After almost three years, MacAskill insists he knows where he's going

KENNY MacAskill, has been in post as justice secretary for close to three years. No-one would deny these have been "interesting times" in both civil and criminal justice with the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the collapse in disarray of the highest profile murder trial in decades, overhaul of the business basis of the Scottish legal profession and much fluttering in the legal dovecotes about more change to come.

While no politician with responsibility for law and order ever has the luxury to play the long game while required daily to damp down brush fires that flare up in unexpected quarters, Mr MacAskill insists he is clear about his "direction of travel".

In criminal law he thinks the interests of justice in high-profile cases will be served by reviewing the present restrictions on double jeopardy and allowing evidence of previous bad character to go before a jury. A consultation on double jeopardy will be opened shortly but it will be for the next Holyrood administration to legislate. Similarly, in civil law he expects "one big bill" to be introduced by the next Holyrood administration "of whatever hue" to legislate on the comprehensive blueprint set out in the Gill Review of the Scottish Civil Courts.

While there has been anxiety in some quarters over the recommendations of the Thomson review of the rights of audience in the supreme courts, Mr MacAskill is explicit that there will be no attempt to shoehorn reforms into the Criminal Justice and Licensing Bill currently before the Scottish Parliament.

Acknowledging the criticisms voiced increasingly by judges throughout the UK, including the former Lord Chief Justice in England, Lord Woolf, that legislators are too quick to pass a law in response to passing issues, Mr MacAskill says: "I think there is some merit in that observation. My preference is for a big civil justice bill and a big criminal justice bill after the next Holyrood election.

"Frankly, even the acknowledged experts in some areas find it hard to say for sure what the law is when a section in one act has to be considered in the light of three or four other piecemeal legislative stabs at the subject.

He goes on: "Firearms control is a classic example. We would bring forward a single bill clarifying what a firearm is, who is entitled to possess it and for what purposes, and what constitutes firearms offences."

That is if Westminster agrees to devolve the power to legislate on firearms.

He insists he is also a great believer in the worth of Scots common law as the foundation of an approach to law and order and the temptation to define in detail every possible variation on misconduct. He believes, he says, in the importance of supporting individuals at all levels in the criminal justice process when they make judgment calls.

That is the context in which he intended his call for a radical reduction in the use of prison sentences of six months or less to be debated.

"We are not doing away with prison sentences of less than six months. What we've said is that such sentences should be the exceptional case and not the rule. Why do we say that? All the evidence shows that a tough community sentence works. A short prison sentence doesn't work.

"The statistics are quite stark. Three quarters of those given a prison sentence of six months or less reoffend within two years. Three-fifths of those given a community sentence will not reoffend."

The concern expressed by sheriffs in the past is whether the past is a reliable guide to the future.

Up to now they have taken some care to identify those in the dock who might respond well to a non custodial disposal.

Yet if the presumption shifts and the less promising candidates are added to the criminal social workers' caseload, will the figures look as good?

Mr MacAskill says: "I can understand their concerns. If they are not satisfied we have provided the appropriate community sentence, the community payback, with effort directed at destroying the 'bed and board' culture or dealing with the underlying drug or alcohol problems they will have our full support in their sentencing decision.

"We do recognise there's a challenge that the government has to rise to. Can we provide the appropriate support to ensure community payback is there?

"There are problems in some parts of the country and we have to raise their standard to the level of other areas where it is frankly outstanding."

In Mr MacAskill's view, his direction of travel seeks to promote a balanced approach: "We are getting tough where we have to be tough. We've set up a Serious and Organised crime Task Force – the first ever such institution in Scotland. We know in a world of global crime we are not immune to those who prey, connive and damage communities. That's something I am proud of, but some of the criminal conduct is rooted in broader social problems that the justice system can't solve.

"Drug addiction and alcohol problems need to be addressed. To that end we require individuals to take responsibility for themselves as well as recognising the role of collective responsibility for the wider action that Scotland needs to take in undoing its damaging relationship with alcohol."

The grind of alcohol and drug related prosecutions that dominate the work of the Scottish courts is often obscured by the headlines generated by high profile cases.

The collapse of the World's End murder prosecution in 2008 prompted Mr MacAskill to instruct the Scottish Law Commission to report on whether "double jeopardy" should be reviewed, allowing an accused to be tried again on the same charges after being acquitted at trial.

The World's End trial revealed a catalogue of prosecution disasters. When the SLC reported last year it indicated its recommendations should not be applied retrospectively. Kenny MacAskill was quick to appear on television saying if the Crown Office was minded to reopen the World's End case he would support it.

"Sometimes – not often – the law ends up as a system of rules because of the adversarial system where sometimes the interests of justice aren't served for a variety of reasons," he says.

"I see it as the job of the justice secretary and the legislature to seek to make sure that the rules provide for the interests of justice to be served. The Scottish Law Commission had reasons for their view that retrospectivity might not be appropriate. Equally there are many others who think it is appropriate as it is in other jurisdictions. This is about weighing the rights of the accused with the rights of the broader community."

He goes on: "We will shortly be seeking to consult on retrospectivity, for new evidence and, in view of the amendment proposed by the Conservatives, whether it should be restricted to murder and rape. That would not apply therefore in an Operation Algebra situation (internet paedophile investigation]. I think the community would see no sense in that.

"After the consultation the next stage will be to introduce legislation that will be, I'm sure, thoroughly debated, but it is my sense that the broad view of Parliament is that we should move to where other jurisdictions presently are."

Acknowledging that judgment calls can sometimes go wrong and in the spirit of Nicola Sturgeon's appeal for political intensity to be eased sufficiently for decision makers to reflect on whether they got it right, does Kenny MacAskill think he could have done anything differently in his decision to release Megrahi on compassionate grounds last summer.

"In this instance no. I would have been more impressed by those who have criticised the way I went about my decision after it was made if they had indicated how they would have done it differently before."