Current Affairs legalIssues:

Every sexual crime incident is an interesting news item for media- both print and electronic. When an international school principal is involved as an accused in such a crime where he was arrested for alleged rape of a 11th class student of 17 years, the TV channels showed building shots of all the international schools of Hyderabad unmindful of the fact they are suggesting that those schools also are dangerous for the girls. A case of rape and criminal intimidation has been booked against Salahuddin Ayub, Principal of Parkwood International School at Manneguda near Vikarabad on the outskirts of Hyderabad (Times of India, Hyderabad Newsreport, 22nd July, 2010). While the parents of the girl from Mumbai alleged that she was repeatedly raped by the principal during the last one year, the school authorities denied claimed that they were aimed at defaming their popular school, which has branches in the Middle East.

Crime: As News, Case, Story, Money, Success

Generally, once the arrest scenes are repeatedly shown, the media focus shifts on to the investigation process, which happened in this case too. The police tried to use the media’s interest to reveal the details of ‘confession’ of the accused to tell the world that they did an efficient job and caught the real culprit. Whole strength of such reports is the unnamed ‘sources’, as revealed by the following sentences:

“According to sources (phrase frequently used by media, without telling who the sources are), accused confessed that he used to stay on the third floor of Princes Court Block, where girls used to stay on the school campus. Every day he used to call girl students from the first floor to the penthouse and urged them to stay even during late hours, sources said, quoting the confession statement drafted on a laptop. In March, the girl went to his room at 9.30 pm to clear some doubts. At that time, he hatched a plan and mixed a sedative in her cool drink and gave it to the girl, who after drinking it fell unconscious. He then raped the girl and also threatened her with his licensed 0.32 pistol that if she reveals to anybody he would kill her, the sources said. ….Accused also confessed that he took the girl to two hospitals. He first took her to a corporate hospital in Banjara Hills on May 5 suspecting pregnancy. He stood outside the hospital and sent the girl inside by giving her the required money. After that, he took the girl to a private nursing home at Lower Tank Bund for subsequent treatment. A lady doctor at the hospital gave her some pills for abortion. Sources said he also confessed that he had the habit of taking photographs and videos of girl students at various times and used to see them during night. He also stated in the confession that he used to take the girls outside the school premises without noting in the security register. “On July 1, some girl students came to my room to see a movie on TV. The foreign student slept in my room while watching TV. I asked the other students to leave the girl in my room. When all the girls went away I touched her …and tried to remove her clothes…But she resisted and cried loudly. Then I changed my mind and threatened the girl not to reveal this to anybody,” Ayub admitted in the confession. (Times of India, Hyderabad, 25th July 2010)

Releasing of such ‘sensational’ information with details of incident either formally or informally to the media will not strengthen the case of prosecution in any manner. Still give and take happens happily on both the sides.

Neither the police nor the media bother whether such confession to police officer would be admissible in court or enough to prove the guilt? After the confession story is written, both the media and police wash off their hands. Further investigation successes do not appear in media. Once media loses interest, case becomes a routine and no one would be watching the process of destroying evidence, diluting the investigation etc. Every one starts talking about the case only when the case ends in acquittal or nominal sentence is pronounced.

Reporting in media (Times of India, Hyderabad, 24th July 2010) that police seized handycam camera with memory card in which the sleazy scenes were recorded and the .32 pistol used to threaten, or other parts of investigation including the recording of statements of doctors who examined the victim, would help the readers to know the progress. The details of the recordings are again not required to be reported. All these will help the accused to develop plan to dilute or sabotage or destroy the strength, which happens when media ‘forgets’ this totally. Thus media by it’s over enthusiastic reporting of details of confession and seized articles in the beginning and by silence or negligence or being busy with other crime of contemporary interest, will be helping accused than the victim.  Crime is a just a thing of interest for media, while a challenge for police to bring publicity to their efficiency,  a case for courts and ignominy or worse than that for the victim, while reports serve the accused as ‘alerts’ at every stage. The dishonesty and corruption in the system stand as great strengths for the accused in destroying the case. As the judgment day arrives, it is the judiciary that gets blamed. Justice is another victim.

Blog to Assassinate the Character

In the process another worst thing is happening every time for the victim, this time in case of this school girl’s rape is the use of new medium for character assassination of the victim in defence of the rape accused. The character assassination is being used as vital weapon by almost all accused, of sexual offence. A blog created to defame and demoralize this 17 year old student victim of rape.  Times of India made it a banner item, which perhaps make people to rush to search the blog to know who the victim is. It proclaims that blog contains a photograph and other details, which evince sufficient interest among the netizens. The banner news report says: “Stooping to a new low and in contravention of various laws of the land, a blog has been floated with the express purpose of disgracing the rape victim of Class XI of Parkwood School and her family. The blog identifies the 17-year-old, who has levelled charges of rape against the school’s director and has posted her pictures on cyberspace. It also raises questions about her ‘relationship’ with other male students of the school, apart from rubbishing all her statements made in connection with this case. Worse, it even gives out a picture of the girl sourced from her profile on a social networking site…..While it cannot be ascertained who the creator of the blog is, its content makes it amply clear that it serves the purpose of the disgruntled school management. The blog claims that it has been created to foil the “malicious attempt to defame the director and the school” and goes on to list in detail the victim’s family background, naming her parents, siblings among others.” (Times of India, Hyderabad, 30th July 2010).  This claim would be enough to register a  case against the accused and his group.

The report also quotes the father of the victim saying; “They (the management) have not only posted her pictures all over but have made false allegations. It is not just unlawful but also immoral”.

The suspicion that blog is created by the accused group is further consolidated by the points made in the newsreport: “The blog reads like the repeat of the rant of the school management and carries the claims it had made last week when the rape case was filed against M S Ayub, the school director. While the school management, mainly Ayub’s sister, Ayesha Tanvir, had later stated that they would let the law take its own course in the matter, the blogger has curiously used every point Tanvir had made last week.”

References to the statement of the victim to the police, attributes motive of ‘hidden agenda’ to the victim, or ridiculing the allegations of video making or photography by the accused,  are the factors which show pointing finger to the accused.

Can Law Comes to the Rescue of Victim

The law made it very clear that it would be a crime to reveal the identity of the rape victim. Section 228A of Indian Penal Code, which is introduced in 1983, prescribed 2 years of imprisonment and fine for this offence.

228A. Disclosure of identity of the victim of certain offences etc.

(1) Whoever prints or publishers the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, or section 376D is alleged or found to have been committed (hereafter in this section referred to as the victim) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.

(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) extends to any printing or publication of the name or any matter which may make known the identity of the victim if such printing or publication is:-

(a) By or under the order in writing of the officer-in-charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation into such offence acting in good faith for the purposes of such investigation; or

(b) By, or with authorization in writing of, the victim; or

(c) Where the victim is dead or minor or of unsound mind, by, or with the authorization in writing of, the next of kin of the victim:

Provided that no such authorization shall be given by the next of kin to anybody other than the chairman or the secretary, by whatever name called, of any recognized welfare institution or organization.

Explanation:- For the purpose of this section, “recognized welfare institution or organization” means a social welfare institution or organization recognized in this behalf by the Central or State Government.

(3) Whoever prints or publishes any matter in relation to any proceeding before a court with respect to an offence referred to in sub-section (1) without the previous permission of such court shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation: - The printing or publication of the judgment of any High Court or the Supreme Court does not amount to an offence within the meaning of this section

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.”

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 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 minimize harm to children.

Norms by Press Council

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. Press Council of India laid down Norm No.14 which states: “Caution against identification: While reporting crime involving rape, abduction or kidnap of women/females or sexual assault on children, or raising doubts and questions touching the chastity, personal character and privacy of women, the names, photographs of the victims or other particulars leading to their identity shall not be published.”

Crime against Juvenile

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.”

It is quite possible that the allegations made in the blog would attract the definition of criminal defamation under section 499 and punishment of two years of imprisonment and fine under section 500 of IPC.

Cyber Crimes

It could be even a crime under new cyber law in India, such as sending offensive messages (S66A of Information Technology Act, 2000 as amended in 2008), publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form (S 67), transmitting of material depicting children in sexually explicit act in electronic form (S 67B) besides being cyber defamation.

Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device – (a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or (b) any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently by making use of such computer resource or a communication device; …..shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine. (Section 66A of IT Act, 2000)

Blocking Blogging

Section 69A gives power to state or central government to direct for blocking for public access any information through any computer resource. This is the suitable case for invoking the power under section 69A to block this blog. This direction can be issued to the intermediary or server or subscriber and if this direction is violated, it will attract a penalty of seven year imprisonment and also fine. {S 69A(3)]

It is a known fact that if the physical sexual assault is first rape of the victim, second is done by media and third by the prosecution. If the in camera is not the rule, there would be another rape by media while victim was being cross examined. Finally in the text of judgment, if it goes in appeal, in appellate court’s orders, the debate and discussion continues to hurt the reputation of the victim, for which no remedy could be imagined. Blogging is another tool now to victimize the victim, further.

Prof. Madabhushi Sridhar,

Coordinator NALSAR Center for Media Law & Public Policy

Tags: