Justice Secretary asks for review into revealing rape victim's sexual history - the Metropolitan Police Service inquiry into false allegations

The Times reports http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rape-victims-sex-lives-may-be-off-limits-q5lbcqxjs that the Justice Secretary, Liz Truss has asked for a review into the impact on rape victims of the existing law, which allows their sexual history to be revealed in court.

This is a welcome development. The ability of a court to allow such evidence in, means according to women's rights groups that the rape victim is effectively put on trial.

It has always struck me as a peculiar, that a woman's sexual history should be treated almost as if it was some kind of criminal record, or that a history of sexual encounter in the past in some way, affects that woman's credibility when she claims that she never consented. What about the man's sexual history, or his own criminal convictions?

Quite apart from anything else, anyone who has gone through the criminal court system as a rape victim will tell you about the sheer horror of the whole process.

I came across another development the other day, which may be a concern to victims of abuse. A very informative article written by Zubair Ahmad, barrister of 2 Hare Court describes the publication in November 2016 of an Independent Review into the Metropolitan Police Service's (MPS) handling of cases of historic sexual abuse.

http://www.2harecourt.com/training-and-knowledge/independent-review-metropolitan-police-services-handling-non-recent-sexual-offence-investigations-alleged-persons-public-prominence/ 
 
The Review was set up after allegations made by a person known as ‘Nick’, who accused high profile individuals of abuse. Whilst the Review was written by a highly respected judge, and whilst some of its recommendations are perfectly reasonable, others may be a concern to victims of abuse. Here are some of the recommendations.

1. The word ‘victim’ should be removed from the investigation process and those who make a complaint be referred to as ‘complainants’ up to the moment of conviction
2. The College of Policing’s guidance that officers should believe a complainant’s account should be changed. Facts should be investigated objectively.
   
3. False allegations should not be treated as a remote possibility.
4. The MPS should avoid pro-actively sharing information about a suspect's age and location. 
5. There should be pre-charge anonymity for suspects enforced by statute and a clear definition of the exceptional circumstances in which the MPS would identify a suspect.
   
6. The explanation: “the case failed to meet the evidential test” should be adopted when no further action is to be taken.
   
7. In exceptional cases, the MPS should consider issuing a statement explaining why no further action has been taken.

The term "victim" is certainly one that indicates that a person has suffered abuse, although the law is quite clear that a person remains innocent until proven guilty. The term is used in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, but does not means that a "victim" will be compensated.

The recommendation that might cause most concern is the pre charge anonymity for suspects. In many historic child abuse cases, it is the announcement of the arrests of a suspect that has encouraged victims to come forward, with  credible claims of abuse by that suspect. 

However this recommendation does not appear to exclude any reporting of a suspect's identity, only that it might be much more difficult in the future for the police to take that step.