Controversy Arises as Law Commission Suggests Limiting Journalists’ Coverage of Rape Trials

The Society of Editors has expressed its horror at the Law Commission’s proposal to restrict journalists’ access to rape and sexual assault trials. The Law Commission is currently conducting a review of the trial process for rape and sexual offences in England and Wales, with submissions due by the end of September.

The Society of Editors has said that this proposal would have a devastating effect on the coverage of sexual offence cases and goes against the principle of open justice.

The Crime Reporters’ Association and a rape victim, Ellie Wilson, have also opposed the proposal.

Ellie Wilson, who waived her right after her rapist was convicted, stated that more needs to be done to lift the secrecy around courts and expressed her opposition to the proposal. She recognized the important role journalists play in court by ensuring people think about their words, as they will be reported.

The executive director of the Society of Editors, Dawn Alford, argued that adding unnecessary restrictions on the media’s presence in court during the giving of evidence by complainants is disproportionate and unlikely to significantly affect victims’ court experiences. She also highlighted the potential negative impact on public confidence and reporting of sexual offence cases.

The Society of Editors also claimed that the proposal is impractical, as there is no fair way of selecting which journalist would be allowed to remain in court, and there is no system in place to check and distribute their copy to interested media outlets.

The Law Commission spokesperson emphasized that they acknowledge the critical role the media plays in reporting on sexual offences trials and ensuring justice is done and seen to be done. They stated that complainants already have the right to request to give evidence in private, and they are consulting on making this process easier while still allowing media reporting.

They added that they welcome all views on their proposals, and it will be up to the government to decide how to proceed once they produce their final recommendations.

Sean Parker, editor of False Allegations Watch, also expressed his opposition to the proposal, stating that having one court-approved reporter syndicate their report to other media outlets would lead to further confusion and degradation of these cases.

PA Media contributed to this report.