Sexual Offences Act 2003
From Free net encyclopedia
The Sexual Offences Act 2003 is an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom that was passed in 2003 and became law on May 1, 2004.[1]
It replaces other sexual offences laws with more specific and explicit wording. It creates several new offences such as voyeurism, assault by penetration (with objects), causing a child to watch a sexual act, meeting a child following sexual grooming, and necrophilia.
There are precautions against abuse of the law by provision of safeguards such as "B is under 16 and A does not reasonably believe that B is 16 or over".
Contents |
Major Changes
The Act makes many changes to the United Kingdom's sexual crimes laws, including reforming law dating as far back as the Sexual Offences Act of 1956.
Rape has been redefined from the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (amended) 1976 to read:
"a) he has sexual intercourse (whether vaginal or anal) who at the time of intercourse does not consent to it and;
b) at the time he knows that that the person does not consent to the intercourse or is reckless as to whether that person consents to it"
{{cite book
| last = Smith | first = jc | year = 2005 | title =Criminal law | publisher = smith and hogan
}}
Rape has now been redefined to include any kind of penetration to the mouth, anus or vagina.
The act also now includes provisions against sex tourism. People who travel abroad with the intent to commit sexual offences can have their passports revoked or travel restricted.However, this part of the Act has yet to be enforced by a test case in the UK and has been critisied by numerous high profile litigants due to its complexities.
Criticisms
The Act has faced criticism on several grounds, the most controversial of which is the criminalizing of various common behaviours, such as laws which, on the face of it, outlaw consensual "sexual hugging" in public places or by underage persons, even when both participants are underage, followed by the issue of guidance notes which countermand this, saying they should almost never be prosecuted.
The law is unique since neither the Home Office nor the Police have any intention of policing it or prosecuting those who break it except in extreme circumstances. This has not changed much; underage sex by teenagers has never been actively pursued by either the Police nor the Crown Prosecution Service.
The Home Office says legalising consensual sexual activity between children "would damage a fundamental plank in our raft of child protection measures". A spokesman said, "We are not prepared to do this. We accept that genuinely mutually agreed, non-exploitative sexual activity between teenagers does take place and in many instances no harm comes from it. We are putting safeguards in place to ensure that these cases, which are not in the public interest, are not prosecuted - by amending guidance to the police and Crown Prosecution Service."
Criticism comes from Action on Rights for Children: "Laws should mean what they say. It's astonishing that the government could consider legislation with the prior intent of issuing guidance to countermand it. I worry about the message it sends to young people - it seems to say that sometimes the law means what it says and sometimes it doesn't." Spokesperson Terri Dowty also fears that it could lead to unreasonable private prosecutions, such as by angry parents who don't like their child's boyfriend or girlfriend.
Professor Nicola Lacey of the London School of Economics comments: "What the Home Office would say was that they wanted to use the criminal law for symbolic impact, to say that it's not a good thing for kids to be having sex. My counter-argument is that the criminal law is too dangerous a tool to be used for symbolic purposes. With this on the statute book, it will give police and prosecutors a lot of discretion. It could be used as a way of controlling kids who perhaps the police want to control for other reasons. Kids who perhaps are a nuisance or who belong to a group who attract the attention of the police in some way."