Interview with Dr Nishtha Desai, Director, Children’s Rights in Goa

Susan Abraham talks to Nishtha Desai, director of Child Rights, Goa, about the anti-paedophilia campaign

Considering that there is a worldwide and concerted campaign to reign in the tentacles of paedophilia, how was the Bombay High Court judgement in the Anchorage case seen by anti-paedophilia campaigners?
The world had its eyes on the Anchorage case. The judgment is a huge disappointment. It appears that the judgment does nothing to alter various popular misconceptions with regard to child abuse cases.
For example, the fact that the children did not complain earlier, although they claimed that they had been subject to sexual abuse over a number of years, has been given a lot of weight. However, it may be recalled that in the Freddy Peats case, it became evident that in spite of suffering sexual abuse for so many years, none of the inmates complained. It was only after a child who visited the shelter complained to his parents about pain in the testicles that the abuse was uncovered, after which a police complaint was lodged by the father. After this, a number of the inmates stated that they had been sexually abused. Did the fact that they only disclosed the occurrence of abuse after an investigation was initiated, make the abuse they suffered less real or less traumatic? Had the judge in that case held that the occurrence of abuse was doubtful because the children had remained silent about it for so long, would the cause of justice been served?
Persons who run homes occupy a position of trust vis-a-vis the children. When such persons betray the trust reposed in them, it is not easy for the children to muster the courage to lodge a complaint against the offenders. Whether anyone will believe them is a serious concern. Also, the offenders often spend a long time ‘grooming’ children. As a result of this, the relationship between the offender and victim is complex and the victims are terribly confused by the behaviour of the offenders.
Another contention of the judge is that it was ‘improbable’ that the accused persons could have sex with the victims in front of the other inmates, while they were sleeping. In numerous sexual abuse cases, it is evident that adults who engage in sex with children do not share the sensibilities and values of a ‘normal’ person.
In cases involving children from the poorer strata, who sometimes have problems with temporal concepts, their ‘reliability’ is often doubted, as appears to have happened in this case. But this makes the hope of justice less accessible to the poor.
The judgment while questioning the applicability of Section 377 in this case says:
''There are lots of changes taking place in the social milieu and many people are having different sexual preferences, which are even not considered to be unnatural. Therefore it is high time that the provisions of law which was made more than a century before, is looked at again.’’
This has been hailed by some as a progressive stand of the judiciary. However, read in the context of the sexual abuse of children by grown adults, this statement can easily be interpreted in an ominous manner. Will courts be looking at adults having sex with children as a mere sexual preference?
The main reason for the acquittal is that the two child victims’ testimony was unreliable. What has been your experience – how reliable are such children?
When a child makes a disclosure about sexual assault of any kind we would take it very seriously. In cases involving travelling sex offenders our experience suggests that it would be more likely for a child to deny the occurrence of abuse than to say that abuse has taken place when it has not.
The judgment calls their conduct - not complaining to anybody about the alleged sexual abuse for long, and not walking out of the shelter – unnatural. Do you agree?
Not at all. In cases of sexual offences in general, but more so in cases involving travelling sex offenders the offenders use a process of grooming which enables them to continue abusing children over a prolonged period, The grooming process also serves to ensure that the child victims will not confide what is happening to anyone - this could be out of fear or a sense of loyalty. The relationship between a paedophile and the child victim is often complex. In cases of foreign paedophiles aside from the complex relationship there may also be monetary and other material considerations.
What is the definition of `traveling sex offender’ and does the offender have to be declared one by any agency?
A travelling sex offender is one who travels and commits sexual offences abroad, often because of the anonymity that a foreign country affords the offender. (This does not mean that a TSO does not commit offences in his/her own country.) Some countries like the UK have a register of sex offenders, a few of whom are barred from travelling. But often while their movements are monitored in their own country, the law enforcement does not necessarily inform the home department of the country that the person with a history of offending wants to visit. It is essential that such information is shared, so that the movements of the registered offender can be monitored and children can be kept safe. Often the argument given against the sharing of this information is that it violates the human rights of the offenders; but what about the rights of the children? Are the rights of third world children less important than the rights of first world offenders?
What about the campaign for a law against paedophilia? Which countries have passed such a law and where does the campaign for one in India stand?
Goa has a special act, the Goa Children’s Act in which sexual offences against children come under the definition of ‘sexual assault’ and ‘grave sexual assault’. There are also provisions that specifically address tourism-related child sexual abuse.
There was a proposal for a central Act relating to offences against children. When the draft Bill was prepared, many organisations and professionals felt that it should be widely discussed and deliberated on. But now it is unclear what the fate of this Bill is.
How effective has the Goa law been in prosecuting paedophiles, getting convictions?
Unfortunately, in the two cases of paedophilia that have come up before the Children’s Court in Goa, in spite of the fact that the children initially deposed before the police, and there was medical evidence of abuse, the accused were acquitted because the children in both cases failed to depose before the court. This again points to the vulnerability of the victims. There is a need to ensure that the accused (who roam about freely, once they are out on bail) do not have access to the victims and their families.