Hansard

I welcome the debate and I will support the Executive motion—that is a rare occurrence. I congratulate the Minister for Communities and the Deputy Minister for Communities on the wording of the motion. Too often, we talk about violence against women as if it happens in the absence of anyone else and we do not mention the men. It is hugely important that the motion refers to "male violence against women", because if we are to challenge attitudes we must describe the problem as it is: men are the perpetrators of violence against women. I understand the significance of the Executive's welcome shift in language and I think that women's organisations throughout the country will appreciate that, too. The amendment in my name is intended to complement the motion and I hope that members receive it in that way.

According to the United Nations, women face increasing violence in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia, especially when they speak out to defend women's rights. In Liberia, 40 per cent of women and girls who were surveyed said that they had been victims of sexual violence. However, we need not travel far from the Parliament to find women who have been subjected to sexual violence and denied justice. Last year there were 900 reports of rape in Scotland but just 39 convictions—a conviction rate of 4.3 per cent. The number of reported attacks has doubled in the past 10 years, but the conviction rate has dropped, as Cathy Jamieson acknowledged on 6 March. In some areas the conviction rate is even lower. For example, none of the 20 reported rapes in Dumfries and Galloway in 2004-05 resulted in a conviction.

The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 and the Sexual Offences (Procedure and Evidence) (Scotland) Act 2002 were intended to give greater protection to women who reported rape and to improve their chances of bringing a successful prosecution. When the Lord Advocate was Solicitor General for Scotland, she announced the findings of a review of the system, which made 50 recommendations. I hope that during the debate she can give us information about progress in that regard. Research that the Scottish Executive commissioned indicated that in the three years after it was passed, the 1995 act failed to protect women who reported rape.

I welcome Elish Angiolini's commitment to reforming the system, but much more needs to be done. I have tried to flag that up in my amendment. Christine Grahame talked about the need for change. We cannot say often enough that there will have been effective change only when conviction rates start to increase. I cannot claim to be able to be more specific about what is needed, but changes need to be made, so that we can bring to justice the men who perpetrate violence against women.

It is bad enough that women are made to relive their ordeal when they come forward and that their chances of succeeding are around one in 25; what is worse is that the courts are still failing to protect innocent victims of male sexual violence from humiliation and degradation in the witness box. The Executive's own research shows that defence lawyers made verbal applications to introduce evidence of the complainer's sexual history in 23 per cent of rape cases and that 95 per cent of those applications were made spontaneously, which means that they were sprung on the complainer while she was giving evidence.

What is worse is that researchers found that sexual history evidence of the type prohibited by the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 was introduced without application in half the rape cases heard in the High Court that the research investigated. The researchers said that the nature of the questioning and the inspection of the complainer's private life, including their medical and gynaecological histories, can be potentially humiliating and intimidating. Small wonder that the researchers also found that 62 per cent of complainers in the High Court were audibly distressed and were crying or sobbing while giving evidence. That is torture; it is cruel and inhumane treatment of women that would not be tolerated if the victims were men.

Where are the other crimes the victims of which are treated as criminals? Where are the muggers' victims who are treated as liars? Are they subjected to questioning by defence lawyers about whether they were asking for it by wearing expensive designer clothing?

On the basis of the Executive's research it is fair to conclude that about three out of four women who are brave enough to give evidence against rapists are being subjected to humiliating questions about their sex life with no protection from the courts.

Research from the United States suggests that introducing sexual history evidence lowers the chance of securing a conviction. That means that an awful lot of women's chances of securing a conviction have been compromised by the introduction of such evidence. As a result, thousands of rapists are wandering about free. As well as there being hundreds of rapists who escape justice because no prosecution is ever brought, despite a complaint being made, thousands of women never make a complaint because they know that, at best, all they face is humiliation in court with a tiny chance of conviction. Men know that they can do the crime and need never worry about doing the time.

We need to consider setting up specialist sexual violence courts of a type similar to Glasgow's domestic violence court, which I think has been effective—the signs are that it is certainly helping to address male violence. We need courts that are presided over by judges who will provide protection to women complainers; where prosecutors are determined to secure justice for rape victims; and where defence lawyers are prevented from humiliating victims. Until we have such courts, we will continue to let down women who are subjected to vile crimes against their person while letting rapists continue to believe that they can get off.

I ask members to support my amendment, which recognises that we still need effective change. I hope that there is consensus on that throughout the chamber.

I move amendment S2M-5109.1, to insert at end:

"and, in so doing, expresses continuing concern at the despairingly low conviction rates for rape and sexual offences and the continuing humiliation that the majority of women complainants face through the courts allowing examination of victims' sexual history and character, and believes that the efforts of the Executive to address male violence against women must be supported by effective change in the criminal justice system."