The government has announced a review of the use of rape complainants’ sexual history during court cases in the wake of concerns that the acquittal of footballer Ched Evans could deter women from reporting attacks.

The retrial in which Evans was cleared last month of raping a 19-year-old woman prompted outrage from campaigners after a key part of the defence argument involved describing the complainant’s previous sexual history.

This is permitted, under strict conditions, by section 41 of the Youth and Criminal Evidence Act 1999. Women’s support groups said its use in such a high-profile case could set a precedent and put off others from pursuing a complaint.

News of the review came in a debate on crime and policing in the House of Lords on Wednesday, when the Liberal Democrat peer Jonathan Marks raised the Evans case. He argued that the case “raised fears that complainants will be deterred from reporting rape because they might be cross-examined about their sexual history”.

In response, Susan Williams, a junior Home Office minister who also works with the Ministry of Justice, argued that the legislative bar put in place by section 41 was “high and decided by judges on a case-by-case basis”, meaning there should be no risk of it happening more often.

But she added: “We are aware of the recent concern about the admissibility of a complainant’s previous sexual history, and wider perceptions about the law. We accept that the concern should be looked at and we intend to deal with it. We have committed to looking at how the law is working in practice and will do so as expeditiously as possible, to understand whether any further action needs to be taken.”

Asked whether this meant the government was undertaking a review of the law, Lady Williams replied: “Yes.”

The announcement was hailed as “exceptionally good news” by Jess Phillips, who was among more than 40 female Labour MPs who wrote to the attorney general in the wake of the Evans case warning about the possible consequences.

In the letter to Jeremy Wright, the MPs said a move towards revisiting the sexual history of complainants in court would “act to make the prosecution of rape cases in the future harder and reporting of these crimes less likely”.



“The verdict and events in this case set a dangerous precedent that how a victim of rape, usually a woman, has behaved in the past can be taken as evidence of the way she behaved at the time of the alleged rape,” they wrote.

Campaigners fear Evans case will stop women reporting rape Read more

Phillips said that although Wright had indicated willingness to look into the matter, she and her fellow MPs had not been told before now that anything was happening.

She said that although the Evans case did not create a strict precedent under law, she remained worried about the impression it left. “Because of the high-profile nature of the case and the way it happened, it sends a terrible, terrible message,” she said. “If we can even just amend the law slightly to toughen up the protections against this sort of case then that’s what we need to do.”

The MP, who formerly worked with a charity helping victims of domestic sexual abuse, said: “A review of the law and how the law needs to work is very much needed. Lawyers might say no change is needed, but as someone who has spent a lot of time in courtrooms, my faith in the ability of this system to work for sexual violence victims is at a low ebb already. Any protection is a good thing.”

Lord Marks, the Lib Dems’ legal spokesman, said the Evans case had “led to the perception that a victim’s sexual history can be combed through and used against them in court”, which could lead to fewer people coming forward to report rape.

“We all have a responsibility to ensure that victims of rape are encouraged to come forward to enable justice to be done,” he said. “That is why we sought a review of how section 41 is working, to ensure that the section is as restrictive as we have long thought it is.”