NI sex offence victims could be jailed if they name abusers, court told

Victims of sexual assault could be jailed if they publicly name their suspected abusers, a court has heard.

The claim was made by a barrister representing the media in a challenge against sexual offence anonymity laws.

The new law, which came into effect in Northern Ireland in 2023, grants anonymity to people suspected of sexual offences, until they are charged.

David Dunlop KC said Stormont had acted beyond its "legislative competence" and that the act was "unlawful".

Media organisations have joined forces in an attempt to have sections of the Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking Victims) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 declared legally invalid.

One challenge is from the Irish News and the publishers of the Belfast Telegraph, while another is from the Times and other national media organisations including the BBC.

Mr Dunlop argued that Stormont could not introduce a law said to be incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

He argued the "sweeping impact" of the restrictions failed to properly balance the wider interest in bringing information to the public's attention.

Although anonymity continues after the death of a suspect, media organisations can apply to a magistrates' court to have it lifted.

But disputing justification for the clause, Mr Dunlop insisted it was disproportionate for any prohibition to be maintained.

"In virtually, if not every case where someone has died there will be no Article 8 rights engaged whatsoever, yet there's still a ban on publication of a suspect's identity unless the publisher is prepared to stump up the funds and make an application to set it aside," he added.

"The category of public interest journalism illustrates there is clearly an interference with Article 10 rights that cannot be justified."

He said the prospect of victims facing up to six months in jail for naming an alleged abuser was "a pretty draconian consequence of exercising one's freedom of expression".

The law stops the publication of claims against alleged perpetrators until 25 years after they die, unless they have been convicted or charged during their lifetime.

Members of the public are also excluded from the crown court during sexual offence cases under the legislation.

Northern Ireland was the first part of the UK to put these measures into law.

They were brought in as a result of legislation passed by the devolved Stormont Assembly in March 2022.

The bill was brought forward by Justice Minister Naomi Long after a review of laws and procedures relating to sexual offences.

The report by the retired senior judge, Sir John Gillen, was published in 2019 and made more than two hundred recommendations.

Any newspaper editor, journalist or member of the public who names a suspect - even after their death - could also be jailed for six months and fined up to £5,000.

Tony McGleenan KC, acting for the Department of Justice, told the court the press were seeking to go down a radical path of having a law declared so fundamentally flawed that it should be wiped from the statue book.

Mr McGleenan insisted the act provided legal certainty and a "temporal limitation" on restrictions which could still be lifted on request to a magistrate.

"It shows the assembly was fully aware of the media interest in publication," he said.

During exchanges the court heard that only the chief constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland could seek to have the anonymity clause lifted during the lifetime of a suspect who had not been charged with any offence.Using the imaginary example of a hypocritical politician believed to have committed sex crimes, Mr McGleenan suggested that a victim or the press could lobby for police to take that step.

Mr Justice Humphreys asked if the law meant an alleged perpetrator of sexual abuse couldn't plead their innocence in public without committing a criminal offence.

Mr McGleenan said this was the case.

Mr Justice Humphreys replied: "So you couldn't say 'yes there are rumours about my sexual misconduct but there's nothing to see here?'

"They could potentially end up with a six month prison sentence if they exercised that right?"

Mr Justice Humphreys told the court he would formally reserve his judgement to consider the outcome.