Spotlight on Juveniles
- Hueiyen Lanpao Editorial :: July 15, 2014 -

As expected, the proposal raised by Union Minister of Women and Child Development Maneka Gandhi for amending the Juvenile Justice Act to allow juveniles who are found guilty of committing serious crimes such as rape and murder is tried like adults has evoked mixed response among the rights bodies.

While some of the rights bodies including National Commission of Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has objected to any amendment in the existing Act which defines a person below 18 years as a juvenile and fixes maximum punishment - no matter what the crime - at three years in a correctional home, some others like National Commission for Women and Delhi Commission for Women have welcomed the proposal in view of the alarming rise in the number of juveniles involving in sexual assault cases.

The contention of the former group is that such amendment is against the basic tenets of child rights but the latter group has questioned the rational behind letting a rapist or a murderer go without any strict action just because they regardless as juveniles.

So, this group feels that there should be no difference between adults and juveniles when it comes to punishment for such serious crimes.

But the former group feels that children under 18 years of age should remain under the juvenile laws and any punishment should be to ensure reform and eventual reintegration into society as a law abiding person.

This is not the first time that proposal for amending the Juvenile Justice Act has been raised.

Before Maneka Gandhi, during the previous UPA regime, the then Minister of Women and Child Development Krishna Tirath too had proposed that juveniles above 16 years guilty of heinous crimes be treated on par with adult offenders. But move was opposed by various NGOs.

The Act has also come under scrutiny since the fatal gang rape of a 23-year-old paramedical woman on a moving bus in New Delhi in December 2012 by six assailants, one of whom was 17 years old.

The accused juvenile was tried under the Juvenile Justice Act and he was handed a maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in a reform facility.

In the twin Shakti Mills rape cases in Mumbai too, two juvenile accused out of five were also tried separately.

Considering the serious nature of the crimes they committed, there was uproar over the lenient punishment given to the juvenile offenders, and voices have been raised to demand that the juvenile offenders they should be treated on part with adult offenders.

While the debate over whether Juvenile Justice Act should be amended or not and whether young people above 16 years of age who are found guilty of heinous crimes like rape and murder be treated like adults or not, goes on, perhaps, we need to think over seriously why an increasing number of young people are involving in criminal activities today and the kind of exposure they are getting.