The sexual offences act [2003], is the most prominent piece of legislation surrounding the area of sexual offences, this legislation outlines the different type of offences and most importantly clarifies the components for criminal liability. This act for many people at the time was seen as the biggest reform of sexual offences legislation which has taken place in a generation. This indicates that it is difficult to discuss possible areas for reform without including possible reform for the SOA [2003].
Firstly, the most controversial area of the SOA [2003] is throughout the numerous sections there is not a clear definition of consent. Given the fact that having consent and there not being consent is the difference between rape and consensual sex, it is of grave disappointment that there has not been a clear definition of …show more content…
The major issue with not there being a clear definition of consent is firstly, the burden of proof increases in the specific case when there is no force. In English criminal law there are two parts to a criminal liability the physical element and the mental element (actus reus and mens rea). In the case of rape the actus reus element is only needed for sexual interaction with a child under the age of 16, the age of consent in a global view can be as high as 21 in Bahrain and as low as 11 in Nigeria. In the UK there have been arguments to increase the age of consent as a majority of 16 year olds do not understand the full consequences of sexual intercourse. However, there has also been calls to lower the age of consent to as low as 15 years old in the UK. Professor John Ashton, president of the Faculty of Public Health, was the person who proposed this as he believed it would be more easier to prevent STDs as they can gain access to contraceptives without hassle. Although, this makes sense scientifically it does not make sense politically, thus Downing Street rejected the proposal for reform. Nevertheless, one must take into
Firstly, the most controversial area of the SOA [2003] is throughout the numerous sections there is not a clear definition of consent. Given the fact that having consent and there not being consent is the difference between rape and consensual sex, it is of grave disappointment that there has not been a clear definition of …show more content…
The major issue with not there being a clear definition of consent is firstly, the burden of proof increases in the specific case when there is no force. In English criminal law there are two parts to a criminal liability the physical element and the mental element (actus reus and mens rea). In the case of rape the actus reus element is only needed for sexual interaction with a child under the age of 16, the age of consent in a global view can be as high as 21 in Bahrain and as low as 11 in Nigeria. In the UK there have been arguments to increase the age of consent as a majority of 16 year olds do not understand the full consequences of sexual intercourse. However, there has also been calls to lower the age of consent to as low as 15 years old in the UK. Professor John Ashton, president of the Faculty of Public Health, was the person who proposed this as he believed it would be more easier to prevent STDs as they can gain access to contraceptives without hassle. Although, this makes sense scientifically it does not make sense politically, thus Downing Street rejected the proposal for reform. Nevertheless, one must take into