Defendants accused of sex offences could have their identity protected - unless they are convicted.

The provision is included a major piece of legislation dealing with sexual offences and obscene publications.

As the law stands, if someone appears in court accused of rape or other sexual offences, their name can be reported by news outlets. Victims’ identities must be protected.

But the Sexual Offences and Obscene Publications Bill will change the rule to give defendants a similar same right of anonymity to that afforded to victims - but they could be named if found guilty.

The final draft of Sexual Offences and Obscene Publications Bill has been drawn up, following a public consultation.

The bill brings together and updates two previously separate pieces of legislation.

It appears on the agenda for a first reading in the House of Keys today (Tuesday). There will be no debate - that comes at the second reading and clauses stages - but it means the bill, which will be promoted through the Keys by Dr Alex Allinson (Ramsey), is now in the public domain.

As with the current law, the new bill specifies that when a sexual offence case goes to court, or if someone has been accused of it, nothing can be published that could lead to members of the public identifying the victim.

However, it goes on to provide similar protection for suspects and defendants. This is a break from the current law. Any ban on naming them would cease automatically if they were convicted.

The court would also be able to direct that information that may identify a witness should be withheld.

There is provision for a senior police officer to apply to a magistrate for a lifting of the ban on naming a suspect, in order to assist with an investigation or to protect the public.

In all cases of anonymity - both for a defendant or a victim - a judge could lift the ban on naming if they decided it would impinge unfairly on the reporting of a trial or if they felt it was in the public interest for a person to be identified.

The rules on anonymity apply on a range of sex offences, including rape, procurement, drugging someone in order to have sex with them, under-age sex, incest, incitement, indecent assault and indecency with children.

Under the present law, the punishment for breaking anonymity rules is only a fine, but the bill introduces a prison sentence of up to 12 months.

During the consultation, 81% of respondents said that the anonymity of a defendant should be protected in certain circumstances.

Among the other changes the Sexual Offences and Obscene Publications Bill introduces are a number of measures to take cognisance of the evolution of offences on the internet and through social media.

It introduces a new offence to combat ’upskirting’ - taking pictures up somebody’s skirt - under the remit of recording an intimate image without consent.

During the consultation, 91% of respondents said they regarded ’upskirting’ as a form of sexual abuse.

And the bill also stipulates the proposed pardon for those convicted of since-repealed ’historic homosexual offences’ should be automatic, rather than upon an application by the individual or their family to have their case looked at. It would still be up to the person or family to apply formally to have the offence removed from all records.

In the consultation, 77% of respondents were in favour of the automatic pardon.