Perhaps because it involved shocking brutality and epitomized the sexual excesses against women in the country, perhaps because it stirred the youth of the country from a long-drawn slumber, perhaps because the shock was transported overseas and even the media across the world took note of it, perhaps as Indians we were just too overwhelmed by the wrongdoings within the society, perhaps the youth had seen how (by exercising its power in unity during Anna Hazare’s campaign) it could fight anything the society is guilty of – the debate sparked by the Delhi physiotherapist succumbing to gangrape has not been reduced from headlines to deadlines.
Perhaps the media is out to prove columnist Doug Larson wrong. Larson had said, “A lot of people mistake a short memory for a clear conscience.” Whatever be the reasons, the issue over sexual assault against women in India, what constitutes the ‘rarest of rare’ cases, what should be the ideal punitive measures to act as deterrents against such heinous acts continue to be visible in news pages, a departure from the convention of pushing such reports as ‘fillers’ in ad-filled pages or to inside pages. It is not going to die a quick death and the Indian media is adamant not to let it fade away.
I find a similarity between the media’s resolve and what Eric writes in Classical Values, end of culture war by restoring classical values: “... I think the American public has quite a long memory. They remember the ban on so-called ‘assault weapons’ and they remember that there is a constant push to disarm them. The fact that guns are selling like never before and dealers can’t keep inventory on their shelves shows that the public has a long memory. What I think the White House means is not that memories fade or the memory span is short, but that emotions tend to be dampened over time by realism.”
A three-member commission, headed by former Chief Justice of India, JS Verma, reviewed the laws for sexual crimes in a report submitted on January 23. The commission, while slamming “failure of governance”, government, police and even public apathy, has recommended a slew of changes, including:
That punishment for rape should be rigorous imprisonment for seven years to life. Punishment for causing death or a “persistent vegetative state” should be RI for a term not less than 20 years, but may be for life also, which shall mean the rest of the person’s life. Gang-rape, it suggests, should entail punishment of not less than 20 years, which may also extend to life, and gang-rape followed by death should be punished with life imprisonment.
The need is to curb all forms of sexual offences and the commission recommended that voyeurism be punished with up to seven years in jail; stalking or attempts to contact a person repeatedly through any means by up to three years. Acid attacks would be punished by up to seven years; trafficking will be punished with RI for seven to 10 years.
Every complaint of rape must be registered by the police and civil society should perform its duty to report any case of rape coming to its knowledge. “Any officer, who fails to register a case of rape reported to him, or attempts to abort its investigation, commits an offence which shall be punishable as prescribed,” said the report. The protocols for medical examination of victims of sexual assault have also been suggested.
According to the panel, all marriages in India (irrespective of the personal laws under which such marriages are solemnized) should mandatorily be registered in the presence of a magistrate. The magistrate must ensure that the marriage has been solemnized without any demand for dowry and with the full consent of both partners.
The panel proposed that the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2012, should be modified. “Since the possibility of sexual assault on men, as well as homosexual, transgender and transsexual rape, is a reality the provisions have to be cognizant of the same,” it says. A special procedure for protecting persons with disabilities from rape, and requisite procedures for access to justice for such persons, the panel said was an “urgent need”.
It said a separate Bill of Rights for women be drafted, entitling a woman a life of dignity and security and for women to have complete sexual autonomy. The panel observed the “impunity of systematic sexual violence is being legitimized by the Armed Forces Special Powers Act” and said that to inspire public confidence, “police officers with reputations of outstanding ability and character must be placed at the higher levels of the police force”.
Reforms are needed to deal with criminalization of politics, the panel said and suggested that, in the event cognisance has been taken by a magistrate of a criminal offence, the candidate ought to be disqualified from participating in the electoral process. It suggested law-makers facing criminal charges, who have already been elected to Parliament and state legislatures, should voluntarily vacate their seats.
That the Verma Committee desisted from recommending chemical castration and death for rape — even in the rarest of rare cases — and a reduction in the age of juveniles from 18 to 16, were speculative points in the media. The fact that the committee, instead, proposed life imprisonment for the entire natural life of a criminal was also something new and worth a debate.
As KN Raghavendra wrote in his letter to The Hindu, “So we are now left with a recommendation that raises questions on whether the discretion of judges in interpreting the “rarest of rare” cases will be applied with the sensitivity that rape cases deserve.”
But that’s not the issue we are debating here. The fact that the Verma Committee addressed the societal malaise not only in what’s wrong with state and society, but also provided ways to improve both and penalties for breach of law, and recommended ways that could solve the vexed issue in terms of life, security, equality and democracy, has kept it burning in the media.
The fact remains that by focusing on prevention of sexual crimes rather than just prescribing punishments, the committee has only given more to the media to continue the debate. Will the media continue to be at the forefront in doing so? Our hopes are alive, lest it actually becomes headlines to deadlines.
Feedback: abatra@exchange4media.com
