Jim Allister voices concerns about future of open justice in Northern Ireland as new law bars public from gallery during sex offence trials

A judge, John Gillen, proposed a wealth of changes to how sex offence cases are handled after the Ulster rugby players and their co-defendants were acquitted over an alleged rape which had been reported roughly two years earlier.

These changes are known as the Gillen reforms, and many of them have already entered force.

Today’s barring of the public from Crown Court sex cases alters the long-standing principle of UK law that anyone – students, bloggers, family members, friends of witnesses – can access courtrooms and get an unfiltered, first-hand look at how the justice system functions.

In addition to the barring of the public from Crown Court proceedings, the two other changes entering force today are as follows:

– Anonymity for claimants of sexual offences, which expires after their death, will now be extended until 25 years after they have died.

In other words, if someone reports being the victim of a sex offence, then mentioning any fact which identifies that person within a quarter-century of their death will be a crime punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of £5,000.

– People who are accused of a sex offence will now be guaranteed anonymity up until the point they are charged.

While the overwhelming bulk of the Gillen reforms are geared around softening the trial process for complainants, this last measure may be seen as a kind of concession to the accused.

However, its actual impact will be virtually zero: it is extremely rare that the media learns of the identity of someone who has merely been questioned in relation to a sex case.

Usually such information only gets confirmed once that person is charged and comes before a court – at which point the anonymity granted by these reforms dissolves anyway.

Tight anonymity restrictions covering complainants have been a fact of UK law since 1992.

Rape defendants used to be anonymous in Northern Ireland up until point of conviction from 1978 until 1994, at which point that law was repealed.

The latest reforms were announced by Richard Pengelly, top civil servant at the Department of Justice (and husband of the DUP’s Emma Little-Pengelly).

TUV MLA Jim Allister, a KC with a long background in criminal trials, has been among the few politicians to have publicly questioned some of the reforms in the last few years.

Speaking to the News Letter last night, he said: “Public justice has been central to our judicial system for generations, as we shook off the medieval stigma of star chambers and behind-closed-doors ‘justice’.

“Thus, I disagree with the default position being all Crown Court cases involving sexual offences being in secret.

“Rather, the discretion of the presiding judge to hold relevant parts of a trial in camera is much more compatible, I believe, with open justice – which itself is a key component of confidence in the trial and legal process.”

He added: “Just as data protection largely dies with death, I must also question the necessity of anonymity being death plus 25 years.

“Sometimes confidence in the judicial process can be under pressure and, therefore, to build in trials in secrecy for a whole cohort of cases is not, in my view, advisable.”

The ban on the public attending is not total: news reporters can still attend (specifically “bona fide representatives of news gathering or reporting organisations”), as can one family or friend nominated by the complainant, and one nominated by the defendant.

During the Jackson/Olding trial, there was a backlash to the appearance in court of Ulster rugby star and team-mate of the accused Rory Best, who was watching proceedings.

Alliance MLA Paula Bradshaw was among those to have demanded answers about his appearance.

She was quoted in the Belfast Telegraph as saying: “It's hard to measure if the rugby team's reputations have been tarnished … the whole thing has been ill-judged from the start."

Mr Best had been advised that he may be needed as a character witness, but was not ultimately called.

Frank O'Donoghue QC, representing Stuart Olding, said at the time: "He (Mr Best) attended in court to hear the evidence of the complainant.

"It has provoked what can only be described as a ferocious debate about his appearance or attendance.

"This is a public court and any member of the public can attend this court at any time.

"It is extremely important that the public should know that there is a presumption of innocence which some may feel has been lost."

In the past five years concerns about the Gillen reforms have been almost totally unreported outside the pages of the News Letter, even though they have stemmed from lawyers themselves, a leading UK judge, a feted international author and commentator on the #metoo movement, and others:

• Revamp of Northern Ireland rape cases risks innocent men being jailed, says Sir Richard Henriques – the judge who examined UK false sex claims scandal

• Gillen review: Top QC Chris Daw warns against ‘tilting scales of justice’

• ‘Beware thumb being placed on scales of justice’: world-renowned author Lionel Shriver reacts to Gillen sex case review

• Major concerns raised by lawyers over ideas to overhaul sex cases

• Gillen review: There is nothing in this to harm fair trials says MLA

• PSNI launch seven-strong full-time detective squad to re-examine 10-year-old complaints of 'sexual impropriety' against officers, including allegations of behaviour while off-duty