Daily The Hindu Editorials Notes Mains Sure Shot (12^th Aug 2019 )

GS-1 or GS-2

Question – The amendments to the POCSO Act, 2012, introduces the death penalty for child sex abuse. In this context what are the larger questions that need to be addressed? Discuss (250 words)

 

Context – The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill 2019.

 

What are the amendments made to the POCSO Act, 2012?

• The Bill proposes to increase the punishments under POCSO Act from seven to 10 years, from 10 to 20 years and from 20 to life imprisonment and death penalty.
• It also seeks to amend Section 9 of the Act that deals with ‘Aggravated Sexual Assault’ to protect children from sexual offences in times of natural calamities and cataclysms.
• The definition of ‘Sexual Assault’ has been extended to incorporate administration of hormones or chemical substances to children to attain early sexual maturity. 
• The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018 introduced the death penalty for rape of girls below the age of 12. This Bill makes sexual offence of children more gender neutral. It provides for the death penalty for “aggravated penetrative sexual assault of a ‘child’. It is not gender specific.
•  It specifically defines what ‘child pornography’ is.
• And also, clearly states that ‘using a child for pornographic purposes’ and for ‘possessing or storing pornography involving a child’ is punishable.

The objective – 

• To discourage the trend of child sexual abuse by acting as a deterrent ‘due to strong penal provisions incorporated in the Act’.
• The objective is noble but the clause that it will act as a deterrent due to strong penal provisions need to be thought about.

Why?

1. First because strong penal provisions is not the ultimate solution. POCSO Act has other limitations that need to be addressed first like – its implementation, lack of adequate special courts, lack of sensitization for investigators and prosecutors in dealing with child victims, poor rate of convictions etc. The alarming rise in the cases under POCSO itself leaves a big question over how it is being administered and managed.
2. Certainty of punishment acts as a better deterrent than its severity- it is the sureness of being caught that deflects an individual from carrying out wrongdoings, not the dread of being punished or the severity of the punishment.
3. Poor conviction rates under POCSO- according to the data from the National Crimes Records Bureau 2016, only 3 percent of child rape cases that came up before the courts ended in conviction. This slow rate of conviction provides the accused more than enough time to coerce and intimidate the victims or their families to backtrack on their complaints.
4. The Justice J.S. Verma Committee, which was constituted in 2013 in the aftermath of the Nirbhaya case, after due deliberations found itself against the imposition of death penalty in rape cases on several grounds like-  the death penalty may backfire in cases of child sexual abuse because often the perpetrators of abuse are family members and having such penalty in the statute book may discourage the registration of the crime itself.
5. Also, the provisions of capital punishment might provoke the accused to murder the victims and increase the risk of sex offenders doing away with their victim to destroy the evidence and ensure there is no testimony.

Way ahead:

• According to various surveys, since 2013, the average time taken for completing a child’s testimony in seven of the 10 cases was 242 days, which is eight months as against the mandatory 30 days. On an average the cases remained pending for 5 years against the mandated period of 1 year. Unless this situation is solved any strong penal provision will not serve the desired purpose. 
• Huge pendency of cases needs to be solved. Taking Suo moto notice of the huge pendency of POCSO cases, the Supreme Court has directed the establishment of special courts in each district. This order must be complied as soon as possible.
• To conclude the Bill is a step forward in preventing child abuse but the consequences of providing for the death penalty need to be closely observed.

 

 

 

Question – In the wake of some parts of the country going through water crisis and the other having flood, is transporting water from the flooded areas to the water scarce areas a viable solution? Discuss ( 200 words)

GS-1 Mains

Context – the Chennai water crisis and Assam and Bihar floods.

 

Note : not many points are given in the article but these are the main highlights.

 

• It doesn’t rain evenly across India. For example – when Chennai was going through a severe water crisis, flood took several lives in Assam and Bihar.
• Last month the ‘Chennai water train’ as it was called carried 2.5 million liters of water for the water parched people of Chennai. This is called the ‘water-tain’ model where water is carried from water excess areas to water scarce areas which are in dire need of water.
• But setting up the infrastructure to transport water from areas with water surplus to areas that are water deficient is costly. The cost mainly occurs due to the cost of ferrying water through thousands of kilometres of pipeline and gradients, often involving pumping stations which require a lot of energy.
• So, it is not much of a technical problem as it is of money and also at times politics.
• But if cost is the main concern then there is something that we can learn from the American, French and Greek examples.
• For example – in the U.S., the city of Las Vegas planned to use excess water from the Mississippi river through a multibillion-dollar project. French engineers have planned to help water-starved African nations by hauling icebergs to their shores. Greece has used the mega Spragg trash bag to haul (carry/drag) massive amounts of water.
• Some of these plans have been successful. And have shown a very good idea.
• The idea of transporting water over water ie. to transport water from water surplus areas to water scarce areas not through land (pipeline) but by using water mode of transport.
•  This mode of carrying water has been implemented with success in the Caribbean, especially during the drought of 1983-84 in Antigua.
• The advantage – The advantages of transporting water over water include the fact that one Horsepower of energy can move 150 kg on road, 500 kg on rail and 4,000 kg on water. Similarly, one litre of fuel can move 24 tonnes per km on road, 85 tonnes on rail and 105 tonnes on inland water transport.
• But there are some disadvantages like the loading and unloading facilities are expensive to construct and, in India, most rivers don’t have the depth and breadth to accommodate large barges all through the year. 
• It will also require the dredging of rivers, which is exorbitant and might destroy natural ecosystems. 
• Finally, though India recently forged ahead with its inland waterways development plans by investing in the National Waterways in the Northeast, the bigger problem is that there are too few large industries located near river belts.
• Also, the impetus for investment in such purposes simply doesn’t exist.

Way forward:

• We have seen the advantages and disadvantages of one technological innovation i.e. water-train model and the alternate viable water transport through inland waterways but there must be other technologies that can be used. More research needs to be done in this area.
• Desilting of lakes and rivers (concomitant with effective garbage/plastic disposal); extensive, state-mandated rainwater harvesting; desalination and, finally, recycling of water can make a considerable difference to solve such water related problems in both waters scarce and water surplus areas.
• But overall it is the will that is most important.