Juveniles can’t be allowed shield of technicality
With only two days to go for the release of the juvenile convicted for the December 16, 2012, rape and murder of Jyoti Singh Pandey, the spotlight is back on the country's juvenile justice system, specifically on the new law that was proposed in the aftermath of that heinous crime. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Bill, 2014, which will replace the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, was passed by the lok Sabha in May but is pending with the Rajya Sabha. The new law allows for children between the ages of 16 and 18 years who have been convicted for heinous crimes, to be tried as adults. This means that older juveniles, like Jyoti Singh Pandey's attacker who was just a few months away from his 18th birthday at the time he committed the crime, will no longer be shielded by technicality but have to face the full legal consequences for their actions. Now, while it is unlikely that the new law, even if enforced any time soon, will be applied in retrospect to the December 16, 2012, gangrape case, the 2014 Bill is an important legislative measure to ensure that the law keeps up with changing social mores and values. To understand the gravity of the situation, one only needs to pay heed to the fervent pleas of Jyoti Singh Pandey's mother to the authorities to keep the juvenile incarcerated. And the victim's loved ones are not alone in this demand — they have the support of Union Minister for Women and Child Development Maneka Gandhi, who has consistently campaigned for punishment to juveniles in accordance with the gravity of the crime they commit. Ms Gandhi’s tireless advocacy brought the 2014 Bill to the fore — though it would have been ideal if the Justice Verma Committee had pushed for it in its recommendations on criminal law amendments for enhanced punishment of those who commit sex crimes against women.
Today, the juvenile convict is 20 years old and, according to his counsellor at the reform home, has no remorse for his actions. Clearly, the argument for reforming child criminals, instead of penalising them for their crimes, has its limits. Moreover, national crime data shows that juveniles between the ages of 16 and 18 years make for the vast majority of juvenile crimes; with regard to sex crimes in particular, data shows that crimes committed by juveniles have increased by as much as 50 per cent. Even if a part of this jump is attributed to the expansion of the term ‘rape' as well as some false reporting (wherein consensual sex between youngsters, elopement etc are reported as rape), there’s still no denying that, overall, there has been a rise in the number of heinous crimes committed by juveniles.
That in a situation such as this, the Rajya Sabha has chosen to sacrifice the new juvenile justice Bill at the altar of partisan politics, is deeply disappointing. The Bill has been listed twice in the Winter Session but could not be discussed because Opposition members have been regularly disrupting parliamentary proceedings. Rajya Sabha MP Jaya Bachchan public regretted that her intervention on the matter went unheard amidst the din in the House and that the Bill could not be passed. Protesting parliamentarians need to show some sensitivity.