lawyers to be jointly committed to finding the truth and ensuring that the norms of rule of law and justice prevail. Similarly the judge has to follow the proceeding carefully and use his/her professional judgment and strive to ensure that justice is done in fulfillment of the interests of the community. Where these standards are not observed consistently, an important core procedure of the legal system in responding to crime, the criminal trial, can end up being biased against the victim. The adversarial style of prosecution can result in a trial for GBV being a traumatic experience for the victim, especially in sexual crimes. In Rape for instance, the consent of the victim is a defence to the crime. The prosecution will therefore try to prove that the victim consented to sexual intercourse. This adversarial environment means that she, as well as experts like forensic evidence witnesses and others are subject to harsh cross examination. The trial judge can intervene and control the procedure to ensure that it is not biased against the victim and key witnesses. If this control is not exercised, the negative environment impacts on the elicitation of the truth, as well as on the persons who are before the court as victim and witnesses. [See Annex]. (iii) Evidentiary Rules and Sentencing in Criminal Trials These are key aspects of the criminal Trial. There are specific matters that are of special relevance to the subject under consideration. [See Annex]. Burden of Proof and Evidence The guilt of the accused has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt under our Evidence Ordinance (1895) and the Criminal Procedure Code. This means that in some cases like rape where the offence is nonconsensual sex, the burden of proof is on the defence to show that the victim did not consent. This can be difficult in a situation where rape occurs when a woman is in detention or custody or was in a place under the control of the accused. In this situation some countries have recognized that the prosecution must prove that the victim consented, [See Annex]. Amendments to the Penal Code have after 1998 created an offence of custodial rape, which suggests that a similar result has been achieved by creating liability for rape when a woman is in lawful or illegal custody, and it is proved that the accused had sexual intercourse with the woman. (See Custodial Rape earlier and Annex). DNA evidence can be used today to establish the identity of the accused. It is now being used in criminal trials. However our criminal law recognizes the right to bodily integrity, and interference is considered violence. Consequently blood and body fluids can be obtained only with the consent of the accused. Another principle of the criminal justice system that operates against the victim of GBV is the requirement that evidence of the victim in a sexual offence has to be "corroborated", or supported by independent evidence. As pointed out earlier, this is a principle of the English Common Law, and it has not been followed in some cases in our courts that have been willing to recognize that the accused can be convicted on the victim’s evidence. There is also some continuing misunderstanding on what is required as “independent evidence” (e.g. that there must be evidence of resistance and physical bodily injuries) even though the amendment of 1995 to the Penal Code clarified that such evidence is unnecessary to prove rape. (See Annex). There is a rule of evidence based on English Law that spouses cannot generally give evidence for the prosecution (Evidence Ordinance S.120 (4)). The reason for this is the idea that husband and wife are 28 COMPENDIUM ON LAW, GENDER BASED VIOLENCE AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS