To ask the Scottish Government for what reason the prison estate is segregated by sex. (S6O-05433)

The Scottish Prison Service is required to comply with relevant legislation and work towards international standards and norms to uphold the rights of all individuals while they are in custody. The prison rules, which are based on international standards, generally provide for the separation of men and women and are applied in such a way as to better support their individual needs while they are in custody.

The legal submission published by the Scottish Government states:

“There is no general requirement in law that the sexes be segregated.”

Does the Scottish Government still support single-sex spaces? If so, what assessment has the Scottish Government made of the risk that the legal arguments that it is advancing in court could ultimately result in a breakdown of the established conventions for providing female-only spaces for reasons of safety and dignity, and could require a fundamental reassessment of the Equality Act 2010?

Prison rules in relation to establishments are set out in the Prisons and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 2011, which are rooted in the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989. The member’s question touches on rule 126, which relates to the separation of male and female prisoners. The interpretation and operation of rule 126 are matters that, in relation to the placement of trans prisoners, are key issues that are being debated and disputed as a result of the live litigation, which I cannot comment on further.

However, the reason that the Scottish Government published its note of argument and answers is that we recognise and appreciate the general public interest in the issue, particularly the circumstances of the case, and the interest in open justice. The documents are there to enable people who have an interest to follow the case. However, the case must be decided in the courts—that is the appropriate place for these debates.

I will take a couple of supplementaries. They will need to be brief, but the responses will need to be even briefer.

I recently received a letter from Angela Constance, the justice secretary, in which she said two things: that the Scottish Government accepts the Supreme Court ruling and that the guidance for prisons

“does not need to be changed.”

I will clarify that. The Scottish Government accepts the Supreme Court ruling on sex, but it also thinks that it is perfectly fine for male prisoners to be housed alongside vulnerable women. How can the Scottish Government justify holding that ludicrous position?

To be brief, as Ms Dowey is a member of the Criminal Justice Committee, she will be well aware that the policy on which evidence was provided to the committee is, at its heart, all about the assessment of risk and needs of transgender prisoners and, indeed, of all prisoners, because there are particular requirements for the Scottish Prison Service and, therefore, for ministers to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all prisoners.

A study by the University of Glasgow showed that around a third of women who are serving prison sentences have had head injuries and that the vast Majority have been subjected to domestic violence. Will the Cabinet secretary outline why the Scottish Government, through its challenge, is subjecting vulnerable women to a very public court case, throwing open the arguments and essentially saying that it will no longer continue supporting the segregation of the prison estate by sex?

Although I acknowledge and respect the research referenced by Ms McNeill, her characterisation of the Scottish Government’s position is not one that I would adhere to.