WHILE we welcome any move by our justice system to pursue sex offenders and protect the vulnerable, we are uneasy about the law changes announced by the Government yesterday.

As we report, police will now be able to apply for orders placing restrictions on people suspected of being a sexual predator even if they are unable to actually prove offences in a criminal court.

On the face of it, the change may appear a sensible one, but it marks an erosion of the basic principle that underpins the British justice system: you are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The closest parallel we can draw with these orders are Asbos, where police or councils secure restrictions on people they are sure have been breaking the law but are unable to prove it definitively in a criminal court.

However, unlike an Asbo, the stigma of being labelled a sex offender is nigh on impossible to remove, even if a suspect was to later overturn an order on appeal.

We don’t wish to be misinterpreted as defending paedophiles and rapists. We feel the point must be debated to ensure safeguards are in place preventing police officers seeing this as a convenient shortcut to nail someone they wrongly suspect.

Any reasonable person must be in favour of a more robust police and judicial system dealing with sex offenders, but it must be reasonable and proportionate.

The starting position for dealing with an abuser has to be to a criminal charge and conviction. This new system could only be a valuable addition to our justice system if it is used with considerable safeguards in place.