Accused rapists who plan to argue that sex with their victims was consensual may have to prove in court what measures they took to gain consent.
The proposal is one of three changes to sexual violence legislation being put forward by the Justice Ministry.
"Changing the law would send an important message about community standards and about what the law expects," ministry documents say.
"In particular, there would be a reminder that consent has to be obtained on each separate occasion."
Under the proposal, if a defendant claimed sex was consensual the courts would have to look at what steps had been taken to find out that consent had been given.
Other changes being considered are including creating a legal definition of consent to remove ambiguity and banning questioning complainants about their sexual history with the alleged attacker.
The ministry has issued a discussion paper on the proposals and is calling for public submissions.
Now, firstly let it be said that I have never been involved in a court case of this or any nature, so I don't have a vested interest. But what the Justice Minsitry is proposing is a paradigm shift of huge proportions, and totally contrary to legal principles which have been established over centuries.
I have the utmost sympathy for any person, female or male, who is the victim of sexual assault. To have to then re-live the experience in a courtroom amplifies the trauma . However the Justice system has made a number of changes over the last decade or more to make giving evidence less traumatic. But this move is a step too far.
When I posted on this a month or so ago, I described it thus - "It is a piece of liberal lunacy, goes too far, and should be quickly condemned to the dusbin.". I do not resile from that description. And I am pleased to see that Jafapete, whose political views are diametrically opposed to mine, but with whom I have had some robust debates is also urging caution.