January 24, 2013 11:15 IST
Don't allow Armymen to take cover under AFSPA, says Verma
Stressing that women in conflict areas were entitled to all the security and dignity that was afforded to citizens in any other part of the country, the committee recommended bringing sexual violence against women by members of the armed forces or uniformed personnel under the purview of ordinary criminal law; taking special care to ensure the safety of women who are complainants and witnesses in cases of sexual assault by the armed forced; and setting up special commissioners for women’s safety and security in all areas of conflict in the country.
The commissioners must be vested with adequate powers to monitor and initiate action and initiate criminal prosecution. Care must be taken to ensure the safety and security of women detainees in police stations, and women at army or paramilitary check points. “This should be a subject under the regular monitoring of the special commissioners mentioned earlier,” the committee said.
It also recommended strict adherence to laws related to detention of women during specified hours of the day. It said measures to ensure their security and dignity would not only go a long way in providing women in conflict areas their rightful entitlements, but also restore their confidence in the administration.
__________________________
Published: January 24, 2013 04:04 IST | Updated: January 24, 2013 04:04 IST
Home Secretary chided for giving ‘clean chit’ to Delhi Police
Deplores use of force by Delhi Police against protesters
Dismayed by the government apathy in dealing with the situation after the ghastly rape of the young paramedical student in Delhi last month, the Justice Verma Committee on Wednesday criticised Union Home Secretary R.K. Singh for giving a clean chit to Delhi Police Commissioner Neeraj Kumar. It came down heavily on the Delhi Police for using force against protesters on India Gate lawns and Vijay Chowk.
The former Chief Justice of India also asked the Centre review the appointments of all State police chiefs as not as a single Director General of Police (DGP) sent his suggestions to the Committee formed to look into legal reforms needed to deal with sexual assault cases and crime against women. The government departments were also lambasted for not responding or their late response to the Committee’s letter.
“The Commissioner of Police was given a pat on his back by no less than a person holding the post of Home Secretary … I am shocked as a citizen [to see this],” Justice Verma said while releasing the Committee report on ‘Amendments to Criminal Law.’ The least he could have done was to seek an apology for the failure of the duty to protect citizens whose safety they are entrusted upon. “This much sensitivity is needed,” he said.
Justice Verma also pointed towards lack of seriousness on part of government officials and departments in responding to the Committee’s requests for sending their suggestions. “We sought response from all DGPs … hardly any one of them wrote to us. I have asked the Home Ministry to review appointments of all DGPs,” he said.
Justice Verma further said he was disappointed by the “lukewarm” response from various government departments towards the Committee.
The people who initiated the process failed to respond to the Committee’s request, he said, and added: “Some organisations sent us their recommendations as late as yesterday [Tuesday] evening.”
Stating that law enforcement agencies should be insulated from political influence, Justice Verma took a jibe at the CBI. “The CBI changes its stand when government changes … First it files application [in court] and when a government changes, it seeks its withdrawal,” he observed.
Delhi lathicharge
Referring to use of force by the police on protesters in Delhi, the Committee said: “The lathicharge on peaceful demonstrators after the December 16 gang rape has scarred the Indian democracy.” It also noted the “peculiarity” of the Delhi government not having any control over the Delhi Police, which reports to the Union Home Ministry. This is the reason given publicly by Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit for the absence of responsibility of her government.”
“This ambiguity must be removed forthwith so that there is no divided responsibility in Delhi in respect of maintenance of law and order. Such a step is also essential to maintain accountability,” the report said. It also said the “undisputed facts” related to the [gang rape] incident “unmistakably” disclose the failure of many public functionaries for traffic regulation, maintenance of law and order and more importantly, “their low and skewed priority” in dealing with complaints of sexual assault.”
The Committee has also asked all MPs and MLAs facing severe charges to voluntarily quit as a mark of respect to Parliament, legislatures and the Constitution. “We have suggested amendments to Section 33A requiring the making of a declaration about the pendency of any criminal case, whether cognisance has been taken of it. A certificate from the Registrar of the High Court should be necessary for the validity of the nomination. We also suggest that, in the event cognisance has been taken by a magistrate of an offence ... the candidate ought to be disqualified from participating in the electoral process,” it recommended.
Khap panchayats
Coming down heavily on ‘khap panchayats’ (caste council), the Committee said means adopted by them have assumed “unreasonable proportions” and asked the government to ensure such bodies do not interfere with choices made by people regarding marriage. It asked the State to ensure that these institutions should not interfere with the choices made by men and women in respect of marriage, as emphasised by the Supreme Court.
The Committee said actions of khap panchayats are extremely relevant for its consideration in the context of crime against women, since one of the most prevalent practices to enforce writ was honour killing.
The logic of maintaining caste order by khap panchayats severely limits the freedom to freely choose one’s partner. Measures of khap panchayat like disallowing inter-caste marriage does not have legal sanction under the Hindu Marriage Act, it observed.
_____________________
Published: January 24, 2013 04:06 IST | Updated: January 24, 2013 04:06 IST
The youth have shown the way, says Justice Verma
The youth of the country who came out on the streets protesting against the failure of the government to ensure the safety and security of women received a pat on their back from Justice J.S. Verma. Commending their “peaceful” and “mature” protests, he said it was this clamour for good governance that paved the way for the constitution of the Committee on Amendments to the Criminal Law.
Hundreds of thousands of youth came out on the streets to protests against the growing instances of crime against women following the brutal gang rape of a 23-year-old physiotherapy student in a moving bus on December 16.
Releasing the committee’s report on Wednesday, Justice Verma said: “I am indebted to the youth. But for them, the issue would not have come up. They have shown the way… how good governance can be achieved in a mature manner.”
Heaping praise on the youth for their perseverance in seeking gender justice, Justice Verma said: “I was struck by the peaceful manner in which people not known to each other protested. I won’t call it a movement, but [it was a] spontaneous show of feeling.” The experience had been humbling and the satisfaction he received from drafting the report was unmatched.
He said the youth, who were incidentally at the receiving end of police action in Delhi when protestors were lathicharged, tear gassed, doused with water canons and even detained, have taught the older generation something they were insensitive to or unaware of. “This is the brightest aspect of this exercise,” he told media persons.
The committee, in its report submitted to the Union Home Ministry on Wednesday, said its formation was in response to the country-wide peaceful public outcry of the civil society, led by the youth, against the failure of the government to provide a safe and dignified environment for women in India, who were constantly the targets of sexual violence.
Pointing out that there was a need for sensitising the society, Justice Verma said: “We have all the laws; what is needed is sensitivity. It is equally shocking that a large number of people passed by where the girl and her companion lay completely disrobed and injured and no one offered help. It was total apathy….”
Justice Verma spoke about the extensive process that went into the creation of the report and the enthusiastic response the committee got from the national and international community. “We want to thank those from the international community, including people from Oxford and Harvard universities and Australia and Canada, who volunteered their observations and suggestions. In India, we consulted experts, social activists and invited representation from those associated with the topic. The committee also got 80,000 responses from the general public, which surprised us.
“It is, however, sad that this tragic incident had to occur for us to wake up to the issue of gender protection,” he said.
Speaking about the strict time limit that the group worked under, Justice Verma said: “When I was approached on December 23 to do this report, I asked when the Parliament would be in session next. And I was given February 21 as the date. So I told the government representative that instead of two months, the report would be ready in one month, and now that it is ready, I hope the government, with all its might and resources, is able to react positively on the recommendations.
“Being proactive now will be the best tribute to the memory of the brave Delhi girl who forced us to take a hard re-look at gender issues in the country.’’
_____________________
NEW DELHI, January 24, 2013
Verma panel not for lowering juveniles’ age
‘Bring new constitutional authority for education, non-discrimination of women, children’
Standing firmly against lowering of the age criteria for juveniles accused of heinous crimes including rape, the Justice J.S. Verma Committee report on ‘Amendments to Criminal Law’ has noted that “the Juvenile Justice Act has failed miserably to protect the children in the country. We cannot hold the child responsible for a crime before first providing to him/her the basic rights given to him by the Indian Constitution.’’
The report recommended the creation of a new constitutional authority akin to the Comptroller and Auditor-General for education and non-discrimination in respect of women and children.
Committee member Gopal Subramanium told a press conference that “the issue has to be looked into in its totality. The juvenile homes are unable to provide for the children what is their Constitutional rights and these children without proper and adequate fulfilment of their nutritional, emotional, physical and mental requirements are often not able to contribute productively to the society.”
“We have in our report looked extensively at the condition of homes for children and found them lacking in basic infrastructure and facilities. In these homes children are forced to grow up in the most unhealthy circumstances and are prey to all kinds of sexual offence,” he added.
Stating that the manner in which the Juvenile Justice Act has been implemented showed a complete failure of the State, Justice Verma noted: “It shows apathy but perhaps more importantly it shows vested interests. This is a matter of serious concern. We are informed that the principal magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, has actually passed orders to segregate juveniles on the basis of age to ensure that younger juveniles with tender and impressionable minds are not mistreated and are kept away from elder juveniles.
“We are also given to understand that no constructive occupational training or schedule has been formulated or are being followed.”
Missing children
Highlighting the ‘shocking’ number of children who go missing in the country everyday, the report said that “if children can be trafficked it sets the climate for rape culture.”
“Trafficking of women and children is a failure of governance,” Justice Verma said.
_____________________________
January 28, 2013
Insightful and path-breaking
Although it has left some crucial questions unanswered, the Verma Committee report is a big step forward in the struggle for women’s rights
The UPA government has perhaps got more than what it bargained for from the committee it set up, headed by the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice J.S. Verma, in the wake of the public outrage following the horrific Delhi gang rape. The government had decided on only limited terms of reference for the committee (whose other members were an equally eminent former Supreme Court judge, Justice Leila Seth, and former Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam) but fortunately the members, in their words, interpreted it “expansively.”
Through the over 600 pages of this path-breaking, insightful report, with the marshalling of irrefutable evidence, what emerges is a strong indictment of the governments at the Centre and the States for their criminal callousness in ignoring the earlier recommendations of measures to prevent sexual violence against women. In section after section, the committee quotes reports — from 1980 — of Law Commissions, earlier judgments and directions of the Supreme Court, and notifications and circulars of the Home Ministry, which were never implemented.
Critical of governments
It blasts governments for the lack of accountability of public servants, stressing the importance of making dereliction of duty a punishable offence. In the context of the Centre’s refusal to act against Delhi’s top police officials, including the Police Commissioner, the committee’s proposal is particularly relevant. It also proposes to include the concept of command responsibility in the law, holding superior officers responsible for the acts of their juniors when the circumstances show that the crime could have been prevented had the superior acted.
In fact, the Parliamentary Select Committee headed by the present Union Law Minister set up several years ago to re-examine the flawed official bill against torture discussed this issue in detail and recommended the inclusion of command responsibility. But the committee’s recommendations have remained in cold storage. Similarly, the Parliamentary Committee on Women’s Empowerment made a strong recommendation to bring the armed forces and the para-military forces under the purview of criminal law, but the aggressive opposition of Defence Service Chiefs was a convenient reason for not accepting it.
The Verma Committee takes this forward by recommending a concrete amendment to the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act to prevent it from being used as a shield to protect criminals in uniform. Significantly, it suggests the appointment of Special Commissioners in conflict zones to monitor women’s security. It is well known how women, in Chhattisgarh and elsewhere, become targets, caught between militants and the security forces.
The recommendations on the state’s culpability on a range of issues pinpointed in the report are most welcome but it is not because these recommendations were not made earlier that the situation is as it is, but because of the lack of political will.
The report locates violence against women and children in a broader framework of violation of constitutional guarantees, demolishing self-serving arguments that governments cannot be held responsible for individual acts of violence. At a time when market based ideologies so close to the hearts and minds of those in power promote the government’s retreat from its fundamental social responsibilities, the report reminds governments of their primary responsibility to ensure through preventive and deterrent measures a secure environment for its citizens. The report says: “The failure of good governance is the obvious root cause for the current unsafe environment eroding the rule of law…” Indeed the direction of governance in the last decade or so has been dominated by a promotion of corporate led growth, the “unleashing of animal spirits in the economy” with no concern for its impact on increasing social inequalities and subverting the constitutional and fundamental rights of people.
The statistics of increasing violence against women tell their own story. In 2011 alone, there were 24,206 registered cases of rape of which 2,579 were registered in the 89 listed cities. There were as many as 51, 538 cases of sexual harassment of which around 25 per cent took place in cities. Thus a majority of rape and sexual harassment victims are from the rural andmofussil areas, of whom substantial numbers are poorer sections of women and children who live and work in insecure environments. All child rape cases in Haryana in the last few months, for example, occurred because there was no crèche or safe place where the working mother could leave the child.
Vulnerable sections
The changing nature of labour contracts, from permanent workers to casual or contract daily workers, makes women workers, particularly migrant women, vulnerable to the exploitation of employers, landlords, contractors and supervisors. The privatisation of essential services has resulted in a lack of accountability in public transport, lack of electricity, absence of public toilets, all of which are directly related to government policies creating insecurity for women. The report comments “We believe that fundamental rights must not be ignored by the state on a specious argument of paucity of resources when the rich continue to thrive and the wasteful expenditure of public monies is more then evident.”
The report also mentions critical issues such as food security and malnutrition. These are welcome as they do take into account the experience of millions of poor women across the country who face sexual harassment on a daily basis arising out of their economic conditions, worsening by the day. It is, therefore, inexplicable that the committee’s recommendations for amendments to the criminal laws omit crucial clauses concerning economically and socially exploited women — in other words, the class and caste aspects of sexual violence. For example, the long pending demand to consider sexual crimes on the basis of caste against Dalit and Adivasi women or against women on the basis of communal considerations as aggravated sexual assault, inviting enhanced punishment, is unaddressed.
It is well documented how women face intense insecurity because of dominant caste hostility or communal violence. Further, because of the increasing number of cases of rape by powerful and politically connected men, women’s organisations had successfully ensured the inclusion of a clause in the official Bill of amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code introduced in Parliament that when rape is committed by a man “being in a position of economic, social or political dominance,” there should be enhanced punishment. But this does not find a place in the committee's recommendations.
In this context, there is an important demand made by rape survivors from economically and socially exploited sections for a comprehensive rehabilitation package. Some have mocked this as compensation for rape. In fact, it is virtually impossible for a rape survivor who belongs to the working class or the rural poor to bear the expenses of the legal process. It is not enough for the state to provide a lawyer. The question of loss of work, of sometimes having to shift residence, of frequent consultations with lawyers and trips to the court, incurring expenses and losing a day’s income are critical issues in the decision of whether or not to fight for justice. It is puzzling that the report does not mention a mandatory rehabilitation package or did not review the existing schemes of rehabilitation. The only mention is that the perpetrator should pay for the victim’s medical expenses. The victim might find that abhorrent and demeaning and, in any case, what if the accused proves that he has no funds? If the court wishes to fine the accused, there is a legal provision for that and hefty fines can and should be imposed. But it is the state which must take the responsibility for medical expenses and rehabilitation.
Disappointing
One of the most widely supported demands of the nationwide protests was time-bound procedure in cases of rape. Today, a rape victim, including a child, may have to wait even 10 years or more for the judgment. The report recognises the large number of pending cases with courts and calls for an end to frequent adjournments in rape cases. It suggests as a way out recruitment of retired judges, extending the age of retirement of judges at the lower levels and so on. But disappointingly, there is no concrete recommendation regarding a time-bound procedure for cases of rape or the setting up of fast track courts. The three months’ time frame suggested by a large number of organisations could have been accepted, as lengthy judicial procedures lead to gross injustice for rape victims.
The committee must be congratulated on its multidimensional report which constitutes a big step forward in the struggle for women’s rights. Its recommendations can be converted into longstanding gains if the present struggles are linked to political interventions that force the government to act on them. It cannot be allowed to meet the same fate as the 15-year-old Women’s Reservation Bill which remains an ornament to be dusted and displayed before every election.
(Brinda Karat is a member of the Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India – Marxist.)
_____________________
January 28, 2013 02:45 IST
January 28, 2013 02:45 IST
Exempt disabled women from coming to police station: Verma panel
Police can record complaint of such woman at her residence
Considering the difficulties encountered by physically challenged women at each stage of the criminal-legal process, right from filing an FIR to testifying in court during trial, the Justice J.S. Verma Committee has recommended that they be exempted from coming to the police station and making repeated visits to courts for testimony.
In its report, the committee said that when a physically or mentally challenged woman lodged a complained of rape or sexual harassment, the complaint should be recorded by a woman police officer at the residence of such woman, or wherever she was comfortable. The complaint should be recorded in the presence of a special educator or interpreter, depending on the need of the complainant. The entire process of recording the complaint should be videographed under Section 154 of the Cr P.C.
Videographed ID
Similarly, during the process of Test Identification Parade (TIP), if the person identifying the arrestee is physically or mentally challenged, then the identification must also be videographed. Also, while recording the statement of a physically or mentally challenged woman in court, the Magistrate must take the assistance of a special educator or interpreter, depending on the needs of the complainant. Additionally, the recording of testimony of the woman should also be videographed so that the statement is treated as a statement for the purpose of cross examination during the trial and the disabled woman will not have to state the same thing repeatedly, the panel report suggests.
Importantly, the panel recommended that the use of the word “dumb witnesses,” for those who cannot speak, should be replaced with “persons who are unable to communicate verbally.” ‘Dumb witnesses’ is provided under Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act.
“One of the major reasons why most cases involving rape of disabled women fail to convict the wrongdoer is because the testimony of the victim is not given due importance by the police or the court. The recommendations of the panel, if incorporated in the law, would go a long way in addressing this problem,” says Muralidharan, assistant convener of the National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled (NPRD).
The committee also invoked the idea of parens patriae (the principle that political authority carries with it the responsibility for such protection) to describe the role of the state. However, experience shows that protection by the state is like a double-edged sword. When the state takes over the role of the parent, it often overrides the opinion of the ward; the state then decides what is good for the ward and what is not. This could at times go against the interest of the disabled. This issue also needs to be addressed, the NPRD has said.
Further, the definition of special educator and interpreter requires clarity when these recommendations are incorporated into the law.
“In our deliberations with the committee, it was found that a special educator may not know sign language and an interpreter may know only a few signs and, therefore, may not be always equipped to provide required assistance in bridging the communication barrier between the victim and the legal system,’’ Mr. Muralidharan says.In the overall conclusions and recommendations, the committee has spoken of a “monitoring mechanism” for the safety and physical security of children, women, persons with disabilities, inmates of mental homes and widows and mandates that the ultimate responsibility for monitoring lie with the judiciary.
In addition, there has been proposed a one-stop ‘Emergency Response System,’ which is sought to be run by a civil contract agency which does not report to the police but to the civil administration of the city, and will be equipped to identify wireless telephone devices by GPS co-ordinates. Though not specifically stated, if this system were made accessible to persons with disabilities, even in the event that they were unable to communicate their distress, an emergency service would be at their doorstep for immediate assistance, a statement issued by the Inclusive Planet Centre for Disability Law and Policy, Chennai said.
Safe spaces
The committee affirmed that every citizen has a right to protection against violence and it is the duty of the state to provide safe spaces to all women, including disabled women. It recommended that such safe spaces should be accessible to the disabled in terms of architectural design, management and provision of services. To address abuse of disabled children within institutions, the committee suggested that all such institutions and homes must be registered with the High Court concerned with the acting court as the guardian of such children.
It recommended that the High Court concerned should act as an oversight mechanism to all the institutions in the State and that it must be the task of educational institutions to recognise discriminatory attitudes among children on the basis of gender, disability, caste and so on.
_____________________
January 28, 2013 03:57 IST
January 28, 2013 03:57 IST
Marriage is not a valid defence against rape, says committee
The HinduJustice J.S. Verma. File photo: Sushil Kumar Verma
Seeks an exception for the definition of marital rape in the existing laws
Backing the long-standing demand of the women’s activists that marital rape be considered as an offence, the Justice J.S. Verma committee has said marriage or any other intimate relationship between a man and a woman is “not a valid” defence against sexual crimes like rape.
The three-member panel, which was constituted to recommend amendments to criminal laws in the wake of the national outrage over the December 16 gang rape here, has sought “an exception for the definition of marital rape in the existing laws.”
“The law ought to specify that marital or other relationship between the perpetrator or victim is not a valid defence against the crimes of rape or sexual violation,” the committee said in its report. The committee said the “relationship between the accused and the complainant is not relevant to the enquiry into whether the complainant consented to the sexual activity and the fact that the accused and the victim are married or in another intimate relationship may not be regarded as a mitigating factor justifying lower sentences for rape.”
Quoting various court judgments in different countries, the panel said “the exemption for marital rape stems from a long outdated notion of marriage, which regarded wives as no more than the property of their husbands.”
“Our view is supported by the judgment of the European Commission of Human Rights in C.R. versus UK, which endorsed the conclusion that a rapist remains a rapist regardless of his relationship with the victim,” the 630-page report said.
“According to the common law of coverture, a wife was deemed to have consented at the time of the marriage to have intercourse with her husband at his whim. Moreover, this consent could not be revoked,” the committee said.
The defendant cannot argue that the complainant’s consent was implied by the relationship between the accused and the complainant, the report said. In South Africa, the 2007 Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendments Act (Sexual Offences Act) provides that marital or other relationship between the perpetrator and the victim is not a valid defence against the crimes of rape or sexual violation.
“Even when marital rape is recognised as a crime, there is a risk that the judges might regard marital rape as less serious than other forms of rape, requiring more lenient sentences, as happens in South Africa. In response, the South African Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act of 2007, now provides that the relationship between the victim and the accused may not be regarded as a ‘substantial and compelling circumstances’ justifying a deviation from legislatively required minimum sentence for rape,” the report said.
Attitudinal change
It is also important that the legal prohibition on marital rape is accompanied by changes in the attitudes of prosecutors, police officers and those in society more generally. Citing the example of South Africa where, despite legal developments, rates of marital rape remain shockingly high, the Verma committee report points out that a 2010 study suggests that 18.8 per cent of women are raped by their partners on one or more occasion.
Rates of reporting and conviction also remain low, aggravated by the prevalent beliefs that marital rape is acceptable or is less serious than other types of rape.
“Changes in the law, therefore, need to be accompanied by widespread measures raining awareness of women’s rights to autonomy and physical integrity, regardless of marriage or other intimate relationship,’’ the report says while referring to a recent communication under the Optional Protocol of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, where the CEDAW committee emphasised the importance of appropriate training for judges, lawyers, law enforcement officers and medical personnel in understanding crimes of rape and other sexual offences in a gender-sensitive manner.
_____________________
Click here for the full text of Justice Verma committee's recommendations (PDF file)
Ordinance moots death penalty if rape victim dies or slips into coma
NEW DELHI: Shaken by the Nirbhaya case, the government on Friday approved a law prescribing death penalty for cases of rape which lead to the victim's death or her slipping into persistent vegetative state, going beyond the recommendations of the Justice JS Verma committee.
An ordinance cleared by the Union Cabinet seeks to treat rapes resulting in death of the victim or causing her to be in a persistent vegetative state as a crime belonging to the "rarest-of-rare" category for which courts can award death punishment if they so decide. For such cases, the ordinance proposes a minimum sentence of 20 years which can be extended to imprisonment until the natural life of the convict, or death.
[Click here to know what the govt accepted, partially accepted or didn't accept of Justice Verma panel report (PDF file)]
The ordinance was rushed through to beat the notification of Parliament's budget session which is due to begin on February 21. The notification would have prevented the issuance of an ordinance.
The ordinance, designed to change the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012, and set to be promulgated shortly, has accepted Justice Verma committee's recommendation to treat voyeurism, stalking, disrobing of women and acid attacks as specific offences under the Indian Penal Code. The change will raise "eve-teasing" from being considered a minor offence to a serious crime attracting enhanced punishment.
The panel's recommendation for punishing those who knowingly employ a trafficked person has been accepted, with the government proposing a maximum sentence of five years for the guilty.
It has also accepted the recommendation of the committee, set up in response to the public upsurge over Nirbhaya rape case, to raise the maximum punishment for rape from the existing 10 years to life. For repeat offenders, the life imprisonment will cover his entire life and not just 14 years as is usually the case now.
Government has also embraced the recommendation that rape committed by a "person in authority" — a term that covers public servants and officers of police and Army — be punished by a minimum 10 years of rigorous imprisonment that can be extended to life.
However, it did not agree with the committee led by the retired Chief Justice of India that rape should not be made a gender-neutral crime. Accordingly, the expression "rape" in law is proposed to be replaced by "sexual assault".
10 years in jail for rape by 'person in authority'
Government has also turned down the committee's recommendations for criminalizing marital rape even in cases where the wife is above 16 years of age, and for punishing command officers who may fail to prevent rapes by subordinates.
The issue of whether the age of a juvenile should be reduced will be treated separately when the Juvenile Justice Act is reviewed.
Law minister Ashwini Kumar described the provisions of the ordinance as "path breaking". He said, "The changes proposed will bring in an effective and purposive law to protect the dignity of women."
He also said the ordinance, drafted with a sense of unprecedented urgency, reflected the UPA government's responsiveness to people's heightened sensitivities, as revealed in the aftermath of the Nirbhaya case, towards crime against women. "We have redeemed the pledge that we made," he said.
But women's rights activists were not pleased, and complained of a letdown. They are upset over the government's refusal to recognize marital rape as an offence, failure to hold command officers accountable for rapes by their subordinates and omission of rapes by armed forces as a category.
Sources in the government defended the provisions as bold, and pointed to a number of Justice Verma committee recommendations being accepted completely.
The law minister said the ordinance seeks to change provisions of Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill which is being examined by a parliamentary standing committee in the light of the recommendations of the Justice Verma committee.
The Justice Verma committee's recommendations have been widely welcomed as a new bill of rights for women.
______________________
An ordinance cleared by the Union Cabinet seeks to treat rapes resulting in death of the victim or causing her to be in a persistent vegetative state as a crime belonging to the "rarest-of-rare" category for which courts can award death punishment if they so decide. For such cases, the ordinance proposes a minimum sentence of 20 years which can be extended to imprisonment until the natural life of the convict, or death.
[Click here to know what the govt accepted, partially accepted or didn't accept of Justice Verma panel report (PDF file)]
The ordinance was rushed through to beat the notification of Parliament's budget session which is due to begin on February 21. The notification would have prevented the issuance of an ordinance.
The ordinance, designed to change the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012, and set to be promulgated shortly, has accepted Justice Verma committee's recommendation to treat voyeurism, stalking, disrobing of women and acid attacks as specific offences under the Indian Penal Code. The change will raise "eve-teasing" from being considered a minor offence to a serious crime attracting enhanced punishment.
The panel's recommendation for punishing those who knowingly employ a trafficked person has been accepted, with the government proposing a maximum sentence of five years for the guilty.
It has also accepted the recommendation of the committee, set up in response to the public upsurge over Nirbhaya rape case, to raise the maximum punishment for rape from the existing 10 years to life. For repeat offenders, the life imprisonment will cover his entire life and not just 14 years as is usually the case now.
Government has also embraced the recommendation that rape committed by a "person in authority" — a term that covers public servants and officers of police and Army — be punished by a minimum 10 years of rigorous imprisonment that can be extended to life.
However, it did not agree with the committee led by the retired Chief Justice of India that rape should not be made a gender-neutral crime. Accordingly, the expression "rape" in law is proposed to be replaced by "sexual assault".
10 years in jail for rape by 'person in authority'
Government has also turned down the committee's recommendations for criminalizing marital rape even in cases where the wife is above 16 years of age, and for punishing command officers who may fail to prevent rapes by subordinates.
The issue of whether the age of a juvenile should be reduced will be treated separately when the Juvenile Justice Act is reviewed.
Law minister Ashwini Kumar described the provisions of the ordinance as "path breaking". He said, "The changes proposed will bring in an effective and purposive law to protect the dignity of women."
He also said the ordinance, drafted with a sense of unprecedented urgency, reflected the UPA government's responsiveness to people's heightened sensitivities, as revealed in the aftermath of the Nirbhaya case, towards crime against women. "We have redeemed the pledge that we made," he said.
But women's rights activists were not pleased, and complained of a letdown. They are upset over the government's refusal to recognize marital rape as an offence, failure to hold command officers accountable for rapes by their subordinates and omission of rapes by armed forces as a category.
Sources in the government defended the provisions as bold, and pointed to a number of Justice Verma committee recommendations being accepted completely.
The law minister said the ordinance seeks to change provisions of Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill which is being examined by a parliamentary standing committee in the light of the recommendations of the Justice Verma committee.
The Justice Verma committee's recommendations have been widely welcomed as a new bill of rights for women.
______________________
No comments:
Post a Comment