No increase in crimes by juveniles, Ministry ignored views of stakeholders – Standing Committee on the JJ Bill 2014

The government’s plan to enact Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Bill of 2014 has found opposition in the form of a Standing Committee Report. The report, which was presented to the Parliament on February 25, highlights a number of flaws in the proposed legislation, and also questions some of the most far-reaching provisions of the Bill..One of the most significant changes proposed in the Bill, was the procedure to be adopted for offenders falling between the 16 to 18 year age bracket. In the Bill, a special category was carved out for such minors, with the possibility that such minors would be tried as adults, and under the existing criminal code..This particular clause was defended by Maneka Gandhi, the Minister of Women and Child Development, who went on record to state that,.We are changing the law and I am personally working on it to bring 16-year-olds into the purview. According to the police, 50 per cent of the crimes are committed by 16-year-olds who know the Juvenile Justice Act…. for premeditated murder, rape, if we bring them into the purview of the adult world, then it will scare them,.In fact, the Delhi gang rape case was used to generate support for this particular provision. The Ministry had also claimed that this clause would deter child offenders from committing heinous crimes, and relied on data from the National Crime Records Bureau to support this cliam..The Committee, though, clearly thought otherwise..“The objective analysis of the data….makes it abundantly clear that the percentage of juvenile crimes in India i.e. 1.2 per cent…is quite low….some incidents of juvenile crime….should not be the basis for introducing drastic changes in the existing juvenile justice system.[T]he Committee can only conclude that the existing juvenile system is not only reformative and rehabilitative in nature but also recognizes the fact that 16-18 years is an extremely sensitive and critical age requiring greater protection.”.And when it comes to the specific offence of rape, what often goes unnoticed is the fact that the POSCO Act raised the age of consent from 16 to 18, and thus.“[S]exual activity earlier treated as consensual was criminalized, resulting in a significant surge in reporting of rape and kidnapping/abduction cases against women.”.Swagata Raha works with the Centre for Child and the Law at National Law School Bangalore. Along with Arlene Manoharan, Fellow and Programme Head Juvenile Justice at CCL, she appeared before the Committee. Says Swagata, her focus was on highlighting those aspects of the Bill that were legally flawed [Read submissions]..“The very concept of “heinous crimes” [in the Bill] has no legal basis. We don’t categorize crimes as “heinous” or not and to create such a classification in a law meant for reformation of children is just absurd.”The other thing I highlighted was that the JJB was meant to adjudicate from the point of view of the child [but the Bill] is asking this body to adjudicate whether the child should to be pushed into the adult [criminal] system.”.This is not the only dangerously flawed provision in the Bill. Perhaps the most damaging provision imposes criminal punishment retrospectively. Clause 7 of the Bill reads as follows:.Any person, who is apprehended after completing the age of twenty-one years, for committing any serious or heinous offence when such person was between the age of sixteen to eighteen years, then he shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, be tried as an adult..Effectively, the person will be tried as an adult despite being a child at the time the act was committed. Evidently, the Ministry tried to justify this clause by stating that it would,. “[E]ncourage persons to come forward and inform about the offences committed so that they remained under the Juvenile Justice Act.”.Even though it was a rationale that the Committee rejected in no uncertain terms, this particular provision also highlights the retributive bias evident throughout the Act..Of course, the Bill is not about penal provisions alone, it also includes child-related practices such as adoption. The Bill has cut down the time parents have to reconsider their decision to give a child for adoption. Moreover, as noted by the Committee, the Bill also exhibited a bias towards inter-country adoption rather than domestic adoption..So what next?.The Committee Report has been tabled before Parliament, explains Trina Roy from PRS Legislative Research, and will now be taken up if the Bill comes under discussion. Minister Maneka Gandhi has indicated that the Bill will be introduced in the monsoon session of Parliament, which means that ideally, the Committee’s suggestions ought to be result in some changes to the Bill..Now whether the Ministry decides to accept the Committee’s recommendations, or sticks with the current version is anybody’s guess. .Image courtesy CCL