“If there were a nation of Gods, it would govern itself democratically. A government so perfect is not suited to men” wrote Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
Since April, 2020 there has been more than 1 Lakh deaths in India due to Covid-19 which has caused serious social and economic disruption. While the country was going through its worse phase of this deadly pandemic and the entire nation was under lockdown, at that critical time the Ministry of Home Affairs on May 4th , 2020 constituted a five member committee headed by Prof. Ranbir Singh (Vice Chancellor, NLU Delhi), Prof. G. S. Bajpai (Registrar, NLU Delhi), Prof. Balraj Chauhan (Vice Chancellor, DNLU Jabalpur), Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani (Senior Advocate) and Mr. G. P. Thareja (Former District and Sessions Judge, Delhi) to recommend reforms to the Indian Criminal Laws in a manner that “ensures the safety and security of the individual, the community and the nation; and which prioritises the constitutional values of justice, dignity, and the inherent worth of the individual“. The Committee has been given only six months to finish the task assigned to it.
The very fact that the Committee has been constituted at a time when the country, rather the whole world was and still is grappling with the pandemic makes the intention of the Government in bringing about real and meaningful reforms in the criminal delivery system a suspect. Some of the criminal laws which are in force are as old as the hills, say for example, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 , Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 etc. If all these laws have governed us for over hundred years except for few amendments here and there where was the need for this hurried constitution of the Committee?
While no one has anything against the members of the Committee who are all men of repute, but the Committee does not represent a cross section of the society. Recently a group of 16 former judges, nearly 100 lawyers, and many legal academicians have addressed a letter to the Committee voicing their concerns about its functioning. They have requested the Committee to make public as to how it proposes to go ahead in the matter. As of now, given the fact that the Committee was constituted during the pandemic, the public at large is not in the know of its formation nor is it represented by various stakeholders. It is for this reason that over 150 women lawyers have highlighted the fact that the Committee comprises of only five dominant-caste Hindu men, while there is no representation of a woman, dalit or a member/s from religious minorities. Can a discussion on criminalization of honour killing or mob lynching be meaningful without the inclusion of dalits and religious minorities in the Committee? It is strange that the intended reforms on sexual offences have no woman presence in the Committee. In this scenario, the constitution of the Committee appears to be an eyewash.
It may be worthwhile to recall that the previous Committees which undertook such studies were headed by ex-Chief Justices or former judges of High Court or Supreme Court. In the wake of public outrage on Nirbhaya’s tragic death no less a person than a former Chief justice namely J.S Verma had headed a Committee with a former Chief Justice of a High Court, Leila Seth and two other prominent members as his associates. The Committee was also assisted by a team of young lawyers, law students and academicians. It was after an in-depth deliberations that the Committee recommended changes on laws relating to rape, sexual harassment, trafficking, child sexual abuse, medical examination of victims and police reforms. Do we really need changes again specially in the middle of a pandemic?
If the Government needs to bring about real and meaningful changes in policing, investigation and in the delivery of criminal justice it needs to in the first place broad base the Committee. The people of India have a right to know on what basis the Government has formulated the present Committee which is supposed to recommend changes in laws which are in existence since time immemorial and have stood the test of time except when the Governments of the day twisted and turned them to suit their own political agenda. It is therefore necessary to include in the Committee someone like Prakash Singh, DGP, who is a crusader for police reforms. Why should the Committee be not headed by someone as eminent as a retired Supreme Court Judge or a High Court Judge.
Having said that most criminal laws have stood the test of time, it also cannot be ignored that some laws are totally archaic and were framed by the colonial masters to perpetuate their colonial rule over us. Such laws need to be consigned to the dustbin. For example, the sedition law which in the recent past has being most misused and abused. Even a simple criticism of the Government is being construed as anti national and seditious all in the garb of such archaic laws. Bringing reforms in criminal justice system is serious business and needs in-depth study and deliberations, which can by no means be completed in six months. The Committee needs wide publicity and it should invite suggestions from the members of the civil society and more particularly from lawyers and judges.
As of now people of Jammu and Kashmir are not even allowed to have full benefit of internet services and hence in many ways they are cut off from the outside world. Democratic Governments allow people to help set the rules to which all must adhere, and have a say in the direction of their lives and work. While the reforms in the criminal laws and criminal justice system are the crying need of the hour but they should not be ridden roughshod. Since we are in the midst of a pandemic, the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 which is nearly 123 years old also needs a relook particularly quarantining measures. However, this legislation much like the Indian Penal Code continues to remain in force and is not fully equipped to address a global pandemic of 2020.
About Author:
Nazoo Sharma
A lawyer with more than 8 years of experience in the legal profession, along with government-related projects. Presently, an independent advocate and a senior task based legal consultant and mediator with National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, under Ministry of Women and Child Development.
(Views are personal)
