Reporting on the Need to Reform Child Abuse Laws

The Indian Express has published an article entitled ‘Need Act to bring child abuses under one law'. All said and done, there’s an element of truth in that – laws related to children are contained in so many diverse laws and rules that it is virtually impossible to be constantly aware of all the laws which relate to children. Among the many laws and rules which contain provisions which deal specifically with children are the Indian Penal Code, the Cable Television Network Rules, the various labour laws, and the Contract Act, the Juvenile Justice Act, and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act.
With reference to Child Abuse though, the applicable laws would probably be Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Section 377 of the Penal Code is an antiquated provision which was enacted during the Raj, and which is simply not designed to deal with child abuse. It is, instead, designed to criminalise homosexuality by making so-called “unnatural acts” criminal. This Section has, nonetheless, been used to prosecute offences involving child sexual abuse simply for the lack of a more appropriate provision under existing law under which to do so.
There have been proposals to restructure sexual abuse law to make child sexual abuse a separate offence. However, the proposals in their current form do not appear to be entirely free of loopholes, to put it mildly.
What got to me in the Indian Express article, however, was its introduction. It began by quoting someone who said, “Neglect is of greater concern than abuse,” which left me rather confused because, to my mind, neglect is a form of abuse. The rest of the article seemed to clarify that the “neglect” referred specifically to the neglect of complaints of child sexual abuse, which, in itself, is an entirely valid point.
The reason why this bothered me is that, it seems to me, that if one is advocating change in the law, or writing about it, it is important that all stakeholders / interested parties / the media use precise language all the time – clarity right from the outset about what the law needs to do, and what exactly the law needs to address, would probably help to ensure that the “finished product” i.e. the enacted statute would be as strong as possible.