Admissibility of character evidence in rape cases

Anew report commissioned by the Bangladesh Legal Aid & Services Trust (BLAST) and the Thomson Reuters Foundation, provides an insight into the laws regarding use of character evidence about complainants in rape trials in seven countries.  

The report titled Character Evidence in Rape Trials- 'A Comparative Study of Rape Shield Laws and the Admissibility of Character Evidence in Rape Cases' reviews in-depth the laws on character evidence from seven jurisdictions including Canada, India, Pakistan, South Africa, Singapore, United Kingdom and the United States of America. It identifies reforms that have now resulted in enactment of 'rape shield' laws, which prohibit any questioning on the complainant's character and past sexual history during rape trials. BLAST will use this report to support its advocacy before the Law Commission of Bangladesh seeking reform of the colonial era Evidence Act, 1872 which still allows use of character evidence in such cases.  The report will help to identify the options for law reform in Bangladesh on this issue, whether to simply repeal the law, or also put in place 'rape shields', preventing questioning on character of the complainant.

As part of its efforts to address barriers to access to justice in cases of violence against women, BLAST undertakes research and advocacy on law and policy reform, with rape legislation being a key focus area. Following recent public interest litigation led by BLAST, the Hon'ble High Court directed the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to set up an expert committee to review the process for medical evidence collection in rape cases, to provide guidance for lawyers and health professionals, and forensic experts, and in particular to address concerns over the so-called 'two-finger test'.  This report is pending consideration. In the meantime, the law that permits use of character evidence to draw conclusions about and to question women's character remains in place.  

Ms. Sara Hossain, Honorary Executive Director, BLAST said, “Globally, the laws on rape have evolved from narrow definitions requiring proof of force to requiring proof of consent. Section 155 (4) of the Evidence Act 1872 represents an archaic understanding of rape requiring the complainant to prove that she is of 'good' character.” She also added, “Our experience suggests that the use of this provision is a major barrier to women and girls securing justice in rape cases. It contradicts our constitutional guarantees of equality, as well as provisions of CEDAW. It's time to repeal this discriminatory and arbitrary legal provision.”

From Law Desk.