Sir Cliff Richard is to petition Parliament to make it a criminal offence to name suspects accused of sexual offences before they are charged.

The veteran pop star is demanding a controversial change in the law to make it a crime to publish the name of anyone arrested on suspicion of rape or sexual assault until they are charged.

Victims of alleged sex offences have the right to anonymity.

His campaign has already won the backing of a number of people wrongly accused of sex crimes including the DJ Paul Gambaccini and former Tory MP Harvey Proctor.

Sir Cliff Richard is petitioning Parliament to make it a crime to name suspects accused of sexual offences

However, victims’ groups and lawyers reacted with outrage to the proposal, warning it will have a ‘chilling effect’ on rape prosecutions and freedom of speech.

They said it could hamper police investigations because victims and witnesses often come forward when arrests are publicised, as in the cases of Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris and Max Clifford.

Rape victims could also find themselves in the dock simply for alerting friends or family on social media that their attacker had been arrested.

Sir Cliff is due to launch the petition on behalf of the campaign group Fair (Falsely Accused Individuals for Reform), which states: ‘The law should grant anonymity to those accused of sexual offences unless and until they are charged. Publication of their names should be a criminal offence.’

He said: ‘I will be helping to launch this Parliament petition on July 1 to ensure that no one is ever again treated as appallingly as I was when my name was wrongfully exposed in the media. There must be anonymity before charge in sexual allegations unless there are exceptional circumstances. That is why Fair’s campaign is right and why I am supporting it. It should be a criminal offence to name a suspect before charge.’

Sir Cliff sued the BBC and police for allowing a search of his £3million home in Berkshire to be broadcast during an investigation. He was never arrested or charged

Sir Cliff, 78, sued the BBC and police for allowing a search of his £3million home in Berkshire to be broadcast during an investigation into unfounded claims that he sexually abused a boy 30 years earlier.

Although Sir Cliff was questioned by detectives, he was never arrested or charged. It was almost two years before police admitted there was not enough evidence to prosecute him over abuse claims made by four men.

He has likened the experience of being named as being like ‘live bait’ for false accusers, adding: ‘Even though untrue, the stigma is almost impossible to eradicate.’

Daniel Janner, QC, who is spearheading the Fair campaign after his late father Lord Janner was accused of historical sex offences, said: ‘It’s about the rebalancing of the criminal justice system and in particular preventing the unique stain of sexual allegations sticking with people who turn out to be innocent.

‘It is stopping prominent people being, in Sir Cliff’s words, “live bait” served up for false accusers who then come forward asking for compensation.

‘This will not prevent genuine claimants coming forward after a person is charged.’ But lawyers and victims groups said it would be an affront to open justice that could impede the identification and prosecution of sex offenders.

Critics say Sir Cliff's proposed law would stop other victims coming forward, which is what happened in the case of Max Clifford (pictured)

Chris Henley QC, chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, said: ‘Secret arrests are the hallmark of oppressive regimes.

‘It must be horrible to be arrested in a blaze of publicity; Cliff Richard should not have had to endure police tip-offs. And Paul Gambaccini should not have been left in legal limbo for so long.

‘But open justice and respectful, proportionate treatment are not incompatible. Arrests and prosecutions are done effectively in our name and with our consent. We need, within sensible parameters, to know what’s going on.’

Harriet Wistrich, director of the Centre for Women’s Justice, said: ‘There are believed to be a significant number of men who target vulnerable women deliberately often by using drink or drugs and other means to ensure they are incapacitated.

‘These sorts of cases are notoriously difficult to charge and preventing the naming of suspects will be of great assistance to such serial offenders.’

Rachel Krys, of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said: ‘Very few rapes tend to result in convictions, there is a real risk this would make it worse. This would have a chilling effect on victims’ ability to seek justice.’