India has a poor track record despite a strong law
India's decision to back out of co-sponsoring a United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution on eliminating child marriages, will be read as its lack of commitment to the cause. Indian officials have been defending the move on the ground that the resolution did not specify the cut-off age and used the term “early marriage”, which is open to interpretation and thus problematic. They were also worried over the strong language used in the resolution that called child marriages a ‘violation of human rights'. The first is a technicality that need not have really bothered New Delhi, since it would not have impacted the situation in the country. We have the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, that holds the legal age of marriage at 18 years. Besides, other countries who adopt the resolution too would be free to have a cut-off age that defines ‘early marriage'. The resolution does make it at least morally binding, if not legally mandatory, on countries to tackle the social evil of child marriages. The second fear has no basis, because the language used was already part of the resolution which India had backed days ago. By not co-sponsoring a resolution which it had strongly supported, India has lost moral advantage. The primary reason why it did not co-sponsor the resolution is because the Indian officials believed it would burden the country with an obligation that it is ill-equipped to handle. The move would have perhaps prompted some countries to question the moral right of India to co-sponsor a resolution on a subject where the country has performed less than well. Whatever the fears may have been, the fact is that we have a worrisome record in tackling child marriages. India has the world's 14th highest rate of child marriages (47 per cent), behind countries such as Bangladesh (66 per cent) and Niger (75 per cent). The country is also said to have the largest number of child brides — an estimated one-third of the global total.
Although the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act provides for stringent jail terms to parents and others complicit in child marriages, the fear of the law has apparently not set in enough. The convictions have been few — if at all — for a variety of reasons, ranging from lethargy of the investigating officers to lack of evidence that would stand legal scrutiny. let alone convictions, even arrests have been rare. According to a report, fewer than 400 persons have been held under the law since 2012, although child marriages are rampant across the country. The situation is made worse by the fact that many instances of child marriages either don't get reported or are blatantly defended on religious and social grounds by influential leaders. The recent move by some clerics in Kerala to have the legal age for Muslim girls to marry lowered to 16 years, is a case in point.