Violent abusers to be prevented from cross-examining ex-partners in court

Domestic violence victims will no longer face the threat of being interrogated by their former partners in court under proposed legislation.

The Ministry of Justice has also confirmed that it is considering measures to restrict references to the sexual histories of rape complainants when they give evidence.

The moves follow a campaign by women’s rights and victim support groups, which say change is long overdue on both fronts.

Violent abusers are not allowed to cross-examine their former partners in criminal cases. But they are still allowed to in family courts, where thousands of women each year can be potentially subject to cross-examination by a violent ex-partner.

Last month the justice secretary, Liz Truss, ordered an emergency review into the practice, which she branded “humiliating and appalling”.

Under the prisons and courts bill, due out later this month, family court judges will be given new powers to stop abusers from being able to torment their victims in court.

Judges already have discretion to conduct a cross-examination themselves if a former partner is not represented by a lawyer. But the change, which requires primary legislation, will allow judges to go further and appoint a legal aid lawyer to prevent abusive men from being able to question their former partners.

“This is a humiliating and appalling practice which must be banned as quickly as possible,” Truss said. “It cannot be right that anyone who has found the courage to escape their abusive or violent partner should be subjected to the stress and torment of being confronted and interrogated by them in any court.”

Research by charity Women’s Aid suggests a quarter of women in family court proceedings have been cross-examined by an abusive former partner.

Sir James Munby, president of the family division of the high court, has also called for a change in the law. In December a spokesman for Munby said: “He has made clear his view that the family justice system lags woefully behind the criminal justice system. He has expressed particular concern about the fact that alleged perpetrators are able to cross-examine their alleged victims, something that, as family judges have been pointing out for many years, would not be permitted in a criminal court. Reform is required as a matter of priority.”

Separately, under plans being rolled out this year, vulnerable victims and witnesses will no longer have to appear in court. Instead their cross-examination will be recorded and played during the trial – a move that the justice ministry says will spare victims and witnesses the stress of reliving traumatic events in open court.

This follows three successful pilots which showed that victims felt less pressure giving evidence pre-trial and that witnesses were better able to recall events. Almost three-quarters of the cases in the pilot programmes, run in Liverpool, Leeds and Kingston-upon-Thames crown courts, involved sexual offences.

The ministry has also confirmed that it is looking at amending the criteria under which a rape complainant’s sexual history can be admitted as evidence. Although it believes that the bar for the disclosure of a complainant’s sexual history is high, and at the discretion of judges, it says it has listened to concerns raised and is now looking at how the law works in practice.

Last week Plaid Cymru’s justice and home affairs spokesperson, Liz Saville Roberts, introduced a 10-minute rule bill in parliament which proposed a new law to prevent a rape victim’s sexual history being disclosed. The Observer reported that in one study, conducted in Northumbria, a third of rape cases saw the complainant’s sexual history discussed in court.

Truss recently held a summit for victims’ groups to discuss strengthening support for rape victims, to ensure they have the confidence needed to come forward with their complaint.

Last year, 35,798 complaints of rape were made to the police. But there were only 2,689 convictions, partly, campaign groups contend, because some complainants withdrew their allegations, fearing humiliation in court.

Harry Fletcher, director of the campaign group Voice4Victims, said: “The impact of cross-examining a person about their sexual history and the direct questioning of victims by domestic abuse perpetrators is intended to undermine the credibility of the victim and humiliate them. This is neither just nor fair and does not happen in other trials. It’s welcome that the government is looking to change the law in these areas.”

Source: The Guardian