To ask the First Minister for what reason the Scottish Government is going to court to continue to allow it to house male prisoners in the female prison estate, in light of any projections it has made of the cost to taxpayers in Scotland of challenging the Supreme Court ruling in this way. (S6F-04578)

The judgment of the Supreme Court is accepted by the Scottish Government. What we are doing—as any responsible Government must—is ensuring that our policies comply with all our legal obligations, including the Scotland Act 1998 and the European convention on human rights. Every key area of Government that is or might be affected by the Supreme Court judgment is carrying out assessments across legislation, guidance and policies, and changes have already been made in some areas.

The prisons guidance has not been changed, and it can be taken from that that the Scottish Government has concluded that it does not need to be changed in light of the Supreme Court judgment. For Women Scotland has brought proceedings challenging that conclusion, as it is entitled to do. The matter is now before the court.

The Scottish Government has to make difficult decisions that balance the interests and rights of individuals, often in complex situations, and this is one such situation.

I am not allowed to call the First Minister a liar, but that answer was not truthful. I have just said that I am not allowed to do it, but he is not giving a truthful answer. It is desperate stuff from the First Minister. How on earth can he stand up here and say that the Government is respecting the Supreme Court ruling when it is in court arguing the very opposite?

Those actions threaten women’s safety. Right now, at this very moment, three biological males are housed in Scotland’s female prison estate. Alex Stewart was jailed for 19 years for murder after stabbing his victim 16 times in the chest. Melissa Young was jailed for 20 years for murder, having left his victim with 29 injuries from multiple stab wounds. Paris Green was jailed for 18 years for torture and murder. He recently assaulted a female member of staff, but has still not been moved to a male prison.

Let me ask the First Minister this question. Those evil killers are all housed with women prisoners. Are they male or female?

As I indicated in my earlier answer, the Scottish Government must ensure that, on all occasions, our policies comply with our legal obligations, including the Scotland Act 1998—[ Interruption. ]

Let us hear the First Minister.

—and the European convention on human rights.

In such situations, the Government must wrestle with complex issues and make difficult decisions that balance and reflect—[ Interruption. ]

Let us hear the First Minister.

—the interests and rights of individuals.

The matter is actively in front of the courts at this time. Scottish ministers appreciate the public interest in the particular circumstances of this case, so, in the interests of open justice, the Government will publish our written case—that being our answers to the judicial review and our note of argument—ahead of the hearing that is due to begin on 3 February. Making the materials that have been lodged with the court publicly available will allow anyone with an interest to follow, in a well-informed way, what is said in court.

I stress that the matter is actively in front of the court and that the Government is trying to make information available to ensure that members of the public—[ Interruption. ]

Thank you, members.

—can follow the case in a well-informed way.

The need for the protection of space on public boards for women has been accepted and the law corrected, but a policy that means that female prisoners, a Majority of whom have experienced male violence, might have to share close quarters with male-bodied inmates while they are in the care of the state is being defended.

Knowing everything that we know about trauma, and given the countless testimonies from women on this matter—including testimony given both privately and publicly by a number of his own party colleagues—does the First Minister understand just how appalling the Government’s actions feel to many of us and how difficult it is to reconcile the Scottish Government’s words about the protection of single-sex spaces for females with its actions on the matter? [ Interruption. ]

Let us hear the First Minister.

I acknowledge, understand and appreciate the strength of feeling expressed to me by Ruth Maguire. I understand her views and the points that she makes and expresses on behalf of those who have had traumatic experiences.

I stress what I said in my earlier answer. The judgment by the Supreme Court is accepted by the Scottish Government and what we are doing is ensuring that our policies comply with all our legal obligations, including the Scotland Act 1998 and the European convention on human rights. The Government is obliged to ensure that that is the case. We have considered the issue and the actions that we are taking are consistent with that consideration.

The Government claims that it accepts the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of women in the Equality Act 2010, but I am not certain that it does. To be honest, I am not sure that the First Minister fully understands the impact that that is having.

The Government has chosen to advance an argument in court that a blanket ban on housing trans women in the women’s prison estate may violate their human rights under the European convention on human rights. What consideration did the Government give to the human right of female prisoners to serve their sentences with dignity and to be kept safe from male-bodied prisoners?

In the likely event of the Government losing its court case, in light of the Supreme Court judgment, how soon after that will the Government comply with that judgment? Will it change its policy as a matter of urgency?

Pauline McNeill questioned the Government’s acceptance of the Supreme Court judgment, so I say once again that the Government unreservedly accepts the Supreme Court judgment. As a consequence, we have revised guidance that is in place in other areas of policy to ensure compatibility with that judgment.

In the case of the guidance on prisoners, the Government has made an assessment, and that is now being tested in the courts. The issue will be determined by the courts. Out of the respect that I have for the decision making of the courts, I want to make sure that the court is free to make its judgment on the application of the guidance that the Government has put in place.