

Politics in Australia is often discussed in crowded pubs, local RSL clubs and community halls. Those informal conversations shape what voters expect from leaders. Ewing’s campaign can draw on that emphasis on fairness, personal responsibility and practical government without copying Australian policies that do not fit Scottish law.

Australian federal elections also use preferential ballots, giving minor parties and independent candidates a meaningful route into the count. Westminster elections in Scotland use a different system, where securing the largest share in the constituency remains essential. Local campaigns therefore rely heavily on door-knocking, volunteers, small donations, community newspapers and radio.

That model offers a useful lesson for supporters abroad. Personal conversations and local organisations can have more influence than expensive advertising. Australians who care about Scotland’s future can help by sharing the campaign’s message, discussing sentencing and constitutional questions with friends, and helping Scottish communities stay informed.

Support Annabelle Ewing’s campaign in Ochil and South Perthshire by sharing accurate information, volunteering, donating or contacting the campaign team. Check official constituency and candidate information before voting, and encourage neighbours to consider the principles behind a fair and effective justice system.

Readers in Australia can also support democratic engagement by sharing Scotland’s campaign material with Scottish communities, contacting the campaign about volunteering opportunities and speaking to others about the importance of justice, self-government and accountable representation.