THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Madam, you have been given double the time. Kindly cooperate. ...(Interruptions)... All of us have to complete this process. ...(Interruptions)...
SHRIMATI JAYA BACHCHAN: Sir, I am not going to complete. It will be incomplete. But I will conclude. ...(Interruptions)...
(Contd. by 2e/KSK) KSK/DS/2.15/2E
SHRIMATI JAYA BACHCHAN (CONTD.): It is incomplete. I will conclude. I remember, जावेद अख्तर जी ने एक फिल्म में एक गाना लिखा था। It was a very sad song. At that time, I did not understand, but today, there is a relevance to that song, as a girl tells her father कि अबकी जो कीजो आगे न कीजो, दूजी बार मुझे बिटिया न कीजो। थैंक यू।
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): I am requesting all the hon. Members to kindly restrict to two to three minutes because we want to complete this process. You know very well that our friends have some other things also to say. Now, Shri Shivanand Tiwari.
श्री शिवानन्द तिवारी (बिहार): उपसभाध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं अपनी ओर से और अपनी पार्टी की ओर से इस बिल का समर्थन करने के लिए खड़ा हुआ हूँ। महोदय, दिल्ली में जो घटना हुई, वह बर्बर घटना थी और उस घटना के परिणामस्वरूप यह बिल हम लोगों के सामने आया है। महोदय, वर्मा साहब की अध्यक्षता में जो कमिटी बनी, उसको मैं मुबारकवाद देना चाहता हूँ कि उसने तीन महीने के कम समय में अपनी रिपोर्ट दी और इस देश में आज़ादी के बाद पहली दफा जेंडर इक्वालटी के आधार पर कोई रिपोर्ट दाखिल की गयी है। संविधान में औरत को जो अधिकार है, उस अधिकार को ध्यान में रख कर पहली दफा यह सिफारिश की गयी है।
उपसभाध्यक्ष महोदय, हम क़ानून बना रहे हैं, इसकी जरूरत थी, इसमें कहीं कोई संदेह नहीं है, लेकिन क्या क़ानून बनाने से औरतों के खिलाफ जो हिंसा है, उसको हम रोक सकते हैं? यह एक बड़ा जबर्दस्त सवाल आज के दिन मेरे मन में है। नजमा जी ने दो-तीन दिन पहले हमको यह बतलाया कि अमेरिका जैसे मुल्क में औरतों के खिलाफ हिंसा काफी बड़े पैमाने पर होती है। हमको इस बारे में कोई जानकारी नहीं थी। हम बहुत चौंके कि अमेरिका, जिसको हम लोग एक आदर्श देश के रूप में जानते हैं और जिसका हम अनुकरण कर रहे हैं, उस देश में औरतों के खिलाफ इतनी हिंसा होती है! मैंने सुना है कि वहाँ की पुलिस भी बहुत सक्षम है। हालत ऐसी है कि वहाँ आप पुलिस को खबर कीजिए, तो वह मिनटों में हाजिर हो जाती है, जबकि हमारे यहाँ की पुलिस में हम उस इफिशन्सी की कल्पना भी नहीं कर सकते हैं। मैंने देखा कि अमेरिका में एक साल में दो-दो लाख, ढाई-ढाई लाख औरतों के खिलाफ वायलेंस का केस होता है, जो दर्ज नहीं होता है। वहाँ 20 परसेंट महिलाएँ ऐसी हैं, जिनके साथ उनके जीवन में कभी न कभी सेक्सुअल वायलेंस होता है। उसके बाद भी औरतों के खिलाफ वहाँ जो वायलेंस है, उसमें कोई कमी नहीं आ रही है।
उपसभाध्यक्ष महोदय, मेरी उम्र 70 साल की है। हमको बचपन की याद है और हमने यह देखा है कि समाज में औरतों के खिलाफ हिंसा बराबर होती रही है, लेकिन पिछले 15-20 वर्षों से हमारे मुल्क में औरतों के खिलाफ हिंसा जिस तरह से बढ़ी है, इसका कोई जवाब नहीं है, वह डरावने ढंग से बढ़ी है। हमको लगता है कि देश जो तरक्की कर रहा है, इस तरक्की के साथ-साथ कहीं औरतों के साथ हिंसा तो नहीं बढ़ रही है? इसके पीछे कारण क्या है? इस सदन में एक बार पहले भी चर्चा हुई थी और तब मैंने कहा था कि हमारे देश में आर्थिक सुधारीकरण के बाद जो कन्ज़ूमरिस्ट कल्चर आया, उसने औरत के शरीर का व्यापारीकरण कर दिया। आज यह हम विज्ञापनों में देखते हैं। आप शहरों में बड़े-बड़े बिलबोर्ड्स देखिए, उनमें औरत कम कपड़े पहनी हुई दिखायी देती है। आज हम टेलीविज़न पर औरत को गंजी का विज्ञापन करते हुए देखते हैं, जिसका पूरा का पूरा रोल ललचाने वाला होता है, जिसमें औरत को हम सिडक्टिव रोल में देखते हैं। आज यह स्थिति है।
महोदय, हमने एक बार पढ़ा था कि चेन्नई में एक हिन्दी सिनेमा गया था, जिस पर एक तमिलियन ने अखबार में एक आर्टिकल लिखा था। महोदय, तमिलनाडु बहुत कन्ज़र्वटिव शहर है और वहाँ औरतों की इज्जत का बहुत ध्यान रखा जाता है। उस आदमी ने लिखा कि उस सिनेमा में जब डांस का दृश्य आया, तो पूरा का पूरा हॉल इस तरह से उफान में आ गया कि जिसका कोई हिसाब-किताब नहीं था। लोग चौंक गए। जो छोटे-छोटे बच्चे हैं, वे औरतों को विज्ञापन में जिस ढंग से देख रहे हैं, फिल्मों में जिस ढंग से देख रहे हैं, उनसे उनकी क्या मानसिकता बनती है? वे औरत को सिर्फ एक ही रूप में देखते हैं, वे उसे सेक्स के ऑब्जेक्ट के रूप में देखते हैं।
(2एफ/एमसीएम पर जारी)
श्री शिवानन्द तिवारी (क्रमागत) : यह हालत है। इसलिए मेरा कहना यह है कि आप सख्त से सख्त कानून बनाइए, इसमें कहीं कोई शुबहा नहीं है। लेकिन इस पर विचार करने की जरूरत है। कानून हम रोज बनाते जा रहे हैं, उसमें सख्ती लाते जा रहे हैं लेकिन औरतों के खिलाफ वॉयलेंस बढ़ता जा रहा है। इसके पीछे हमारे देश के कल्चर में जो चेंज आ रहा है, हम तथाकथित आधुनिकता की ओर बढ़ रहे हैं। उस आधुनिकता के साथ जो सेक्सअुल क्राइम है, औरतों के खिलाफ जो वॉयलेंस है, वह भी बढ़ता जा रहा है। इसलिए सिर्फ अगर कानून बनाकर के हम चुप बैठ जाएंगे, उससे औरतें सुरक्षित नहीं रहेंगी। औरतों को सेक्स का ऑबजेक्ट बनाकर जो हम समाज में परोस रहे हैं, उसको हम जब तक नहीं रोकेंगे, तब तक हम औरतों को सुरक्षा प्रदान नहीं कर सकते हैं। इसी चेतावनी के साथ मैं इस बिल का समर्थन कर रहा हूं।
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Thank you, Tiwari ji. Now, Shrimati Vasanthi Stanley. Kindly confine your speech to two minutes.
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY (TAMIL NADU): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my views on the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013. Sir, here, on this occasion, I would make only one point. This Ordinance has been brought especially after the Delhi gang rape incident, which shocked the entire nation. The conscience of the nation was awakened and we had to bring in the Ordinance. My only one question to the ruling Government is: when the name of the Delhi gang rape victim has not yet been revealed, the photograph of the girl is not out in the open, why is it that most of the photographs of the Sri Lankan Tamil victims are coming out in all the media? More than a lakh of women invariably, whether they are children, whether they are small girls, whether they are aged women or whether they are middle-aged, are raped, victimized and ill-treated there in Sri Lanka. I just leave it to the conscience of the ruling Government to rise to the occasion and do the needful. Considering my health, I request that I may be allowed to lay my views on this Bill. Thank you very much.
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): No, there is no rule for that. Kindly keep the papers, we can use the same in some other debate. Shri Baishnab Parida. Kindly cooperate with the House and finish it within two minutes. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, ..(Interruptions).. (Ends)
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Pardon. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA (ODISHA): Sir, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my views. At the outset, Sir, I support the Bill. ..(Interruptions).. Are you speaking?
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Sir, then, kindly allow me some time. ..(Interruptions)..
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Please. ..(Interruptions).. Please proceed, Mr. Parida. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA: Sir, at the outset, I express my support to the present Bill. It is timely, and, in our country, even after 64 years of Independence, the number of crimes, assaults and discrimination against women is growing everyday. In our political system, we have given many rights to women, which include the right to get elected to Assemblies, Panchayats or other political bodies. But, everyday, when we open the newspapers or watch the television, what do we see? When we gave fifty per cent reservation to women in the Panchayat system, everyday, we used to see 50 rape cases in the newspapers. So, it is a sheer joke to our system, to our justice delivery system, and, to our democratic system. Now, it is high time to be serious about this.
(Contd. by 2G-SK)
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA (CONTD.): We are living in a society where the perpetrators of sexual crimes are not condemned, but the victim is looked down here in this society. This attitude has been continuing since medieval times. This medieval mindset is still prevailing not only in families but also in the society. We can make stringent laws to prevent these crimes. So far as I remember, when late Mrs. Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister of this country, there was a great Parliamentarian whose name was Bhupesh Gupta who fought during those days for brining a stringent law against sexual crimes and Mrs. Gandhi took all interest to bring that law, and that was the most powerful law in post-independent India.
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA: Sir, after making all these stringent laws, what is the situation in the country? We have not practised those laws. We can make laws, but the question lies: How much are we implementing it? That is the issue. We are now so much vocal. We are condemning rape, sexual assaults and all these things. But after making this law, can we be serious? Can this Indian society be prepared to execute that law? Can we make the women folk, the poorer section in our society ...
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): I am going to call the next speaker now. Please cooperate.
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA: Sir, I am supporting this Bill. Law must be stringent ...
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): It is okay. Shrimati Vandana Chavan.
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA: ... but if the mind of the political leadership, the rulers of this country and the common man is not changed, we can't make a 21st century India...
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Okay, thank you.
SHRI BAISHNAB PARIDA: I don’t have much time. With these words, I support this Bill.
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN (MAHARASHTRA): Thank you, Sir, for giving me an opportunity to speak on this very important legislation.
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Vice-Chairman, Sir, on the Budget, everybody has laid the papers. You have allowed all the people. Please allow me, Sir. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN: Vasanthiji, let me speak please. ..(Interruptions).. Thank you very much, Sir, for giving me an opportunity ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Sir, please allow me to lay the papers. ..(Interruptions)..
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): It is a very important Bill. Kindly sit down. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN: Sir, I would have liked to make some introductory and opening remarks and also point out some highlights which are positive as far as this Bill is concerned. However, considering the paucity of time, I only restrict myself to the grey areas which exist in this Bill. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Sir, please allow me to lay the papers. ..(Interruptions)..
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): You are disturbing your own colleague. Kindly sit down. We will decide it.
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN: You have had your say. Please allow me to speak. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Sir, you could give me an answer. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN: Sir, I want to bring to your notice four points which ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Sir, what is this? Please allow me. ..(Interruptions)..
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Please sit down. ..(Interruptions).. Please sit down. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Sir, you have allowed everyone to lay the papers. ..(Interruptions)..
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN: Sir, in clause 8 in Chapter II, there is substitution of section 370 by new sections 370 and 370 A. ..(Interruptions)..
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Kindly sit down. We will take a decision. Please sit down.
SHRIMATI VASANTHI STANLEY: Okay, Sir. Thank you.
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN: This deals with trafficking and exploitation of a trafficked person. Sir, you will see that the new section 370 prescribed different punishments for different levels of trafficking such as a person, more than one person trafficking of minor, trafficking of more than one minor, and all these punishments are not less than 7 years, not less than 10 years, not less than 14 years, not less than life imprisonment. However, sexual exploitation of a person who is trafficked, in fact, is a more serious offence than just trafficking. But the punishment prescribed here is not less than 5 years or not less than 3 years. I feel sexual exploitation of a person who is trafficked is a more serious offence, and, therefore, the punishment which should be prescribed for that also should be of a higher degree. Therefore, I feel there is a serious anomaly in this section which needs to be addressed.
Secondly, Sir, I invite your attention to clause 9 of Chapter II which defines rape ...
(Contd. by KR/2H)
SHRIMATI VANDANA CHAVAN (CONTD.): .. and also substitutes the earlier Sections 375, 376A to 376D and now adds
Section 376E. Sir, in this also there is a serious anomaly about the punishment prescribed. In most of the Sections, up to so much imprisonment and fine. We can see in two sub-sections here...(interruptions).... (Ends)
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Thank you, you have made your points. Dr. V. Maitreyan. ..(Interruptions)... Kindly cooperate. We have to pass the Bill. ..(Interruptions)... You understand the situation. ..(Interruptions)... That is why we want to complete it today. Kindly understand the situation.
DR. NAJMA A. HEPTULLA: We can get it passed tomorrow. ..(Interruptions)... It is discrimination. ...(Interruptions)... Two political parties are not allowing an important legislation to be discussed. ..(Interruptions)..
DR.V. MAITREYAN: Don't accuse like that. ..(Interruptions)... Don't accuse like that. आप लोग कितने दिन करते रहते हैं? रोज हाउस को रेनसेक करते हो और हमसे कहते हो। ...(व्यवधान)
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Kindly conclude quickly.
DR. V. MAITREYAN (TAMIL NADU): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, I have not yet started.
Some searching questions are to be seriously looked into and pondered over in the context of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013 which is before the House for discussion.
Can a Bill, an act or a law alone provide a panacea and address the ills afflicting the society in general and the evil of rape in particular? Can a Bill hastily and hurriedly be prepared and introduced to score a point merely to appear rising to the occasion to sternly and strictly deal with the dastardly act perpetrated against the girl in Delhi on the 16th December? Undoubtedly the barbaric and heinous act done not only with that girl but with any other women as well deserves to be condemned in the harshest of the word possible.
But was it, in fact, the lack of a law or a Bill or an Act which proved to be instrumental in letting this barbaric act to take place? Was it the lack of law that failed the administration to stop that despicable act? Will the proposed Bill, in any way, guarantee that no such incident would recur in future? The answer is, perhaps, a big no.
I am of the view that this Bill has been prepared by the Government in utmost haste without giving any attention to its pros and cons, simply to deflect the attention of the public from its failure in implementing the existing laws of the land in letter and spirit.
I would like to point out one thing. I would have been happier if the Government before rushing through this Bill, through an Ordinance, would have tried to forge a broad consensus through wide consultations on such contentious issues -- whether to call the crime as rape or sexual assault, whether 16 or 18 should be the age of consent for sex, how to define voyeurism, stalking, etc., so as to make the Bill healthy and balanced. But if the motive is only to score a point and only a point at any cost, all these noble tasks are bound to be thrown into backburner. I would have been happy if the Government, in addition to making this Bill, had taken some tough measures to streamline and strengthen the existing implementing law agencies on whose shoulders lie the success or failure of the Act. Steps such as police reforms, fixing responsibility and accountability for failure to maintain law and order and check heinous crimes, fast tracking of dispensation of justice, ensuring conviction, etc., could have been steps in the right direction. No law of the land, however powerful it may be, can prove to be a deterrent unless enforced forcefully and within a reasonable time frame because justice delayed is not only justice denied, but delayed justice also encourages brazen defiance and violation of law.
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Dr. Maitreyan, please conclude. Please cooperate.
SHRIMATI GUNDU SUDHARANI (ANDHRA PRADESH): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak on this historic piece of legislation , the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013. About 45 rape cases were reported within 15 days of Nirbhaya's incident; and about 145 cases were reported after issuance of the Ordinance on 3rd February. This clearly shows that there is no fear in the minds of such people even after this horrific incident. So, this mandates us to be as stringent as possible not only in making laws but also in implementing the same.
Sir, firstly, the Minister has rightly said that it is the onerous responsibility of each one of us to protect the honour and dignity of women in this country. I agree; but, the honour is at stake now and the dignity is at the crossroads. And, both can be protected only if this Bill is given retrospective effect, and not as mentioned in the "Short title and commencement" of the Bill under clause 1.
(Continued by 2J/VK)
SHRIMATI GUNDU SUDHARANI (CONTD): By doing this we give a clear message to the country that even if there are no stringent laws and if any such offences are committed, Parliament, in its wisdom, would enact and implement laws with retrospective effect. Sir, I welcome the inclusion of new forms of offences such as acid attack under Section 326A, voyeurism under Section 354C and stalking under Section 354D of IPC. But under Section 354D, you are saying whoever ‘watches’ or ‘spies’ on a woman. Here there is no mention of what the definition of ‘watches’ is. Nowhere has it been mentioned.
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Okay, thank you. Dr. Ashok Ganguly.
SHRIMATI GUNDU SUDHARANI: Then, Sir, let me lay it on the Table. I am going to lay the rest of my speech on the Table. You are just giving one or two minutes only.
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): There is no such rule like this. We have to take a decision. We will consider it afterwards. Please sit down.
DR. ASHOK S. GANGULY (NOMINATED): Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir, I support the Bill, but I would like to raise a fundamental issue. We are rushing through this Bill. We did not have a debate on the Budget. Sir, I think we are all responsible for giving you this problem of lack of time. These are important issues. Can law change a deep criminal tendency in a caste and male dominated society? Can it put an end to national hypocrisy? That is the important question. We can make law, but can the society change? The society has been complicit in this shameful compact of silence. The Bill is late, but it is a comprehensive recognition by India of the shameful fate of Indian women. The sexual threat to women in India is now a worldwide alert. Tourists now hesitate to visit India. Some countries have given advisories. I think this Bill will reassure some of the countries, but not everybody will be satisfied. New laws may not shame the Indian society. We have to rise as people and stoutly oppose male behaviour which is happening every minute. Let us fight this curse on all Indian males and not only depend on laws and the police. Change the national male mindset towards all women and domestic violence. Mr. Minister, I wish you all the best, but this is the beginning of a campaign. Thank you.
DR. BHARATKUMAR RAUT: Sir, before I start my speech, I would to know how much time you have given me.
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): Only two minutes. If you confine to less than that, I will be happy.
DR. BHARATKUMAR RAUT (MAHARASHTRA): Sir, I do not know what to say when we are spending so much time on many other things. It is a very important Bill. Why are we rushing it through, I can’t understand. What is the idea? Why is this Bill being passed in such a way?
THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN): You have to understand the situation.
DR. BHARATKUMAR RAUT: Sir, when I stand here, apart from the citizen of the country and apart from the Member of Parliament, I also stand here as son of my mother, husband of my wife, brother of my sister and father-in-law of my daughter-in-law. Sir, I feel ashamed that in the 21st Century we have to bring in such legislation which is not as effective as it should have been. Due to lack of time, I am skipping all the points. Here we have to really look at the judicial system of hearing the rape cases. When the judge is a man and the advocates are men, and when cross-examination happens in the court and the type of questions that are put in front of a male judge, imagine the plight of a woman who has already undergone the atrocity. I think one basic amendment that we should have done is that such cases should be heard only by a woman judge in camera and the cross-examination should be done only by women counsels.