Scottish Human Rights Law Group

The petitioner sought judicial review of the imposition on him of an indefinite period of notification on the Sex Offenders’ Register, without provision for review.  He had been sentenced to four years’ detention in 1995 for crimes including assault with intent to rape, which were committed when he was 14.   Given that the order was imposed in terms of the Sex Offenders Act 1997 , as amended by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 the petitioner accepted that interference with his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Article 8 was in accordance with the law.   He contended however that the measures imposed conflicted with the principle of proportionality as reflected in the need for such interference to be necessary in a democratic society.

The petitioner sought declarator that the continued application of s. 81 and s. 82 of the 2003 Act, without the possibility of any review to consider the variation or ending of his obligation to comply with the notification requirement was incompatible with his right to respect for private and family life under Article 8.  He also sought declarator that continued application was incompatible with his right of access to the court for proper determination of his civil rights under Article 6 and was incompatible with his right to enjoy Convention rights and freedoms without discrimination under Article 14.

The Lord Ordinary rejected the petitioner’s arguments holding the provisions of the Sex Offenders Register as applied to the petitioner to be compatible with due respect for his Convention rights.

Full report available here.