Blick_UK Politics (9780198825555)_CH10

240 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

In practice 10.3 The campaign against ‘upskirting’

Before the passing of the Voyeurism (Offences) Act 2019, implemented on 12 April 2019, there was no law in England and Wales expressly preventing taking photos underneath someone’s clothing without their knowledge. It was possible to prosecute a person for ‘upskirting’, as it is commonly known, under more gen- eral law relating to outraging public decency and vo- yeurism. But the lack of legislation designed for the exact purpose of preventing upskirting could make it hard to instigate a prosecution. In 2010, legal amend- ments passed in Scotland only sought to address this specific issue (Lipscombe, 2018: 4–7). The campaign that led to a change in the law for England and Wales suggested ways in which a single person can make a difference to political outcomes. In this instance, the individual concerned achieved an impact through the use of digital technologies; through linking up with pre- existing groups and ideas about change; and through working with an established authority—in this case, with Parliament. They met with powerful obstacles— including online abuse and procedural resistance from within Parliament to the legislative intervention they advocated. Ultimately, by achieving backing from the UK government, legal change occurred. Though a sig- nificant step, altering the law could only be part of the wider transformation sought. In 2015, the Law Commission raised the possibility of new legislation to outlaw upskirting (Lipscombe, 2018: 8). Then in 2017, Gina Martin began a public campaign for change. Martin had been a victim of upskirting while at a music festival in Hyde Park, London (BBC News, 2019b). She reported the incident on site, and though the police were able to see the image, no legal pro- gress was made in dealing with the person taking the photo. Martin began a campaign using social media, achieving substantial support—including from peo- ple who had endured similar experiences—but also becoming the target of abuse from those who did not sympathize with this cause. By forging links with experts and campaign groups, Martin was able to es- tablish the nature of the gaps in the existing law (BBC News, 2017). Martin instigated an online petition demanding a change in the law that would eventually gain in excess of 100,000 signatures; and some Police and Crime Com- missioners also raised the issue. The UK government

decided to carry out a review (Evenett, 2018: 2). The Liberal Democrat MP, Wera Hobhouse, took up the cause, and introduced a private members’ bill to clearly prohibit upskirting (BBC News, 2019b). The Hobhouse Bill entered Parliament in March 2018. Crucially to its chances of successfully becoming law, the govern- ment announced that it supported the bill in June. A setback came when a Conservative MP—claiming to object to the specific use of parliamentary procedure taking place, rather than the substance of the meas- ure—blocked the legislation. This episode generated immense controversy. The government announced that it would take forward the alteration in the law itself (Evenett, 2018: 2). The 2019 Act inserted new provisions into the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The specific approach it took to dealing with upskirting followed the model of the 2010 Scottish legislation. It closed existing loopholes in the law in a number of ways. Previously, it might be nec- essary for at least two people other than the victim to have been present for the offence to count. Therefore, if upskirting took place on a train carriage with no other passengers, it might not be possible to prosecute the perpetrator. The 2019 Act removed this requirement. It also made it possible to apply notification require- ments to a person guilty of the offence—commonly known as placing them on the ‘sex offenders register’. Someone guilty of upskirting could potentially receive a prison sentence of up to two years (BBC News, 2017; Lipscombe, 2018: 13). Parliamentary debates during the passing of the bill demonstrated that there were wider problems—such as misogyny in society—that the legis- lation did not directly address (Lipscombe, 2018: 15–19). Furthermore, passing the Act in itself was not sufficient to stop upskirting from taking place. This change would require effective enforcement and a willingness of vic- tims to report the crime. There was some evidence that the public campaign had led to more people coming forward: in the two years from April 2015, there were seventy-eight reports to the police of upskirting, while for 2018 alone the figure was ninety-four. The cases mainly involved men committing upskirting against women (BBC News, 2019b). What were the main methods by which the campaign to outlaw upskirting achieved its objective?

© Oxford University Press