MEN convicted in Scotland of having same sex under “discriminatory” outdated laws are to get a full and automatic pardon, it was revealed yesterday.
Justice Secretary Michael Matheson’s announcement, described as “historic”, explained that legislation will be introduced in Holyrood which would also consider the case for an apology to be issued to those convicted.
It was immediately supported by Labour, the Scottish Greens and LibDems and came days after equality campaigners were outraged when a similar bill by the SNP MP John Nicolson was scuppered by the Conservatives at Westminster.
“It is sadly the case that Scotland has only relatively recently modernised our criminal laws so that they no longer discriminate against same-sex sexual activity,” said Matheson.
“It is shocking to consider that consensual sex between men was only decriminalised in Scotland in 1980 and the age of consent for same-sex sexual activity was not equalised for sexual activity between men and women until 2001.”
He added: “Such laws clearly have no place in a modern and inclusive Scotland. However, there are people with criminal convictions for same-sex sexual activity that is now lawful and we must right this wrong.
“We will introduce an automatic formal pardon for those convicted under these discriminatory laws so they know they are absolved fully.
“We want to address the injustice that people experienced simply because of their sexual orientation in circumstances that are now legal and this is one way of achieving this.”
Matheson’s statement came in response to a question by Kezia Dugdale who asked whether he would quash the convictions and cautions issued for now-abolished gay sexual offences and grant pardons.
Responding to his announcement, the Scottish Labour leader said it was “nothing short of an historic moment for Scotland to be a more equal and respectful country”.
Scottish Green co-convener Patrick Harvie said: “While many will welcome a pardon others will take from it an implication they are being forgiven for having done something wrong, that is not the message that should be sent out.”
Matheson responded: “I fully acknowledge the issue about the righting of the wrongs of those who were convicted, some of whom were imprisoned as a result of the offences which they were convicted of and are now lawful.
“And I do think the issue of an apology is an appropriate measure government should give consideration to. In my view, that would be best dealt with in a collective way when we look at bringing forward legislation in this Parliament on the matter of a pardon, and I will certainly give that serious consideration as being part of that package of measures which we will take forward.”
Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP Alex Cole-Hamilton said: “Men convicted under this old law did nothing wrong and it is absolutely right they are given a full pardon.”
Last week, the Tory government announced its plans for thousands of gay and bisexual men convicted of out-of-date offences to be posthumously pardoned.
But the bill brought forward by Nicolson on Friday had called on ministers to go further and grant an automatic pardon for the living as well.
Justice Minister Sam Gyimah spoke for more than 20 minutes at the end of a lengthy debate in the House of Commons to prevent the legislation from being put to a vote.
Nicolson’s bill, which would have applied to England and Wales, became known as the Turing Bill after Second World War codebreaker Alan Turing, who was given a posthumous royal pardon in 2013 over a conviction in 1952 for gross indecency with a 19-year-old.
Turing accepted treatment with DES, chemical castration, as an alternative to prison and died two years later, aged 41. An inquest determined he had taken his own life.
Matheson said he regretted the approach the UK government had taken on the issue as he said the Scottish government would bring in legislation for an automatic pardon “at an early date”.
Nicolson’s welcomed Matheson’s announcement.
“I’m delighted the Scottish Government is going to pick up and run with the Turing Bill. What you’ve got to remember in this is the human cost. There are men who have lived with a sense of injustice all these years, and indeed even for decades, who will now get closure.”
Matheson said civil servants were working with Police Scotland on the details of the process required to allow men convicted for actions that are now legal to seek to have those convictions “disregarded”.
“Where an offence is disregarded, a person will be treated as not having been convicted of that offence and so it would not appear on, for example, disclosure checks,” he said.
A spokesman for the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service said figures were not immediately available on the number of cases that would be pardoned.
LGBT discrimination ‘rife’ in detention centres, says charity
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