I have read the first article and it seems a little misleading and/or not entirely well informed.
There were two issues that encroached upon the rights of all suspects. Firstly, police were arresting people to interview them when there was no necessity to do so (necessity is required to make the arrest lawful). This resulted in a wave of litigation against the police for unlawful arrest. They now, quite properly, invite people in for voluntary interviews where they don’t need to arrest. A reason to arrest might be to preserve evidence for example, inviting someone in will give them an opportunity to destroy relevant evidence once they know the police are looking into an offence. If they don’t attend ‘voluntarily’ then they can be arrested instead and if they walk out of an interview they can also be arrested. The interviews are in every respect the same, they are in the same place, under the same conditions with the same right to representation etc.
Secondly, the police were bailing people without charge and placing restrictive bail conditions on them. They were keeping people on bail for many months and even years when there was no realistic prospect of charge. This was unfair and eventually challenged resulting in a time limit of 28 days to keep a suspect on bail (subject to certain exceptions). The police often arrested as opposed to invited in for voluntary interviews as above purely to be able to put these conditions on the detainee. This isn’t so appealing now we have these time limits hence why most people are invited in for a ‘voluntary’ interview. The police tend to not bother bailing anymore and simply release under investigation as they won’t conclude within the 28 day time limit.
So the two issues are very much linked. Rape investigations usually involve a lot of forensics and other things that take time. The hands of the police are therefore really tied as to what they can do.
Looking at the case cited, making threats and harassing someone are crimes irrespective of bail conditions. Interestingly enough, breach of pre charge bail conditions isn’t a crime and if there isn’t enough evidence to charge and remand in custody, there is nothing the police can do if a suspect breaches them anyway. After charge, bail conditions can be imposed.
Just some more information on what is a fairly complex issue in case anyone is interested as the article doesn’t explain it well. Balancing the interests of complainants and suspects is always tricky and obviosuly becomes more of an issue in cases such as rape and dv.