Why the fight against sexual violence must include all genders.
The concept of justice in cases of sexual violence has long been a subject of intense debate. This debate often revolves around whether justice is reserved solely for the high-profile cases that capture media attention or if it should be extended to the countless unnamed individuals who endure such suffering in silence. The recent incident at RG Kar Medical College in Kolkata has once again highlighted the urgent need to address the systemic issues within our society related to sexual violence.
Understanding the motivations behind sexual crimes remains a complex endeavor. However, it is evident that such incidents are neither isolated nor diminishing. Historically, rape has been a manifestation of patriarchal privilege and misuse of power. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance of 2013, enacted in response to the Nirbhaya case, introduced significant changes by replacing the term "rape" with "sexual assault." This amendment aimed to create a gender-neutral framework for addressing sexual crimes, thereby recognizing both male and female victims. Nonetheless, the omission of the term "rape" from the legal vocabulary represented a critical shortfall in the legislation.
The recent amendments to sexual violence legislation, particularly those embedded in the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita laws replacing the IPC, further complicate the issue. The new laws only allows for the concept of rape to be limited to situations where the perpetrator is a man, and the survivor is a woman. All other cases where the survivor is non-cisgendered or otherwise do not fit this binary, may find themselves categorized under sections related to grievous hurt, a bailable offense with imprisonment extendable for up to 7 years.
For example, on June 14, 2024, the Uttar Pradesh Police filed a first information report (FIR) against four individuals for allegedly sexually assaulting a 23-year-old person. Under the new BSN laws, this case is likely to be categorized under "hurt," a designation that inadequately reflects the gravity of the crime and undermines the survivor’s legal recourse. This situation underscores the deficiencies of the current legislative framework and highlights how gender biases continue to shape our legal system.
The discussion surrounding gender in the context of sexual violence often revolves around terminology. By framing rape exclusively as a crime where victims are divided by gender denying the judiciary to view cases on the basis of their severity. This narrow perspective not only disregards the experiences of all survivors. Such stigmas hinder the progress toward a more inclusive understanding of sexual violence in Indian society.
It is crucial to recognize that while individuals may experience sexual violence differently, the underlying issue is one of power and control, not gender. Survivors often face additional societal pressures and unique challenges, including societal taboos and stigmas associated with perceived identity.
As evidenced by the recurrent incidents and ongoing legal challenges, the current state of sexual violence legislation in India is inadequate. The recent legislative changes, rather than advancing justice, appear to regress towards a more exclusionary approach. To address these issues effectively, there is a pressing need for gender-neutral language in laws pertaining to rape and sexual violence. Countries like New Zealand have adopted such measures, providing a model for creating a more equitable legal framework.
In conclusion, justice must transcend media sensationalism and encompass all victims of sexual violence, irrespective of gender. The adoption of gender-neutral legal terminology and a comprehensive approach to sexual violence is essential for ensuring that all survivors receive the justice and support they deserve. The current trajectory of legislative amendments suggests a regression rather than progress, underscoring the necessity for continued advocacy and reform in this critical area.
Comments