Law Reform and Forensic Medical Practice in Sexual-Offence Cases.
Recent reviews in the United Kingdom and Australia again highlight systemic shortcomings in criminal-justice responses to sexual violence. The UK Law Commission’s Evidence in Sexual Offences Prosecutions – Final Report (July 2025) and the Australian Law Reform Commission’s Justice Responses to Sexual Violence (Report 143, “Safe, Informed, Supported”) (January 2025) each propose reforms to improve fairness, privacy, and survivor protection.
Both inquiries respond to persistent criticism that existing procedures deter reporting, retraumatise complainants, and allow myths to distort outcomes. The Law Commission focused narrowly on evidentiary rules—admissibility, disclosure, and courtroom management—with the aims of clarifying consent, improving complainant treatment, and preserving fair trials. It found the current framework for obtaining sensitive material (sexual-history, medical, and counselling records) fragmented and intrusive. Its solution is a structured-discretion model requiring that such evidence possess substantial probative value on a matter of substantial importance and that disclosure be strictly necessary in the interests of justice. The report recommends clearer judicial tests, complainant legal representation during disclosure applications, and specialist courts using expert evidence to counter rape myths.
The ALRC undertook a broader structural review of the entire justice pathway—policing, prosecution, courts, and victim support—issuing 64 recommendations to create a nationally consistent, trauma-informed system. Central to its plan is a funded Safe, Informed, Supported (SIS) hub model integrating forensic medical, psychosocial, advocacy, and legal-navigation services. Reforms include enhanced police-interview and prosecution frameworks, greater use of pre-recorded evidence, protection of counselling and medical records, and limits on cross-examination by unrepresented defendants.
Both commissions identify harm arising from routine access to counselling or medical documentation, noting privacy invasion, retraumatisation, and deterrence from seeking care. The Law Commission seeks to mitigate this through tighter evidentiary thresholds and procedural safeguards; the ALRC combines legal protection with service-design reforms that permit forensic examinations and evidence preservation without immediate police reporting.
Forensic physicians, forensic medical examiners, and sexual-assault nurse examiners (SANEs) remain pivotal. The Law Commission anticipates their future contribution as expert witnesses and custodians of confidential forensic records within systems subject to judicial oversight. The ALRC, by contrast, situates examiners within the health sector under national accreditation, governance, and multidisciplinary SIS hubs to ensure equitable, trauma-informed access.
Together, the two reports offer complementary reform streams: the Law Commission provides the legal architecture safeguarding fairness and privacy; the ALRC outlines the service architecture enabling practical, humane, and evidence-based care. Implemented in tandem, they promise a more coherent and survivor-centred justice response to sexual violence.
Full article was published in the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2025.102990.