Interpretation of the POCSO Act as Gender-Neutral
The Supreme Court of India is reviewing a petition related to the gender-specific interpretation of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The case involves a woman accused of 'penetrative sexual assault' against a minor boy, prompting a discussion on whether the POCSO Act applies to female perpetrators.
Arguments for Gender-Neutral Interpretation
- Statutory Interpretation:
- The POCSO Act is argued to be gender-neutral concerning both perpetrators and victims.
- The General Clauses (GC) Act, 1897, specifies that pronouns like 'he' include 'she', supporting a gender-neutral interpretation of the law.
- Section 3 of the POCSO Act includes acts beyond penile penetration, making female perpetration possible.
- Legislative Intent:
- The Ministry of Women and Child Development has affirmed that the POCSO Act is gender-neutral.
- The Act's gender-neutrality applies to both victims and perpetrators, contrasting with gender-specific laws like the former Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.
- Normative Reasons:
- The Supreme Court in *Sakshi vs Union of India (2004)* emphasized the broad range of abuse encompassed by child protection laws.
- Abuse involves power imbalances, and patterns can vary based on the genders of those involved.
- Ignoring female perpetrators could obscure victim experiences and deny justice.
Conclusion
The objective of the POCSO Act is to protect children from sexual abuse without being constrained by the gender identity of the perpetrator. A gender-neutral interpretation aligns with legislative intent and addresses diverse abuse scenarios, ensuring justice for all victims.
