The Scottish Sentencing Council, established in 2015, has seen staffing costs rise by 355 per cent and overall spending increase more than threefold, according to an analysis by Aberdeen University law lecturer Dr Graeme Brown.

In a scathing essay published in Greens Criminal Law Bulletin, Dr Brown described the body as a “masterclass in institutional preservation”, alleging it had produced a “limited output” despite years of funding and resources.

He highlighted the “intense controversy” over the council’s Sentencing Young People guideline, which he said had resulted in unduly lenient sentences for offenders under 25 convicted of serious crimes.

“If bloated budgets and an ability to squander public funds equalled effectiveness, then the council would be world leading,” he wrote. “Instead, the council is a monument to inertia: Expensive, opaque and, insofar as the legal profession and most sentencers are concerned, functionally irrelevant.”

Dr Brown examined the council’s first nine annual reports, finding that annual expenditure had risen by more than 338 per cent, from £198,635 in 2015/16 to £871,140 in 2023/24. Staff costs, meanwhile, had climbed from £147,102 to £669,073 over the same period.

He noted: “The council’s remit has not expanded over the past decade.”

“At a time when other public servants have faced pay erosion, job cuts and increased workloads, this is unacceptable,” he added.

According to Dr Brown, the council’s contribution over 10 years amounts to three general guidelines – which largely re-stated existing sentencing practice – and one offence-specific guideline that repeated work already done by the appeal court.

He also criticised the body’s handling of rape sentencing guidance, saying it had first pledged to begin work seven years ago but had still not finalised its proposals. In the meantime, he pointed out, successful Crown appeals in rape cases had continued to rise.

Referencing a 2023 case, Dr Brown said Lord Justice Clerk Dorrian, then chair of the council, refused a Crown request for a guideline judgment on rape sentencing.

She had said that the council would “shortly consult on a draft guideline for the offence”.

Dr Brown added: “Despite Lady Dorrian’s assurances, the council’s draft guideline on sentencing rape was, in fact, only issued 19 months later.”

He called this “a shameful, and completely unacceptable” delay.

Since that ruling, he said, there had been 11 successful Crown appeals against unduly lenient sentences in rape cases.

A Scottish Sentencing Council spokesperson said: “Every sentencing guideline developed by the council is a result of a process of careful and evidence-based decision making, involving thorough research including with judges and victims, consultation, and testing prior to the submission of a final guideline to the High Court for its approval.

“This process takes time, but is essential in ensuring guidelines are fit for purpose for all their users.

“With four sentencing guidelines now in effect, the council will soon submit two rape guidelines to the High Court for approval: Rape, and rape of a young child under the age of 13. If these guidelines are approved by the High Court the council will review their operation in line with its statutory duty and its published methodology.”