A CAMPAIGNER has warned the Scottish Government must make clear the difference between a pardon for gay men convicted of now-abolished sexual offences and having the conviction legally disregarded.
Paul Twocock of gay rights organisation Stonewall UK welcomed the planned new legislation to automatically pardon all gay men convicted of historical discriminatory offences and First Minister Nicola Sturgeon's apology for what she said were "completely unjust" laws.
He said once the law is passed it must be effectively publicised that men still have to apply for the convictions to be legally disregarded in order to have their criminal records updated.
He warned a failure to make this clear could lead to men being barred from some jobs due to convictions which the government has recognised are wrong.
Giving evidence to Holyrood's Equalities and Human Rights Committee on the Historical Sexual Offences (Pardons and Disregards) Bill, he said similar legislation in England and Wales had sparked "absolute confusion" on the difference between a pardon and disregard.
He said: "That continues in England and Wales and it is a major problem for increasing the uptake of the disregard scheme for people who would be eligible for their crimes to be disregarded.
"People have not understood ... when people hear the word pardon they think that means that crime has been deleted, often.
"That means if they do have a historic sexual offence that will come up on a barring scheme criminal records report, if they apply for a job where that is relevant they will still receive the impact and people just really don't understand that."
Twocock said the proposed automatic pardon in Scotland, unlike the pardon on application for men in England and Wales, provides a better basis for explaining the important difference.
He said: "You can very clearly say that what this is saying is that the government and the justice system was wrong to prosecute you in this way and that's why you are receiving a pardon.
"However, those records do still exist and if you would like that to be removed from the record so that it doesn't come up on any barring scheme check then please apply for a disregard.
"I think being able to get that message across is so important, it does mean that the Scottish Government will need to invest some resources and time in publicising that and really focus on that difference."
He said the government should work with LGBT organisations on this.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here