1. Introduction
1. The Sexual Offences Bill was introduced into the
House of Lords on 28th January 2003 and arrived in the Commons
on 18 June. Its purpose is to strengthen and modernise the law
on sexual offences, whilst also improving preventive measures
and the protection of individuals from sexual offenders. As the
Home Secretary has acknowledged, the Bill touches on "highly
complicated and sensitive issues which test the balance between
the role of Government and the individual".[1]
2. The Bill was preceded by a period of reviews and
consultation and many of the issues which arise in the Bill are
set out in the reports of those earlier reviews.[2]
The current law "is widely considered to be inadequate and
out of date"[3]
and has also been criticised for its complexity, having been "made
more difficult by piecemeal changes and amendments" in the
past.[4]
3. The Bill is split into two main parts, with the
first part devoted to sexual offences and the second to sexual
offenders. Part I will create several new offences, such as 'meeting
a child following sexual grooming', and redefine some existing
ones, including rape. It seeks to establish a non-discriminatory
approach, by repealing offences such as gross indecency and creating
gender-neutral offences. Part II seeks to improve the management
of sex offenders by strengthening the 'Sex Offenders Register'
and by establishing a range of new preventative civil orders.
The emphasis throughout is on protection for children and other
vulnerable individuals with mental disorders or learning disabilities.
4. In this inquiry, we decided to focus only on the
most important and controversial clauses. We have concentrated,
therefore, on the new proposals for:
- rape and consent (Clauses 1, 77 & 78)
- exposure (Clause 70)
- sexual activity in public (Clause 74-which has
now been removed from the Bill)
- to create a new offence of 'meeting a child following
sexual grooming' (Clause 17); and
- the new civil orders to protect those considered
to be at risk of sexual harm (Clauses 110-116).
Finally, we have looked again at the question of
whether anonymity should be afforded to defendants in sex cases.
Although this issue is not dealt with in the Bill in its present
form, it is an issue which continues to be debated and which we
touched briefly upon during our earlier inquiry into The Conduct
of Investigations into Past Abuse in Children's Homes.[5]
5. Since our inquiry began, many of the clauses which
we have considered have been subject to amendment in the Lords.
Throughout this report, references to clause numbers relate to
the Bill as originally introduced, unless otherwise stated.
Conduct of our inquiry
6. During the course of this inquiry, we have heard
from nine witnesses over two evidence sessions. These included
the Minister who was then in charge of the Bill, Hilary Benn MP[6]
and Home Office officials, the Criminal Bar Association, the Rape
Crisis Federation of England and Wales (giving evidence jointly
with Campaign to End Rape), the Police Federation, JUSTICE and
British Naturism. All of the oral evidence is published with the
report. In addition, we have received written evidence from 47
individuals and organisations, for which we are most grateful.
In particular, we received a large number of submissions on Clause
70 (exposure) from individuals or organisations representing the
interests of naturists, a representative selection of which has
been published. A full list of witnesses and those who have provided
written evidence appears on pages 29-31.
7. Finally, we would like to extend our thanks to
Professor Jennifer Temkin[7]
for providing a valuable and informative briefing at the start
of our inquiry. We benefited, in particular, from her insight
into some of the complex issues surrounding rape and consent,
to which we now turn.
1 Home Office, Protecting the Public, Cm 5668,
November 2002, Foreword by the Home Secretary Back
2
Home Office, Setting the Boundaries: Reforming the Law on Sexual
Offences, July 2000, Vol I; Home Office/Scottish Executive,
Consultation Paper on the Review of Part I of the Sex Offenders
Act 1997, July 2001 Back
3
Home Office, Protecting the Public, Cm 5668, November 2002,
p 9, para 8. In the same paragraph, the Government describe the
existing law as "archaic, incoherent and discriminatory". Back
4
Home Office, Setting the Boundaries: Reforming the Law on Sexual
Offences, July 2000, Vol I, p 1, para 1.1.2 Back
5
Fourth Report of Session 2001-02, The Conduct of Investigations
into Past Cases of Abuse in Children's Homes, HC 836-I, paras
98-99 Back
6
At the time that he gave his evidence to the Committee, Hilary
Benn MP was a Parliamentary Under-Secretary in the Home Office. Back
7
Professor Temkin is a Professor of Law at Sussex University and
was also a Member of the External Reference Group of the independent
Sexual Offences Review, which was established in 1999 and reported
in July 2000. Back
|
