Hansard

It is apt, in the light of this week's press, that we are having this debate on drug-assisted sexual assault. I say that not because I want to deviate from the main subject, but because there are general concerns about the way in which women are dealt with in the criminal justice system and about definitions in the law.

If one tracks the history of crimes against women, one will discover that the legal establishment has often been slow to modernise and to bring equality to the law—consider the fact that rape within marriage was only relatively recently brought to the fore. I know that the Parliament and its powerful committees will not allow that to happen when they find fault in the law.

I turn to the subject for debate. There is a delicate balance to be struck when publicising the problem of drug-assisted sexual assault. There is a need to raise awareness, while not creating unnecessary alarm and without educating potential offenders.

I thank members who have shown their support, not only by signing the motion that we are debating tonight, but by signing an earlier motion in November. Since then, I have learned quite a bit about drug-assisted sexual assault and, because of that, have come into contact with Peter Sturman, the detective chief inspector of the Metropolitan police. He is the author of the most important research in the United Kingdom on this important issue and it is to his research that I will refer.

We must not confuse drug-assisted rape with date rape—very few victims of drug-assisted rape describe their experiences as being anything like a date. The use of that term can serve to negate the strength of the case against an offender. I speak in the light of this week's report and Lord Abernethy's decision in the Aberdeen case—that sex without force, even without the woman's consent, is not rape. That is relevant to the debate because a drug-assisted sexual attack is often sex without a woman's real consent, despite its taking place without the use of physical force.

The police hold no evidence on the specific problem of drug-assisted sexual assault or rape. Drug rape is a problem in the UK, but not of epidemic proportions, although reported cases date back to the 1940s. Rape Crisis Scotland has not noted any increase in the offence, but I would like to debate the subject and, especially, to raise awareness of it.

I want to say something about definitions. The term drug rape describes a situation in which a person's ability to consent or refuse is impaired as a result of a drug or drugs. The scenario that is most commonly associated with drug rape is one in which a drug is slipped into a victim's drink. Such drugs can render a person mentally incapacitated and physically helpless, or victims can be aware of what is happening to them while they are physically unable to resist. Assaults can vary in nature and their effect—accompanied by the trauma that is associated with the memory loss and confusion that is suffered by many victims—can be of a similar magnitude to the effect of the offence of rape.

The term date rape is often wrongly applied to drug-assisted sexual assaults. Although some attacks might result from a date scenario, the majority of complainants do not agree that they were on any sort of date. The term date rape should not be used; it belittles the effects of an attack on a victim.

We know something about the characteristics of offenders. The offence occurs in a variety of circumstances. A victim can be party to a relationship with the offender and can be a willing partner to sexual activity, but many victims have been assaulted while they were completely sedated. Some victims might consent to assaults, but simply cannot remember afterwards what happened.

Some offenders are convicted mainly on the basis of photographic or video evidence and some of that evidence would be alarming to many men and women. Offenders may have collected such evidence as pornography or as trophies. Digital technology can be used to enhance, alter or distribute such material. Some victims in such circumstances may become aware of the event only after an investigating officer shows them the evidence.

Offenders can take advantage of incapacitated victims whom they might encounter, or they might develop situations in which a person becomes incapable of forming reasoned consent. The intent of an offender is often difficult to prove. He might say that he thought it was okay and that the victim had consented. There are also questions about what constitutes socially acceptable behaviour and often the blame can be shifted to the victim.

Pre-planned offences are often the actions of more than one individual using alcohol or drugs, or a combination of the two, to achieve their objective. The first offender administers the drug, then leaves. The second offender will join in after the drug has taken effect, subsequently arguing that he could not have administered the drug. The offenders may be in a relationship. The victims feel safer when a woman is present and tend to trust a couple. The offender may give the complainant alcohol, cocaine or ecstasy after administering a date-rape drug in order to mask the date-rape drug and devalue the complainant's account when samples are examined. Most notably, most of the attacks begin in social settings and often involve people who know each other.

We know from the statistics in the report that 42 per cent of complainants are in their 30s, which is surprising, and that 20 per cent of victims are university students. The National Union of Students is to be commended on the work that it has done to raise awareness among students. We should take that as an example.

I do not have time to talk about all the drugs. I will just say a word or two about what we know. Alcohol is defined as a drug. We all know that alcohol is often associated with circumstances in which drug-assisted assaults take place. Although gamma hydroxybutyrate and a group of 20 other drugs have not been detected in drug-assisted rape cases, they are either suspected of having been used or have the potential to be used. Often, alcohol is combined with the drug. Prior to February 1999, the forensic service did not check for GHB, but now it does, so we are making progress. The crucial point about GHB is that it is colourless and practically odourless, and therefore difficult to detect.

A person who takes drugs or alcohol, and who is raped as a result of being incapacitated, does not consent. Consent must be informed—it must be intelligent and not obtained through drugs. Sixty-nine per cent of complainants realise within eight hours of the attack that they have been assaulted. The majority of victims are alone when they gain full consciousness, and the additional trauma of lost time and fear of the unknown effects contribute to the assault.

The Sturman report asks us to examine four areas, the first of which is a dialogue on sharing information between agencies. That is crucial in all the work that we do on social justice. Secondly, there should be a complainant-driven approach; Rape Crisis should be the lead body in that respect. Thirdly, there should be dedicated sexual assault examination centres, where there should be appropriate equipment to detect such assaults, which it is possible to do. Last, there should be a body to deal with drug-assisted sexual assault and to bring together all the aspects. I am not calling for those measures in particular, but saying that we should consider them as the way forward.

At the beginning of my speech, I said that I would like the Parliament to consider how we can raise awareness of this alarming situation. Once we have done that, if we decide that the law should be reformed, we should do so.

I thank members who have supported my motion and who are here tonight.