| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Greenway: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Previously, whenever the House debated a criminal justice Bill--certainly once in each Parliament--we debated the death penalty. Those days have gone, but I have an inkling that, in future, whenever we debate criminal justice matters, particularly Bills that refer to sex offences, we are likely to discuss the offence of rape, the structure of that offence and the way in which rape trials are conducted.
Part of the reason for that is the fact that the Bill introduces changes that, as the Minister knows, are controversial. We had several constructive debates about them in Committee. In addition, the Home Office is undertaking a detailed research study into the offence of rape, entitled "Question of evidence?: investigating and prosecuting rape in the 1990s".
Earlier this week, some hon. Members who are in the Chamber attended a seminar that the Minister kindly arranged to discuss some of the review's objectives. I make a suggestion to the Minister: will he consider extending that review so that it considers the anonymity of defendants in sex offence cases, particularly those accused of rape? I make the suggestion for several reasons. The first is that the Bill proposes important changes that are clearly designed to protect victims. Clause 34, in particular, provides for an absolute ban on defendants in rape cases cross-examining rape victims. We appreciate why the Government propose making that provision.
We also know from our debates in Committee, and from representations that all hon. Members have received, that the legal profession is divided on the provision. Some lawyers have said that the Government should go further, whereas others--including the Law Society, in stating the official view--have said that it is entirely the wrong thing to do. I dare say that in this debate we shall discover that divisions on the issue are not between, but within, political parties. Victims' interests are unquestionably being provided for in the Bill. I am happy about that,
as the case for such provision has been well made. However, what are the consequences of that provision for the interests of defendants?
Secondly, although the Home Office review will consider all of the issues relating to sex offences, it makes some basic assumptions. I want to deal with one specific assumption, which is that any application of the criminal law must be fair, necessary and proportionate. On the basis of that principle, I want to question whether there is a case for the House again to consider whether, in the interests of fairness and justice, there should be a restoration of defendants' anonymity--particularly in rape cases, but also in cases involving other sexual offences.
The history of the matter is that the Criminal Justice Act 1988 amended the law on anonymity for complainants in rape cases so that anonymity commences when an allegation of rape is made to police and not--as provided in the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976--when a defendant is formally accused. The 1988 Act also removed the anonymity of defendants in rape cases.
Subsequently, in 1994 there was a review of the anonymity provision. My right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), in answer to a written question, confirmed that he was satisfied
In April 1995, Mark Jackson, a 21-year-old chef, hanged himself. He had been accused of rape by a former girl friend. The Crown court jury at Exeter acquitted him, but the story had reached his home town of Wigan 250 miles away, where the local newspaper headline screamed:
Before Christmas 1996, a young man of 25, Dennis Proudfoot, gassed himself in his car. He had been charged with rape and was terrified of the effect of the publicity
on him and his family. A few days after his death his parents received a letter from the girl admitting that he had not raped her.
Those are just two of a catalogue of tragic cases that have occurred in the past few years--since my right hon. and learned Friend last reviewed the issue as Home Secretary--in which accusations that were malicious or that, even if they had substance, ended in acquittal resulted in a defendant's life being ruined. We have been right to explore giving greater protection to victims, but we should also take this opportunity to give consideration to the innocent defendants of rape allegations whose lives and whose families' lives have been ruined by the glare of publicity. One could take up more time with other cases, but I am conscious of the fact that other hon. Members want to speak and we are time limited.
This is not just about men accused of rape seeking some justice through anonymity unless or until they are convicted. Sadly, there are also cases involving women. I understand that on 7 February 1997 the General Medical Council found a female doctor not guilty of indecently assaulting a woman patient. She was subjected to the glare of publicity and her career and personal life have never recovered. I accept that the procedures of the GMC are different from those of the courts, but the principles are the same. Therefore, I felt it right to bring the issue before the House again.
I have one further important point for the Minister. Clearly, this is an exploratory debate, and we do not intend to press the matter to a vote. However, I want the Minister to consider extending the review of how rape and sex offences are investigated and prosecuted, and I would like the anonymity issue to be brought within the purview of the review.
I wish to refer to the incident that prompted me to propose this as a matter for discussion. We have just discussed the reporting of criminal incidents involving young persons under 18 and I have referred to the case of Adam Dent, a 15-year-old who was accused of rape and identified in the press, but not subsequently charged. That case is one of the reasons why the Opposition have agreed to accept the Government's proposal for further curbs on press reporting of criminal incidents to protect the identity of the defendant.
If it is right to give protection and anonymity to a teenager falsely or maliciously accused of rape--as is proposed in clause 44--what is the case for restricting that prohibition only to young men under 18? An accused person aged 17 would be protected, but someone aged 18 would not. Is that a fair, just, balanced or logical conclusion? I am not sure that it is, as is made clear by the two or three cases that I cited which involved young men--maybe a little older than Adam Dent--in similar circumstances.
I wish to drawn the House's attention to the potential scale of the difficulty. In the preamble to the Home Office research study paper, there is an analysis of the attrition process in rape complaints. Although there has been a marked reduction in the number of rape complaints where the cases were subsequently not recorded as crimes, some 25 per cent. of rape allegations are still not recorded as crimes. The most common reason for that is that the complaint was believed to be false or malicious. In over one third of such cases, the complainant withdrew the allegation.
It is perfectly feasible that, in each of those cases, the identity of the persons accused would have been revealed to the press. There could have been some lurid press coverage, with all the consequences of that for that person and his family. We cannot conclude that this is just a tiny problem. It is a significant difficulty and one to whichthe House--and the Minister--should give serious consideration.
Mr. Beith:
We support the aim of the new clause. On Second Reading I asked the Government to consider the issue of anonymity for those accused of sexual offences. Complainants rightly have anonymity. As the hon. Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) said, it encourages the continuance of a case in an area where there is considerable fall-off, for the understandable reason that it is an extremely harrowing business to add to the awful experience of rape all the trials and tribulations that attend on pursuing a court case.
The case for anonymity of the accused is strong. There are two main reasons for granting it. First, the anonymity of the victim can be undermined when the defendant is known. It is also extremely common in rape cases for it to be possible to deduce who the victim is from other extraneous circumstances, such as the location. Lack of anonymity for the defendant undermines our ability to protect the complainant.
Secondly, the social stigma of a rape accusation is very great and may long survive an acquittal. Reputations can be ruined and marriages destroyed simply by allegations. In cases where the allegation is false and malicious, the accuser has the protection of anonymity, so it is reasonable that in those circumstances, which are different from those in other cases, the defendant should have the same right. Of course, the anonymity would disappear on conviction.
The hon. Member for Ryedale spoke of people who were so traumatised by the allegation that they took their own life, even though it subsequently emerged that no rape had occurred. It is clear that people in such cases are under extreme pressure.
"that the present law, which affords anonymity for complainants in sexual offence cases, but offers no special protection for defendants, strikes a proper balance between the principle of open justice on the one hand and the need to ensure that victims of sexual offences are encouraged to come forward on the other."--[Official Report, 18 February 1994; Vol. 237, c. 1029.]
The history of the matter is important to our consideration of the provision for two reasons. First, one of the justifications for the changes in the Bill to the conduct of rape trials is that they will encourage more rape victims to come forward--rather than being discouraged from doing so because of the publicity given to one or two notorious cases in which victims were cross-examined, ruthlessly and without any protection from the court, by the alleged assailant.
"Jilted man, 21, raped ex-girlfriend".
Mark was named and identified for all to see. He could not bear the shame and on the morning of Sunday 9 April his mother found him hanging from the staircase.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |