Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


MSPs back landmark reform of sex crime law

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 11 June 2009
THE biggest ever shake-up of sex laws in Scotland was hailed last night as a "landmark" step that would protect more victims of sexual predators.
The Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill will create for the first time a statutory definition of consent – a crucial issue in rape cases that will now be enshrined in the law as "free agreement".

It also widens the definition of rape, to include male
rape, and introduces a range of new statutory offences dealing with voyeurism and coercive sexual conduct, including sexually offen-sive e-mails or text messages.

MSPs voted by 121 to zero in favour of the bill yesterday, with one abstention.

Justice secretary Kenny MacAskill, said the changes would provide Scotland with a clear and robust legal framework that would help "ensure victims are protected and offenders punished".

But he added that the attitudes of some people towards sexual offences also needed to change. "Legislation cannot be the justice system's only response to rape and other sexual offending," he told MSPs.

"It is also crucial that steps are taken to change public attitudes and challenge misconceptions."

Mr MacAskill stressed the need to challenge the attitudes of the "significant minority who are still too willing to blame the victim" for crimes such as rape.

Yesterday, The Scotsman revealed Scotland's conviction rate for rape remains the lowest in Europe – with fewer than one in 25 cases successfully prosecuted.

The justice secretary said: "Challenging myths, assumptions and unacceptable attitudes is vital if the legislative reforms and the changes being made to the prosecution of these offences are to be fully effective.

"This is a journey, not simply in terms of legislation, but in terms of Scotland becoming a modern, progressive country, recognising the position of women and treating them with the respect they are entitled to."

He said the changes would build on previous reforms, recalling it was only 20 years ago that the law recognised a woman could be raped by her husband.

He said the scope of the new legislation was a "landmark" for the Scottish Parliament, worthy of marking the tenth anniversary of devolution.

Paul Martin, Labour's community safety spokesman, raised concerns about the new laws, claiming there was a remote possibility they could allow a person convicted of sexually assaulting a child to be fined.

But his concerns were dismissed by the other political parties, and Mr Martin went on to state there were "very many positive aspects" to the bill.

Tory justice spokesman Bill Aitken gave his backing to the reforms, adding: "

Sometimes people behave foolishly, sometimes people behave even irresponsibly. But it is our duty to see they are protected."

Liberal Democrat justice spokesman Robert Brown said the bill covered "difficult and sensitive" topics

"It provides protection and sanctions where men as well as women are the victims of nasty and brutal sexual attacks," he said.

The reforms were also welcomed by Sandy Brindley, of Rape Crisis Scotland, who said they marked "an important re-framing of our legislation on sexual offences" and provided a much-needed broadening of the definition of rape.

But she added: "We should be in no doubt that much still needs to be done if we are to significantly improve Scotland's very low conviction rate for rape."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 10 June 2009 9:27 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Legal Issues
 
1

somerferg,

perth 11/06/2009 01:50:57

ABOUT TIME TOO

"This is a journey, not simply in terms of legislation, but in terms of Scotland becoming a modern, progressive country, recognising the position of women and treating them with the respect they are entitled to."

AGREE
2

brianmca3,

auld reekie 11/06/2009 08:40:11
about time,but the courts have to hand out appropriate sentences
some judges dont care as long as fat salary goes into bank on time
too many shyster lawyers who drag up a womans past sex life
that as nothing to do with anyone
NO means NO
now this law will deal with this,i see this covers male rape as well,did the present laws dismiss male rape?
3

mr broon,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 09:30:52
According to the BBC this is a landmark piece of legislation because it was widely reported Down South where comparisons are being made with many of the same problems which still exist in providing sufficient protection for women, and prosecuting rapists in the English and Welsh jurisdictions.





4

andyned,

holland 11/06/2009 10:00:14
Paul Martin, Labour's community safety spokesman, raised concerns about the new laws, claiming there was a remote possibility they could allow a person convicted of sexually assaulting a child to be fined. CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT ?
5

Duncan in Edinburgh,

11/06/2009 11:02:02
#4 Not to worry. Paul Martin is treading a fine electoral line here because his heartland support is chiefly Catholic and socially conservative, and very susceptible to criticism from bishops. He actually supports this bill, but he wants to have it appear that he stood up against it in some small way so that when the church's press office berate the parliament for promoting honest and fair approaches to sexual morality, he can look like he was vaguely on their side. Look out for Keith O'Brien delivering a half-hearted condemnation of this bill sometime soon - he's another one who feels compelled to rail against progress for fear of losing support.
6

SandyBottoms,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 11:05:01
The law is great that it makes men and women equal in that both genders can now file rape charges.

However, the MSPs seem to rely on the fact that the law will be enforced by the police and prosecutors. On the issue of (for example) sadomasochism, they argue that most police officers and prosecutors would not follow up activity that is consensual and noone is complaining. Will the police officers and prosecutors be so forgiving in cases of rape and sexual assault?

If the police and prosecutors are not properly trained in how to effectively enforce the law (gathering of evidence, treatment of victims, etc), then this law will be nought but pretty words on paper.
7

SandyBottoms,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 11:07:32
@2 brianmca3

The present law says that only a v*gina can be raped, and only by a p*nis.

The new law says that mouths, anuses, and v*ginas can be raped, by a p*nis or some other object.

(I can't beleive I had to censor that!)
8

Tartan Viking,

11/06/2009 11:37:42
What about offensive computer pop-ups? Wish I could trace the b@stards who send these.
9

andyned,

holland 11/06/2009 13:20:50
thanks Duncan. its normal slime from a self serving politician. They protect the catholic bishop who protect the priest who gets away with abusing the children in the church. and they want to keep things as they are. its great that we have the S.N.P.
10

Duncan in Edinburgh,

11/06/2009 14:12:19
#9 You might think that, but Alex Salmond was the first First Minister to speak at the Catholic bishops' conference, earning him the support from the pulpit of a Mario Conti - and he spoke in favour of state-funded religious schools. The truth is that all politicians run scared of church leaders of all stripes, because they think they have enormous influence over voting behaviour. Truth is most people see religion and politics as quite separate. It's time politicians stood up for themselves against the bishops, imams and rabbis.
11

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 14:44:50
If it helps convict more rapists then fine. However, I am struggling to see how the new law is going to do that. Can someone explain?
12

Duncan in Edinburgh,

11/06/2009 14:56:32
#11 One area where this law is intended to help improve conviction rates is with the new statutory definition of consent, which will reduce the effectiveness of defences based on presumed consent or assumed consent, and require the far more robust pre-establishment of "free agreement". Time will tell, but most folk are hopeful that this will improve matters.
13

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 14:57:14
10 Duncan

Are you criticising Salmond for doing so?
14

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 14:58:37
12 Duncan

Are you saying that the onus will now be on the accused to prove that there was "free agreement"?
15

SandyBottoms,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 15:05:07
Margaret Cannum (I think) said that it is still the case that the Crown has to prove that there was no consent. And it probably will improve conviction rates for cases that get inditments. But even some of the MSPs questioned if it would improve the rates for reported crimes overall, because the responsibility is still upon the police officers and the prosecuters. While the definition of consent is quite long and lists many cases where there is no consent, it still depends upon "reasonable belief" that the consent was requested and granted. What is "reasonable" for one person may not be for another. Without educating the public and the front line against sexual offences, this will be a useless bill.
16

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 15:05:42
I need some guidance from Kenny MacAskill on how to obtain "free agreement" from my wife before the event.
17

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 15:07:26
15 Sandy

Thanks for the explanation. I suspected as much. You are right, public education is the key, otherwise this is a waste of time.
18

Duncan in Edinburgh,

11/06/2009 15:20:07
#13 Yes. He and any other politician who lends succour to religious divisiveness and the state-sponsored indoctrination of children in sky-god beliefs should be ashamed of himself.

#14 No. But it will reduce the effectiveness of some commonly used defences, which is what I said.
19

Stan Butler,

11/06/2009 15:30:58

I think people are getting too hung up on the word rape here.

The various acts of sexual assault which weren't previously classed as rape were all common law crimes already, and being common law crimes there was no maximum sentence set by legislation.

I can't see how this tinkering and renaming of offences is going to be of any benefit to a victim.


20

Duncan in Edinburgh,

11/06/2009 16:05:41
#19 Are you saying you know better than the Scottish Law Commission, who largely drew up the legislation, the legal experts in various fields who supported it, and the politicians from all parties who studied it, took evidence on it, amended it and passed it?

I don't think you know the first thing about it to be honest.
21

Stan Butler,

11/06/2009 16:18:27
#20 Duncan

Rather than hide behind the Scottish Law Commission, various legal experts, and God help us, MSPs perhaps you could deal with the specific point I made.

How does the reclassification of a number of crimes as rape help anyone?

Seems to me like politicians pandering to the ignorant.

22

Stan Butler,

11/06/2009 16:29:59
#20 Duncan

'Are you saying you know better than the Scottish Law Commission, who largely drew up the legislation'


I've just had a quick look to see who the commissioners were.

Would you like to tell us just how much experience each of them have in dealing with rape and sexual offences cases?


23

Duncan in Edinburgh,

11/06/2009 16:43:34
#21 Oh grow up. The legislation is far more than the renaming of a number of crimes as rape, and you either know that but want to have an argument anyway, or you haven't a clue what you're talking about. Either way, grow up.
24

andyned,

holland 11/06/2009 18:11:12
#10 Thanks again. You remind me to look at the totality of what goes on. I do think that politics and religion are in it together though. the catholic church has put the kings of Europe in power since the beginning of time and they are still doing it now. Politicians are sh#4t scared of them still including blare who has become a Catholic and its so clear that its a political move on his part. Maybe he wants to be king of Europe.
25

Stan Butler,

11/06/2009 21:05:09
#23 Duncan

Still not answering the question.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.