SPEECH BY SHRI RAJEEV CHANDRASEKHAR, MP
DURING THE DISCUSSION ON THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE & PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) BILL, 2015 IN PARLIAMENT
December 22, 2015
Thank you for permitting me to speak on The Juvenile Justice Bill, 2015.
1. Preamble: Victim's Rights Need to be Protected
I believe that this is an important Bill that requires discussion and passing. Sir, thisBill could and should have been debated before Jyoti Singh’s juvenile murderer’s release triggered the public outcry. That would have shown Parliament as being responsible and responsive. But I suppose better late than never.
This recent release of the Juvenile accused in the brutal murder of Jyoti Singh Panday, has spotlighted a grave lacunae in our criminal justice system that lets juveniles committing violent crimes go scot free – putting a spotlight on justice and victims’ rights. A desire for justice should not be seen as Vengeance. This Bill is addressing women victims’ rights.
2. Premise: Need for a New Juvenile Justice Bill
Sir, let me quote some data about juvenile crimes reported by the NCRB. There has been a staggering 143 per cent increase in the number of rapes committed by juveniles between 2002 to 2012.
In the same period, figures for murders committed by minors went up by 87 per cent, and a whopping 500 per cent increase was noted in the number of kidnappings of women and girls by minors. Last Tuesday, the Hon’ble Minister informed LokSabha about 50.6 per cent increase in Juvenile Crimes and 42per cent increase in Arrests.
Significantly, the percentage of violent crimes registered against juveniles in 2012 was about 15.6 per cent of total IPC crimes committed by juveniles in 2012 of which murder (990) and rape (1,175) constituted only 7.7 per cent of total IPC crimes committed by juveniles (27,936). This clearly indicates that violent crimes, such as murder and rape, constituted a sizeable proportion of the crimes registered against juveniles.
Sir, since the tragic and brutal murder of Jyoti Singh, it has become clear that the people of India are calling for Parliament to review the law pertaining to violent crimes committed by Juveniles. In light of the data I quoted earlier, it is certain that some deterrent may be required to prevent the alarming pace of increase in these crimes.
In light of these shocking facts, I would like to assert that I am in full support of the principle behind section 15 of the Bill, which requires that Juveniles above the age of 16, who have been accused of heinous offences, be assessed for their maturity and understanding of the consequences of their criminal actions.
I will make two points about the Bill :
A. Justice for victims is important. However, at the same time, we must protect the Constitutional Rights of juveniles to due process and make sure wrong juveniles are not thrown into thecriminal justice system.
Sir, as far as our Constitutional Principles are concerned, a child is a child is a child. Sir, under Chapter1, Clause 2 (33), the definition of “heinous offences” is too broad. This is a vital definition because this definition is what flings a juvenile into our criminal justice system. It is too broad and vague. The definition of “heinous offences” must be explicit. I must urge the Minister to make explicit the definition of “heinous offences” and not link it to all crimes with a certain prison term. Let heinous offence be defined as Murder, Rape, terrorism and/or child trafficking. On this clarity hinges our decision to treat a child as an adult. Madam Minister, please amend this.
I also agree with my colleague, Derek, that Clause 82 that penalizes child traffickers with lower punishment than those who supply intoxication to children needs correction. Sir, Child trafficking is widespread and needs cracking down on. The punishment in clause 82 must be more than that of clause 78. But since the Leader of the House has clarified this, I will assume that this is the intention.
B. Sir, my second point is that the Mechanism Proposed by the Juvenile Justice Bill requires a re-look today or at least sometime soon.
Sir, we must not lose sight of fact that many of these children committing crimes or being accessories to crime are between 16-18 years and will be from poor backgrounds, and not able to defend themselves through a complex and long process. Given the importance of JJB and CWC to the child's custody and prosecution, genuine fears of extortion of families have arisen.
The robustness of the mechanism that the Juvenile Justice Act will prescribe to determine whether a child must be tried as an adult or as a juvenile, is something that needs further study.
Section 15 of the Bill, which deals with the preliminary enquiry conducted by the Board, is of immediate relevance. The section prescribes that the "Juvenile Justice Board shall conduct a preliminary assessment with regard to a Juvenile's mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence."
The provision further suggests that the Board "may take the assistance of experienced psychologists or psycho-social workers or other experts" in making this assessment.
Sir, JJB is critical to the juveniles’ rights. JJB will assess whether a child alleged to have committed a heinous offence, has the physical and mental capability to commit the offense, and also the ‘circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence’. In order to protect our children, we must ensure that this mechanism is as foolproof as possible.
Sir, we must recognize that this law is merely suggesting that the Board consult with "experienced psychologists and psycho-social workers" for its Preliminary Assessment. The composition of the Board, as defined by Section 4(2) of the Bill comprises of a Magistrate and two social workers, including a woman. It loosely states some generic criterion for the selection of members, which is as follows:
"The members must be involved in health, education, or welfare activities pertaining to children for at least seven years or a practicing professional with a degree in child psychology,psychiatry, sociology or law."
This is vague in terms of capacity and capability that is being sought to be created, given the fact that the Board holds the powers conferred by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and in essence, plays God on the future of a Juvenile produced before it. It may be fraught with an adhocness that may condemn far more children to the adult criminal justice system than it ought to. There are many other issues that will need improving in the process leading from JJB to courts.
It, therefore, becomes imperative that the procedure prescribed by law is water-tight and immune to influences as well as build capacity and capabilities within these institutions, so that the constitutional right of children to equality, liberty and special protections under Articles 14, 21 and 15 (3) of the Constitution is protected.
Sir, I urge the Minister to focus on improving capacities and capabilities in CWC,JJB and child courts. The Government must take the initiative of Creating a Cadre of Trained and Certified JJB Magistrates, Child psychologists and other staff specially trained and certified to be equipped with the skills to make this complex assessment.
In ending, I hope the Minister doesn't stop with passing of this Bill, and focuses on many actions required to keep the women and children of our country much safer than they are now.
Thank You.
Jai Hind.