Anonymity for defendants:

John Wadham, Director of Liberty, says:
"It is a fundamental principle of our criminal justice system that trials should take place in public and that the media are able to report them in full. This principle is echoed in all the major treaties on human rights.

"Any exceptions to this principle should be as narrow as possible and only when justified on the basis of some overwhelming other public interest. (Thus, for instance, restrictions on the media reporting the details of evidence in a case from the time of charge until that evidence is given in court, in order to ensure the accused can have a fair trial).

"Although rape defendants are likely to be damaged by false accusations their position is not significantly worse than that of innocent defendants charged with other serious offences. In such circumstances the public interest in open justice must take precedence.

"Nonetheless, the level of stigma that remains attached to people who are acquitted has to be a major concern. We seem no longer to accept that people are innocent until proven guilty - and that's a huge problem both in this and other areas of criminal law".

Anonymity for accusers:
"The disparity between the numbers of rapes that apparently occur each year and the very low number of convictions by the courts demonstrates that the criminal justice system is failing the victims of rape. In order to ensure that those women who are raped feel able to report this to the police, women (and more recently men) should retain their right to anonymity".