Lord Carloway’s conclusion that there was “no doubt that the requirement of corroboration should be entirely abolished for all categories of crime” has met with a mixed response from professionals and practitioners.

Andrew Tickell of the University of Edinburgh said that much of the “angst” surrounding the removal of corroboration was overstated.

“While jury trial is used for the most serious of crimes, attracting the most punishing sentences, the vast majority of criminal cases in Scotland are decided by sheriffs sitting alone, or in Justice of the Peace courts,” he said.

“Off the top of my head, jury trials constitute around 5% or so of criminal proceedings undertaken, despite their dominance in the public consciousness and in dramatic representation.”

Former President of the Glasgow Bar Association, Hohn McGovern, said that the doctrine of corroboration was no longer the cornerstone of the legal system it had once been.

“Corroboration [has been] watered down so much it has virtually gone anyway,” he said via Twitter.

“[It] bears little resemblance to its highpoint.”

The Law Society, in a statement issued by President and former Procurator Fiscal Cameron Ritchie, said it had “grave concerns” over the proposal.

“Before taking the radical step of abolishing what has been an integral part of Scots criminal law since time immemorial, there would have to be an overwhelming case for that change presented and in our opinion the review in itself does not achieve that,” he said.

“We believe there is a case for a wider and broader based review of the law of evidence and criminal procedure.

JUSTICE Scotland broadly welcomed the majority of the review, but shared the Law Society’s central reservation that abolishing corroboration would risk “justice being undone.”

“There are recommendations which we are very pleased to see in the Report which will enable the period of police detention to far better provide for safeguards for suspects,” the group said.

“Equally the role of the SCCRC would be largely restored under these proposals. However, the parts of the Report which deal with evidence and appeals in our view demonstrate how little time was afforded to consider such wide ranging issues. The proposed reforms here would do much to strip away the safeguards recommended for police detention and risk unfair trials once the case is before the courts.”

“Maggie Scott QC, Chair of JUSTICE Scotland said: “Whilst we welcome the safeguards Lord Carloway has recommended to ensure suspects at the police station will be afforded a fair trial from the outset of proceedings, we are dismayed by the suggested wholesale removal of corroboration absent alternative safeguards to ensure evidence which ought not to be before a jury is excluded.”

“Were this proposal to be followed by Government, defendants and victims at trial would be at risk of justice being undone” she added.