India prosecutors seek death for Delhi rapists, defense urges mercy

By Sanjeev Miglani and Sruthi Gottipat

By Sanjeev Miglani and Sruthi Gottipati

- Indian prosecutors demanded on Wednesday the death penalty for four men convicted of raping and murdering a 23-year-old trainee physiotherapist last December, saying it was important to send a signal to the country that such crimes would not be tolerated.

"The common man will lose faith in the judiciary if the harshest punishment is not given," special public prosecutor Dayan Krishnan told trial judge Yogesh Khanna, who will sentence the men on Friday.

Indeed, outside the court, popular opinion on social media sites and comments by top politicians suggest many Indians want to see the men hanged for a crime the brutality of which shocked even in a country where sex crimes against women are rife.

Social commentators say the attack has forced Indians to confront an uncomfortable truth - that social change, in particular patriarchal attitudes towards women, has not kept pace with rapid economic growth over the past decade.

The case has resonated with thousands of urban Indians who took to the streets in fury after the attack. The victim became a symbol of the daily dangers women face in a country where a rape is reported on average every 21 minutes and acid attacks and incidents of molestation are common.

Bus cleaner Akshay Kumar Singh, gym instructor Vinay Sharma, fruit-seller Pawan Gupta, and unemployed Mukesh Singh stood at the back of the courtroom surrounded by policemen. They showed no emotion as Krishnan described their crime as "diabolical" and called for them to be hanged.

The parents of the victim, who may not be identified for legal reasons, sat just feet away from the men. After the hearing, her father bluntly told reporters: "They finished my daughter, they deserve the same fate."

The men were found guilty on Tuesday of luring the woman and a male friend onto a bus as the pair returned home from watching a movie at a shopping mall on December 16.

As the bus drove through the streets of the capital, the men repeatedly raped the victim before dumping her and her friend, naked and semi-conscious, on the road.

The men used a metal rod and their hands to pull the woman's organs from her body after raping her, Krishnan said. Her injuries were so severe that she died in hospital in Singapore two weeks after the attack.

"This is an extreme case of depravity," Krishnan said, likening the woman's injuries to someone "cutting open a fruit".

All four of the men denied the charges. Three of them said they were never on the bus while a fourth admitted driving the vehicle but said he knew nothing of the crime. The prosecution said mobile phone records, CCTV footage, DNA evidence and bite marks on the woman's body placed the men at the scene.

India's interior minister, Sushilkumar Shinde said the death penalty was assured in the case, while a senior leader of the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Sushma Swaraj, said it was important to "set an example for the future".

Under Indian law, the death penalty is reserved for the "rarest of rare" cases. Even when it is imposed, the authorities rarely carry out executions.

"Hang them, hang them," chanted a small group of protesters outside the court.

There are 477 prisoners on death row in India, according to the interior ministry. Last year, India carried out its first hanging in eight years when it executed the lone survivor of a squad ofPakistan-based militants who attacked Mumbai in 2008, killing 166 people.

"JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE BLOODTHIRSTY"

Inside the court, lawyers for the four men pleaded for mercy and repeatedly highlighted the reluctance of Indian judges in the past to impose the death sentence.

Judges should not be bloodthirsty, said lawyer Vivek Sharma, who represents 19-year-old Gupta, the youngest of the four on trial. "You can't give capital punishment on demand."

Sharma said his client had not taken part in the rape or torture of the woman. He asked the court to take into account that Gupta was the sole breadwinner for his family and had to take care of his elderly parents and brother and sister.

A.P. Singh, lawyer for Kumar Singh and Sharma, said the death penalty was a "primitive and cold blooded and simplistic response to complex issues". He painted his clients as downtrodden who deserved a second chance.

Mukesh Singh, who said he had been driving the bus at the time of the attack, should not face the same penalty as his co-accused, his lawyer V.K. Anand told the court.

"At best, he can be held for aiding the others. Punish him, but punish him keeping in mind he was only driving the bus."

Women's rights groups have welcomed the guilty verdict but cautioned against giving the death sentence, saying that research across the world has shown that capital punishment does not act as a deterrent and the case should not set a precedent for all rapes to be punished with hanging.

If the men do receive the death penalty, India's high court will still have to confirm the sentences. The four are expected to file appeals, so proceedings could still go on for months or even years.

(This story has been refiled to remove reference to alias of one of the convicted men in paragraph 20)

(Additional reporting by Suchitra Mohanty and Anurag Kotoky; Writing by Ross Colvin; Editing by Robert Birsel)

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/11/us-india-rape-idUSBRE98A09M20130911

Press Release by Activists on Criminal Law Amendment Bill 2013

The passing of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2013 in both houses of Parliament is historic and India has taken one step forward in its journey to justice for women. Even as the Bill signals a step forward, the process of its passage shows us that degrading attitudes to women persist at the highest levels of legislative decision-making. With notable and welcome exceptions, the general tenor of debates in Lok Sabha on this Bill has deeply troubled us, as women and as citizens. The nation watched with shame many of our honorable Members of Parliament freely express sentiments that undermined the dignity of all women, unmindful of the gravity of issues of rape and violence. Coming, as this Bill does, after the brutal homicidal gang rape of a young woman in the heart of the nation’s capital, the level of parliamentary debate dishonored her memory, and dishonored the public outpouring led by thousands of our young people demanding greater dignity and more safety for women.

As representatives of women’s rights groups, lawyers and activists from across the country who have worked hard, campaigned for decades, and particularly vigorously in the last three months, to reform laws on rape and sexual assault we, therefore, welcome even more that in such an anti-women environment we have wrested significant gains for women in the CLA Bill 2013, including,

• Denting of impunity enjoyed by police and public servants – Section 166A of the CLA Bill fixes a minimum mandatory sentence for dereliction of duty. No prior sanction under 197 (1) CrPC will be required for public servants charged under this Section. We hope this will be a strong legal deterrent against police dereliction to make our streets and our lives safer.
• Expanded definition of rape beyond peno-vaginal penetration
• Definition of consent and a crucial proviso to Section 375 (Provided that a woman who does not physically resist to the act of penetration shall not be reason only of that fact be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity).
• Inclusion of crimes like forced disrobing, acid attacks and stalking that destroy women’s lives, and can lead to their rape and brutal murders.
• Free, immediate treatment to victims of acid attack and sexual violence to be given by all Health service providers, with penalties for refusal.

At the same time,

• We are deeply disappointed by the widening of the age net for statutory rape to 18 years, when it has stood at 16 years for 3 decades. We are worried that this provision will criminalize our young boys, tainting them as rapists for life, when what we need is discussion and education on issues of sexual contact. We ask Parliament to revisit this provision and to amend it.
• We are disturbed that yet again rape within marriage finds no acknowledgement in the Bill
• Systemic sexual violence against dalit and tribal women is not acknowledged as aggravated rape
• We find it incomprehensible that in a Bill which clarifies that no sanction for prosecution under 197 (1) CrPC is required for public servants charged with sexual offences, a similar clarification regarding 197 (2) CrPC covering armed forces is excluded.
• Why, when all persons can be victims of rape committed by men, does the Bill define the victim as woman only? We urge government and Parliament to revisit the Bill at an early stage, to recognize the reality and vulnerability of transgenders and men to sexual abuse by other men, and amend the definition of victim to make it ‘person’.

 We now ask Government to take the next step towards comprehensive reforms outlined in the Justice Verma Committee report, and amend the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 and the Representation of People Act, 1951 to erase immunity and instill accountability across all institutions.

Finally, we call upon the government, upon all political parties and all citizens to join us in continuing this journey to justice and equal rights for women, and in vigorously implementing these laws we have fought so long and so hard to get.

Source: Via Facebook: by Kavita Krishnan (Notes) on Saturday, March 23, 2013 at 11:10pm

Court lifts gag order on India gang rape trial

NEW DELHI — A court ruled Friday that Indian media will now be allowed to cover the trial of four men accused in the gang rape and fatal beating of a woman on a New Delhi bus in December, a defense lawyer in the case said.

Journalists had been barred by a court order from entering the courtroom or reporting details of the trial, which is already under way in a special fast-track court in the capital.

But the Delhi High Court lifted the gag order Friday, allowing local media to cover one of the most high-profile trials in the country, according to defense lawyer V.K. Anand.

The ruling by Justice Rajiv Shakdher said one representative from national Indian daily newspapers and one from local wire services would be allowed into the courtroom and then will be expected to brief reporters outside the court, according to the Press Trust of India. The journalists will still be barred from naming the victim, her family and witnesses called in the case, the ruling said, according to PTI.

The decision to open the trial to reporters was likely to lead to a new wave of media coverage of the crime, which sparked protests across India demanding stronger protection for women.

Police say the 23-year-old student and a male friend were attacked when they boarded a private bus they thought was taking them home after seeing a movie at an upscale shopping mall on Dec. 16. Six attackers beat the man and raped the woman, inflicting massive internal injuries with a metal bar, police said. The victims were dumped on the roadside, and the woman died two weeks later in a Singapore hospital.

In the wake of the attack, a special fast-track court was set up in New Delhi to deal with sexual violence cases, beginning with the gang rape trial. Five men were originally on trial, but one was found dead in his jail cell earlier this month in an incident authorities said was a suicide. A sixth suspect is being tried as a juvenile.

The court ruling Friday came just a day after Parliament passed a sweeping new law to protect women against sexual violence in response to the rape.

The law, which moved with lightning speed through a usually slow-paced legislature, makes stalking, voyeurism and sexual harassment a crime. It also provides for the death penalty for repeat offenders or for rape attacks that lead to the victim's death.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130322/as-india-gang-rape/?utm_hp_ref=media&ir=media

Cabinet Clears Anti-Rape Bill

NEW DELHI: Amid the government's keenness to enact a tough law to tackle crimes against women, the Union Cabinet today cleared a bill providing for stringent punishment for rape, acid attack, stalking and voyeurism besides reducing the age of consent for sex to 16 years.

The approval of the Cabinet paves the way for introduction of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013 in Parliament before it goes into recess on March 22, which is necessary as it will have to replace an Ordinance which will expire on April four.

The bill, brought against the backdrop of the December 16 Delhi gangrape, provides for minimum jail term of 20 years for rape which may be extended to 'natural life' of the convict in jail or even death if the victim dies or is left in a 'persistent vegetative state'

The bill also provides for lowering the age of consent for sex from 18 to 16 years, one of the contentious provisions which held up the proposed legislation briefly and had to be referred to a Group of Ministers for consensus.

The Ordinance had maintained the consent age as 18 years.

The bill also uses the term 'rape' which will be gender- specific, in contrast to the gender-neutral 'sexual assault' as proposed in the ordinance. This means only men can be booked for the crime.

Stalking and voyeurism have been defined as criminal offences in the bill. Sustained stalking will be a non- bailable offence.

The bill had divided the Cabinet at its special meeting on Tuesday and was referred to a GoM to sort out differences on various aspects of the proposed law.

The GoM finalised the draft yesterday amidst the government's keenness to expedite the bill that will replace an ordinance promulgated on February 3.

The measure, on the lines of the ordinance, has not touched on the issue of making marital rape a separate offence.

Against the backdrop of parties like the Samajwadi Party having serious reservations on certain provisions of the ordinance claiming they are prone to misuse, the government has convened an all-party meeting next week to discuss the bill cleared by the Cabinet today.

Source: http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=792421

Rape behind prison bars

First Published: Tue, Mar 12 2013. 07 50 PM IST

It is a common practice for undertrials accused of rape to be brutally sodomized as a welcome to the prison party

Indian police men and media persons stand outside the Tihar Jail in New Delhi on Monday. Photo: AP

The Indian government has been struggling to come up with a draft of an anti-rape law following the brutal gang rape and resulting death of a young woman in Delhi last December. While the Justice Verma committee report was concluded in record time with recommendations on amending India’s archaic rape laws, differences in views about issues like whether the age of consent should be 16 instead of 18 and whether marital rape is to be recognized as a crime are preventing the clearing of the law.

It is clear that the ruling Congress party is gearing up to make itself attractive to women in time for elections next year. The creation of an all-women bank in the budget this year is one such move. The rape law was meant to be cleared on Tuesday but that has not happened. In the meantime, Ram Singh, one of the accused in the Delhi rape case, was found hanging in his cell on Monday.

The Hindu reported that Singh’s father, Mangelal, alleged that his son had been sodomized inside the jail. So was Ram Singh raped and murdered? Serves him right? Many probably hold the view that Singh got what he deserved and good riddance to someone as evil as him. A number of metaphors like, “as you sow, so shall you reap” will be used to deal with and close the matter.

However, it is worth examining the issue of sexual assault and rape of men in judicial custody by fellow inmates and prison staff. Convicted prisoners and those in custody awaiting trials are at risk all over the world of being sexually assaulted and raped.

The Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) was passed by President George W. Bush in 2003 in an effort to address this widespread human rights problem. As part of this Act, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is to carry out comprehensive statistical review and analysis each year about the incidents of rape in all holding facilities. In the year 2012, nearly one in 10 prisoners reported being raped or sexually assaulted in the US while in custody. Often it is the physically weak, young, gay or those who have been convicted of sexual offences against minors who are targeted.

The Human Rights Law Network in Delhi is one organization that works on prisoners’ rights. They receive letters from prisoners alleging torture and negligence from around India. I learn that it is a common practice for any undertrial accused of rape to be brutally sodomized as a welcome to the prison party.

Given the outrage and the publicity that the Delhi gang rape received, there is no doubt that the accused were at risk for all kinds of abuse while in custody awaiting their trial in addition to the possibility of taking their own lives. Yet Singh is alleged to have hung himself with his clothes and strings from his mattress even as three of his cell mates slept through it all.

Being raped and beaten in jail while awaiting trial is not the kind of justice that anybody deserves in a democratic country—however heinous the crime committed by the prisoner. India has failed miserably in this regard by allowing this incident to occur. Perhaps a way to redeem itself is to work in provisions dealing with prison rape in the pending anti-rape law.

Source: http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/BzOQYSLEsQ9YrXmcbipwrN/Rape-behind-prison-bars.html

Anti-rape Bill deferred second time in six days, referred to group of ministers

ByVishwa Mohan, TNN | Mar 12, 2013, 11.10 AM IST

NEW DELHI: Differences of opinion over the draft Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill - seeking to reintroduce the word 'rape' instead of 'sexual assault' in the anti-rape law and lower the age of consensual sex from 18 to 16 — forced the government to defer it again on Tuesday, second time in six days. 

Anti-rape bill deferred second time in six days, referred to GoM

The special cabinet, called to discuss the issue, referred the Bill to the empowered group of ministers (EGoM) to sort out differences within the government. It is learnt that the age of consent - lowering it from 18 to 16 - is the major hitch as the ministry of women and child development is not fully convinced of the proposal of the home ministry. 

Finance minister P Chidambaram will head the EGoM which will try to finalise the draft Bill as early as possible because the government is supposed to pass new legislation — replacing the existing Ordinance — before March 22 when both the Houses of Parliament adjourn for a month-long recess. 

It is learnt that the law ministry has expressed reservations over the home ministry's draft replacing 'sexual assault' with 'rape' while the ministry of women and child development expressed strong reservation against bringing down the age of consent from 18 to 16 years. 

"The Bill has to stand the scrutiny of Parliament and later judiciary. A consensus is must for the government before moving ahead. In all likelihood, the draft Bill will not undergo major changes now and will soon be brought before Cabinet," said an official. 

The home ministry's draft has, in fact, reversed what the previous Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2012 and the Ordinance on Criminal Law, 2013 had done in the case of the two contentious provisions and preferred to go by the recommendation of the Justice JS Verma committee's recommendation which insists on retaining the word 'rape' in the law. 

The ordinance — making the anti-rape law much more stringent — was promulgated by the President on February 3 in the wake of public outrage over the December 16 gang-rape of Nirbhaya. Making sexual crimes gender neutral, the ordinance replaced 'rape' with 'sexual assault' in tune with provisions of the pending Bill. 

The EGoM has to bring the fresh draft before the Cabinet as early as possible because government needs to bring it to Parliament within six weeks of the ordinance getting promulgated. 

Bringing down the age of consent from 18 to 16 years is opposed by the WCD ministry since it will be run contrary to a recent law protecting children from sexual offences and the Child Marriage (Prohibition) Act. 

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, which was passed by Parliament last year, was enacted following recommendations by a parliamentary panel and a range of experts suggesting that the age of consent provision was being misused for child trafficking for sex, labour and domestic work. The WCD ministry had also reasoned that the provision was used to slap false cases against young couples who were targeted for not conforming to social norms. 

The ministry had faced the wrath of child rights activists at the time who felt that stringent punishment like life imprisonment for sexual assault could be used to criminalize teenage sex, making any intercourse below 18 years of age an offence under this law.

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Anti-rape-Bill-deferred-second-time-in-six-days-referred-to-group-of-ministers/articleshow/18923675.cms

Centre to lower bar for consensual sex to 16 years

TNN | Mar 12, 2013, 01.43 AM IST

NEW DELHI: The Union Cabinet is set to clear a bill seeking to replace the post-Nirbhaya case ordinance dealing with crime against women which will reduce the age for consensual sex to 16 and reinstate "rape" as an offence specifically committed against women.

The government has resolved differences on the two contentious aspects of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013, bowing to the demands of women's groups who protested against the ordinance's provisions making "sexual assault" a gender neutral crime.

Now, the perpetrator in a crime of rape will be male while the victim female according to the law to be considered by the Cabinet on Tuesday.

Settling divergent views on the age of consent was a more difficult task as the women and child development ministry pointed out that a recent law to protect kids deems anyone below 18 as a minor.

Official sources said there would be no contradiction between the two laws as Supreme Court has said in cases of alleged elopement where the girl has acted in accordance to her free will, the age of consent to be considered is 16.

While the issue is likely to be debated by the Cabinet, the ministry of home affairs has taken the view that criminalizing sex in the 16 to 18 age group is not warranted as it fails to take into account changing sexual mores.

With sexual contact between teens of this age increasingly common in both urban and rural areas and across social strata, it was felt a tough law could be misused to settle scores or allow conservative opinion to harass youngsters.

The law to protect children against sexual abuse deals with incidents where no consent has been obtained and the criminal law amendment bill will not allow offenders a legal loophole, sources said.

The bill could also make rape by those in authority punishable by life sentence extending to the abuser's "natural life". Another likely change is making it mandatory for government and private hospitals to provide free medical assistance to victims of sexual crimes.

Home minister Sushilkumar Shinde on Monday said there were differences on "legal points" which were being addressed to and will be settled by Cabinet.

Asked about the fate of the proposed bill, Shinde said the law ministry had to vet all proposals before the government takes the next step.

Once approved by the Cabinet, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill will be introduced inParliament later this week and would be passed before March 22 when both the Houses adjourn for a month-long recess as is necessary if the ordinance is not to lapse.

The bill will replace the ordinance on criminal law which was promulgated on February 3 in the wake of public outrage over the December 16 gang rape incident.

The Justice J S Verma committee, who's report forms the basis of the ordinance, had supported lowering the age of consent to 16.

Times View

This newspaper has repeatedly argued that the change of the age of consent from 16 to 18 was a retrograde step and that it should be reversed. The changed law could have become a tool to harass teenagers rather than one that protects them. We had urged the government and Parliament to reconsider despite the law having been passed, because sticking to a bad law does not enhance the authority of the state, it diminishes it. We are glad that the government now intends to do just that. It would also be a good idea to decriminalise consensual sex even with girls below the age of 16 where the partner is less than 5 years older.

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Centre-to-lower-bar-for-consensual-sex-to-16-years/articleshow/18917656.cms