Supreme Court Ruling: Viewing Child Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material (CSEAM) Now a Criminal Offense
- September 24, 2024
- Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
- Category: DPN Topics
Supreme Court Ruling: Viewing Child Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material (CSEAM) Now a Criminal Offense
Sub :Polity
Sec: Legislation in news
Why in News
The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark judgment on child sexual exploitation. It held that merely viewing or possessing child sexual exploitative and abuse material (CSEAM) is a criminal offense. The judgment calls for legislative amendments to reflect the seriousness of the crime and proposes replacing the term “child pornography” with a more accurate term—CSEAM.
Criminalization of CSEAM Viewing and Possession
The Supreme Court clarified that viewing, downloading, storing, distributing, or displaying pornographic material involving children attracts criminal liability under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act and the Information Technology (IT) Act.
Challenge to the High Court’s Ruling: The verdict overturns a previous ruling by the Madras High Court, which had concluded that mere possession or private viewing of child pornographic material was not an offense under POCSO.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
It was enacted to protect the children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography with due regard for safeguarding the interest and well-being of children.
It defines a child as any person below eighteen years of age and regards the best interests and welfare of the child as a matter of paramount importance at every stage, to ensure the healthy physical, emotional, intellectual and social development of the child.
It defines different forms of sexual abuse, including penetrative and non-penetrative assault, as well as sexual harassment and pornography.
It deems a sexual assault to be “aggravated” under certain circumstances, such as when the abused child is mentally ill or when the abuse is committed by a person in a position of trust or authority like a family member, police officer, teacher, or doctor.
It also casts the police in the role of child protectors during the investigative process.
The Act stipulates that a case of child sexual abuse must be disposed of within one year from the date the offence is reported.
It was amended in August 2019 to provide more stringent punishment, including the death penalty, for sexual crimes against children.
Amendment of POCSO Act: The Supreme Court urged Parliament to amend the POCSO Act by replacing the term “child pornography” with “Child Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material” (CSEAM). This change aims to avoid the trivialization of the crime, as the term “pornography” is often associated with consensual adult acts, which undermines the gravity of child sexual abuse.
Section 15 of the POCSO Act: The court pointed out that Section 15 of the POCSO Act criminalizes the possession and storage of child pornographic material. Merely keeping such material without deletion can be construed as intent to distribute it.
Information Technology (IT) Act Related to Child Pornography:
Section 67B: Punishes publishing, transmitting, or browsing child pornographic material online.
Criminalizes: Creation, collection, and distribution of child pornographic content.
Online facilitation or enticement of children for sexual acts.
Penalty: Up to 5 years imprisonment and a fine of ₹10 lakh for the first conviction; up to 7 years and a ₹10 lakh fine for subsequent offenses.
Section 67: Covers punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material, which includes child pornography, in electronic form.
Section 69A: Empowers the government to block websites that host child pornographic content.
Section 72: Imposes penalties for unauthorized access to any personal information, including images or videos involving child pornography.
Immediate Government Action
Promulgation of Ordinance: The court suggested that the government should promulgate an ordinance to expedite the adoption of the proposed terminological changes while awaiting parliamentary action.
| Ordinance An ordinance is a temporary law issued by the President (at the central level) or Governor (at the state level) when the legislature is not in session. Article 123: Empowers the President to promulgate ordinances during Parliament recess. Article 213: Empowers the Governor to issue ordinances when the State Legislature is not in session. Conditions for Issuance: Legislature must not be in session. Immediate action is required, and the President/Governor must be satisfied with the necessity. Duration: Ordinance must be approved by Parliament/State Legislature within 6 weeks of reassembly, or it will cease to operate. Limitations: Cannot be issued to amend the Constitution. Can be challenged in court if issued without genuine necessity (judicial review). DC Wadhwa Case (1987) – Supreme Court ruled that re-promulgation of ordinances without legislative approval is unconstitutional. |
Court Directives: The Supreme Court also directed lower courts across India to use the term CSEAM in their judgments and orders.