The Supreme Court’s plan to prevent child harassment in the name of deposition is a welcome move
The Supreme Court on Tuesday called for the setting up of videoconferencing facilities across the country to record the testimony of child witnesses in criminal cases. This is part of the court’s bid to make optimal use of communication technology to ease judicial processes and help children overcome the trauma of physically deposing in courts. The court plans to extend the use of internet and videoconferencing facilities which helped courts conduct business during the COVID-19 pandemic. The court wanted a protocol in place to avoid children travelling long distances from home to give their testimony. The protocol will enable a child to testify at the ‘court point’, where the trial is taking place, or the ‘remote point’, where the child lives. The court’s suggestion comes in the context of dealing with sensitive child trafficking cases. It also wants the use of technology made a permanent feature in all criminal cases involving child witnesses. It is a welcome step that throws light on the trauma children face when giving testimony in courts as witnesses or victims. Child trafficking, that the court cited, is one instance where the accused might target the young witnesses. Children appear in courts as witnesses in many domestic disputes and crimes, including murder, and they have to relive the crime in court and possibly even take sides between their parents. But the worst case is of children who are witness to crimes on themselves. These mostly relate to sexual abuse. And the accused in most cases are known to them.
They are forced to recall the horror when questioned by the police, the doctors, the lawyers, their families and friends. In the case of girl victims, the line of questioning of the defendant’s lawyer can be intimidating, insinuating, and even insulting. Child victims often say facing the accused is a frightening part of the criminal justice process. The experience of testifying is harrowing and may re-victimise the already-traumatised child. The least that can be done for all these children is to reduce their trauma and fear as much as possible. Distance testimony, through videoconferencing or one-way or two-way closed-circuit testimony, can come to their aid. The children do not have to come to court. They are spared the anguish of facing the accused. They can be in a separate room and give their testimony. The testimony can be live, in a two-way communication or recorded in a one-way exercise. Care needs to be taken that the interrogators are trained to adopt a neutral but sensitive approach when questioning the children. The criticism of this approach can be its relative lack of impact when compared to in-court testimony. Its advantages, however, outweigh the negatives. The best thing about a recorded testimony is that once the court admits it, the children do not have to undergo the process again. This technology will also be of help to other vulnerable people, especially rape victims, the elderly and whistleblowers.
