THE Lord Chief Justice urged Parliament yesterday to consider whether the names of people accused of rape should be kept secret until they are convicted. Lord Woolf said that there was a “fine balance” over the question of whether people accused of rape should be exposed to publicity before conviction.
He refused to comment during a press conference on the Leslie case, but said: “The situation has got to be kept under continual review. It’s a very fine balance.
“Where the balance should be would be helped by being clarified by Parliament. This is something on which I feel Parliament is perfectly designed to deal with rather than an individual judge. I would prefer to hold my counsel as to my own personal view.
“I do believe in public trial and I do believe that defendants should be identified, as should witnesses in general, but we do have special provisions in relation to rape cases. At the same time, it would be wrong to have trial by media. It is the court’s job to try people.”
The Government is opposed to reintroducing anonymity for rape defendants as existed between 1976 and 1988. A Home Office spokesman said: “We do not believe there is any justification for those accused of sexual offences to be singled out for special protection where other defendants, including those accused of murder, could be identified.”
Advertisement
Anonymity for rape defendants was introduced in 1976 to ensure equality in the treatment of both defendant and complainant. It was also argued at that time that potentially innocent defendants needed protection from the social stigma of a rape allegation that often remained even after an acquittal.
This year the Home Affairs Select Committee said that it was persuaded by arguments to extend anonymity to people accused of rape and other sex crimes.
Its report said: “Although there are valid concerns about the implications for the free reporting of criminal proceedings, we believe that sex crimes do fall ‘within an entirely different order’ from most other crimes.”
But it made a confused recommendation to the Government. It urged anonymity for defendants in sex offence cases, but said that this should be limited to the period between the allegation being made and the person being charged.
“In our view, this strikes an appropriate balance between the need to protect potentially innocent suspects from damaging publicity and the wider public interest in retaining free and full reporting of criminal proceedings.” The Home Office has rejected the idea.
Advertisement
Officials from the department are to hold talks with chief constables and the media to see if existing guidelines can be strengthened.
A spokesman said: “We appreciate the great distress that is often experienced by those wrongly accused or charged with sexual offences.”
He said that the system worked on a principle of openness, which was “vital” in encouraging witnesses to come forward.
“Officials at the Home Office are in discussion with the police and the newspaper industry to see what can be done to strengthen existing guidelines about the disclosure and reporting of the names of persons who are being investigated for an offence, but where no charge has yet been brought.”
DEBATE
Advertisement
Should rape suspects be anonymous?
Send your e-mails to debate@thetimes.co.uk