Categories

Death for Rape? Why Lawmakers Need to Get Realistic and Not Fan Public Sentiments​

People taking to streets over gangrape and murder of Hyderabad veterinarian are demanding death for rapists. Some of the parliamentarians have too echoed the sentiments. But can a law providing death for rape be a real deterrent?

Rape is more common a crime than murder in India, according to the latest data collated by the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB). In terms of crime rate, murder stands at 2.2 while rape at 5.2 for 2017. However, only some rape cases see outpouring of public anger in which demand for death penalty for the rapists is raised at a very high pitch.

Currently, the law does not prescribe death penalty for rape.

The gangrape and murder of a woman veterinarian in Hyderabad has stoked public anger. Clamour is growing louder for death penalty, not only for the culprits in Hyderabad gangrape and murder case, but in general for all rapists.

The mother of Hyderabad doctor, who was gangraped, murdered and burnt by the rapists, has demanded that same treatment should be meted out to the culprits.

The grandfather of Nirbhaya, victim of the gruesome gang rape in Delhi in December 2012, demanded that the rapists should be handed over to public who will do “justice” to them. Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case too had seen nationwide protests in 2012.

LAWMAKERS PLAYING TO THE GALLERY

With people taking to streets demanding death for rapists, some Members of Parliament too were seen fanning the same sentiment. Actor-turned-politician Jaya Bachchan stood out for her remarks – visibly making Rajya Sabha chairperson Venkaiah Naidu little uncomfortable – advocating public lynching of rapists.

Law in India does not provide for street justice to a criminal, irrespective of the crime.

Similarly, Union minister Harsimrat Kaur asked the government to come out with an “out of the box” solution. She offered one herself. “I urge the government that in rape cases, judgment should be pronounced in number of months equivalent to the age of the victim. So if the victim is 20 years old, the trial should be concluded in 20 months,” Kaur said in Parliament.

But what if the victim is a 45-year-old woman or an eighty-year-old? What happens to her right to speedy trial?

The statements of lawmakers reflect public anger. As public representatives, the MPs are right in reflecting the sentiments of the people at large. And, they were in sync. But did they employ the right language while expressing these sentiments?

The problem may be lying elsewhere. It is not the harsh penalty that has proved to be a deterrent to occurrence of crime.

WHITHER DETERRENCE?

While protests are being held to demand death for Hyderabad rapists, a girl was raped, shot dead and burnt in Bihar; another was raped and strangulated to death in Karnataka and yet another was raped and killed in Rajasthan.

All this happened while the voices demanding death for rapists raised by protesters and lawmakers were going viral on social media and being published in newspapers. The perpetrators were in the reach of the voices demanding death for rapists. But this did not deter them from pouncing upon the unsuspecting victims.

Why the possibility of being awarded death penalty for rape did not deter these rapists?

A CASE IN POINT

The answer could lie in the report of a study mandated by the Delhi High Court in the aftermath of the 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case. The study was conducted by a Delhi-based NGO called, Partners for Law in Development with support from the Union law ministry and the United Nations Development Programmes (UNDP).

The high court had asked the NGO to monitor progress of 16 rape cases. It had to test trials in rape cases by fast-track courts against the time stipulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which states that the trial in rape cases should be completed in 60 days.

The report, submitted in 2017, pointed out that the average time of finishing trial in rape cases was eight months in the fast-track courts. Not all rape cases in India are tried in fast-track courts.

The study found that in most cases, even the deposition of the rape victim does not take place within 60 days. The fast tracked Nirbhaya gangrape case was disposed in nine months.

Delay in trial of rape cases occur due to a range of factors – from receiving forensic lab reports to huge burden of pending cases.

And, they say justice delayed is justice denied.

EFFICIENCY OF DEATH PENALTY

But the story does not end here. A study by the Centre of Death Penalty – at the National Law University Delhi (NLUD) — in 2015 analysed data of 15 years to conclude that less than 5 per cent death penalties awarded by trial courts were confirmed by the time the cases passed the tests in high courts and the Supreme Court.

And, in around 30 per cent cases, the high courts ordered acquittal of these convicts.

This is a statement on the quality of judgments by the trial courts.

Another NLU Delhi study found that 162 death sentences were awarded across the country in 2018. Only 23 were confirmed by the high courts.

The Supreme Court heard 12 death penalty cases in 2018 but confirmed death penalty in only one case – of Nirbhaya gangrape and murder.

The Justice JS Verma committee, appointed after the Nirbhaya case, too had examined the efficiency of death penalty for rape. In its report, Justice Verma did not prescribe death penalty for rape for the lack of correlation in preventing the crime of rape or gangrape.

ANY SOLUTION?

The real issue appears to be the time taken in the final disposal of cases of rape and murder. The Nirbhaya case was supposed to set the benchmark for speedy trial for crimes of rape and gangrape, with or without murder of the victim. But despite seven long years having passed by, justice by means of closure of the case is yet to be delivered.

The mercy petition of one of the convicts was rejected only on December 1. All four convicts were awarded death sentence.

The point is this: By the time police and courts close a case, the incident of crime fades from public memory, including those of the prospective rapists. Deterrence does not work. Lawmakers may serve the cause better by bringing about long pending police and judicial reforms for any law to act as a real deterrent.

Source: India Today