Opinion - News Analysis   

The child, the media and the law

On March 19, 2006, The Hindu carried a report from Mumbai, headlined "Jail for 2 Britons for child abuse." Duncan Grant and Alan Waters were convicted of offences related to unnatural sex and abuse of children, and sentenced to jail term and fine. The report mentioned the names of two victims, for whose rehabilitation part of the fine amount was to be used.

On March 20, we received an e-mail from Vidya Reddy of Tulir, Centre for Prevention and Healing of Child Sexual Abuse, Chennai, protesting against the publication of the names of the victims. The Hindu, she said, was sensitive on these issues, and had erred in this instance. A correction was published ("Corrections and Clarifications", March 21, 2006), acknowledging the departure from journalistic norms.

Our Special Correspondent in Mumbai, responding to my queries, said the names were given by the victims' lawyer at a press conference, while referring to the court's order to use part of the money for rehabilitation. The boys, minors at the time the offence was committed, were now adults. These aspects do not justify the publication of their names in the report in any way. The law, the Supreme Court's views, and journalists' codes of conduct are very clear on the need to protect child victims (and offenders) from interference in their privacy, so that their chances of rehabilitation are not affected.

Justice Arijit Pasayat of the Supreme Court said, as recently as February 28, 2006 (Dinesh @ Buddha vs State of Rajasthan): "Sec. 228-A of IPC makes disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences punishable ... True it is, the restriction does not relate to printing or publication of judgment of High Court or Supreme Court. But keeping in view the social object of preventing social victimisation or ostracism of the victim of a sexual offence for which Sec. 228 A has been enacted, it would be appropriate that in the judgments, be it of this court, High Court or Lower Court, the name of the victim should not be indicated."

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 clearly lays down: "No report in any newspaper, magazine or news-sheet or visual media of any enquiry regarding a juvenile in conflict with law (under an amendment proposed and now under consideration by the Standing Committee of Parliament, the words `or a child in need of care and protection' are to be added here) under this Act shall disclose the names, address or school or any other particulars calculated to lead to the identification of the juvenile."

Section 228A IPC and Section 327 (3) Cr PC also specify similar bars on publication of court proceedings dealing with sexual exploitation of the child.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the U.N. in 1989 (India acceded to it in 1992), under a protocol of May 2000, calls for "protecting the privacy and identity of child victims and avoid inappropriate dissemination of information that could lead to the identification of child victims."

The guidelines of the International Federation of Journalists ask professionals to have respect for the privacy and identity of children and consider the consequences of publication of any report, and the need to minimise harm to children.

The Press Council of India's norms for journalistic conduct say that in reporting sexual assault on children, names, photos and particulars of their identity shall not be published.

Judgments, the laws, the conventions, the guidelines are clear and specific. But what is the awareness of these among the public in general, and journalists in particular? One argument put forward by many in the media is that journalists deal with real life and real people, and without names a report will lack punch. So they include the names of child victims or offenders in their reports. I have not come across any legal action in such instances.

According to Geetha Ramaseshan, lawyer and social activist, there are many grey areas also in the laws relating to juvenile justice. How does one deal with pre-trial news of an offence? When police make arrests and announce it, the identity of juveniles involved needs to be protected but it is not done. Even the lower courts are not aware of many guidelines issued by the apex court on such offences.

There is need for a sustained campaign to spread awareness of the rights of the child and the laws and conventions covering this field. NGOs and organisations of media professionals have a big role in this.

The Hindu has always had clear guidelines on the subject — no names of children (the legal definition in India is one below the age of 18) should be mentioned in crime or legal reports involving them. But there have been instances when this guideline was not observed, as in the Mumbai report. The message, and the awareness, has to spread all along the line. Some basic orientation for newcomers on the child, the media and the law (and on other laws affecting the press as well), apart from the practices of this paper, may be needed.

readerseditor@thehindu.co.in

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

People's needs over party politics
Securing our cities
A new kind of history textbook
GoM's confidential report
Narmada project: clearing the confusion
The child, the media and the law
The cost of 3ºC global rise in temperature
Twin blasts
Narmada issue
Poll survey
He deserved better
Dance bars

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu