December 14, 2020 7:56:33 pm
One of the bills will be enacted as the Shakti Law, 2020.
Two bills passed by the Maharashtra Cabinet last week are expected to go before the Legislative Assembly during the two-day winter session that began on Monday (December 14).
But the bills, the Maharashtra Shakti Bill, 2020, and the Special Court and Mechanism for Implementation of the Maharashtra Shakti Criminal Law, 2020, which improve the punishment for violence against women and children, and include the death penalty for Some crimes, prominent advocates of women’s rights have been criticized for being “draconian” and “anti-women”.
Who are the individuals and groups opposing the two bills?
The letter sent to Maharashtra’s Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, who opposes the two bills, has 92 signatories, including women’s and children’s rights groups, lawyers, activists, academics, and LGBTQ + rights activists.
Signatories include lead advocate Indira Jaising, attorneys Veena Gowda and Susan Abraham, child rights activist and lawyer Mahrukh Adenwalla, activist Ulka Mahajan, law professor Dr. Asha Bajpai, and members of the Institute’s faculty. Tata of Social Sciences (TISS).
Members of organizations such as LABIA, the Mumbai-based queer feminist LGBT collective, Akhil Bharatiya Janwadi Mahila Sangathana, the Awaaz-e-Niswan women’s rights forum, and the Forum Against the Oppression of Women, are among the signatories.
What are your objections?
In their letter to Thackeray, the signatories have said that the two bills, framed along the lines of the Andhra Pradesh Disha Act of 2019, should have been discussed with lawyers, activists and academics working on women’s issues before they were state approved. Cabinet.
An amendment to Section 375 (violation) of the IPC has been proposed, to add an “explanation” stating that in cases where the parties are adults and their conduct suggests that there was “consent or implied consent”, a presumption will be made. consent. This, activists say, “feeds the patriarchal construct of women’s consent and behavior.”
Consensual sex is very often used as a defense by defendants in rape cases, and with such an explanation embedded in the law, proving that rape will be impossible, they say.
Once again, Section 12 of the Courts and Special Mechanisms for the Implementation of the Shakti Law, 2020, will sanction the presentation of false complaints. This, according to the signatories, “perpetuates patriarchal notions of viewing women with suspicion, as unworthy of being believed,” and will deter victims from reporting sexual crimes.
The signatories have said that existing laws cover crimes such as intimidation of women through electronic means or the punishment of public servants who do not assist the investigation. But these, they have said, are insignificant and effective just to make a political statement.
But why is there opposition to the prompt administration of justice – 15 days for the investigation and one month for the trial – as has been proposed?
According to those who oppose the two bills, this period will not be long enough to gather all the evidence and will become an excuse for the police not to carry out a proper investigation.
Furthermore, a hasty investigation and trial, they said, will likely lead to judicial error. “Neither the Police nor the Courts have the infrastructure to meet these deadlines and they will only result in unfair trials and more acquittals,” they have written.. 📣 Follow Express explained on Telegram
And what is the argument for opposing the hanging of perpetrators of sexual crimes against women?
While the new law will mean increased punishment for the crimes of rape, gangrape, and child penetrating sexual assault, women’s rights activists say this will backfire.
In various crimes of rape of adult women or under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO), the perpetrators are members of the family. If the crime is punishable by death, many victims may not find the support of their families, thus causing the crime to go unreported.
Furthermore, it would endanger the lives of the victims, as seen in some cases where criminals have killed the rape victim if murder and rape receive the same punishment.
This sends a “wrong and deadly message” to rape survivors, the signatories have said. “The message he sends is that after an incident like rape, his life is about to end; it is almost dead ”, they have written. They have also emphasized that women and child rights activists and scholars have repeatedly asserted that the death penalty reduces both reporting of sexual offenses and conviction rates.
.
