Minister wants debate. let it be reformist
Union Minister of State for Home Affairs RPN Singh says the Union Government is willing to debate the issue of revisiting the definition of a ‘juvenile' given under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, so that juveniles do not get away with light punishments even for heinous crimes such as rape. This is welcome news, but when will the debate beginIJ Following the gang rape of a 23-year-old girl in Delhi on December 16 last year by six persons including a 17-year-old, activists and many others including politicians cutting across party lines had vociferously demanded that the Juvenile Justice Act be amended to remove the protection the provisions of the Act provide to juveniles, in crimes like rape. But the Government has consistently refused to bite the bullet. When a bunch of public interest litigations that challenged the definition of a ‘juvenile' as provided by the Act, came up before the Supreme Court a few months ago, the Centre's law officers defended the provisions.
The failure of the Government's counsels to seek a fresh interpretation of the definition contributed to the apex court’s decision to dismiss the plea and confirmed that the Centre was less than interested in amending the Juvenile Justice Act. Again, in a case which pertains to a petition filed by activist and BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, and which is before the Supreme Court, the Government's lawyers have stood against Mr Swamy's strong plea that the definition of a ‘juvenile' must be revisited because the Centre had arbitrarily fixed the age of 18 years below which a person is considered to be a juvenile and shielded from harsh punishment even for the gravest crimes. Similarly, the Government could have revised the Juvenile Justice Act when it first brought in an Ordinance and then a legislation in the wake of the December 16 tragedy. On all these occasions, it failed to seize the moment. While the subsequent provisions provide for stiffer punishment, juvenile offenders have been spared.
If the Union Minister is indeed sincere about his desire to debate the Juvenile Justice Act, then he must prod the Government to quickly move in that direction. Meanwhile, to begin with, the Government must ask its counsels appearing in cases such as that of Mr Swamy, not to commit that the Centre is opposed to changes in the Act. The law officers must say that the Government is firming up its mind on the issue and that it will soon come to the court with a considered stand. Such a move is all the more necessary given that one of the accused in the recent Mumbai gang rape incident too has claimed to be a minor; if this is confirmed, he too will walk free after a maximum of three years in a reform home. That would be absolutely revolting. If Mr RPN Singh makes good his word, it would send the right message to all those, including the victims, their family, friends and well-wishers, that the Government is willing to walk the talk.