LOWERING THE AGE OF SEXUAL CONSENT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA: CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
0
0
The central government of India has firmly communicated to the Supreme Court that it does not support lowering the legal age of sexual consent from 18 years to 16 years. In its written submission, the government emphasized that the existing provision in law setting 18 years as the minimum age for valid sexual consent is designed to protect minors from exploitation and abuse, and it should remain unchanged.
This development comes in the backdrop of ongoing debates and petitions before the Supreme Court, where some legal experts, activists, and interest groups have argued in favor of reducing the age of consent to 16 years. Their reasoning includes claims that the current legal threshold sometimes criminalizes consensual relationships between adolescents, particularly in cases where both individuals are close in age. However, the government has taken a clear stance against such changes, stressing that the law’s primary objective is the safeguarding of children.
Background of the Law
Under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, any sexual activity with a person under the age of 18 is considered statutory rape, regardless of whether the minor has given consent. This law was enacted to provide a strong legal framework for protecting children from sexual offences, covering aspects such as sexual assault, harassment, and pornography.
The intention behind the 18-year benchmark is rooted in the recognition that minors are more vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, and manipulation. The law assumes that individuals under this age may not have the emotional maturity or life experience to fully understand the consequences of sexual relationships.
Government’s Position
In its affidavit to the Supreme Court, the central government has stated that the age limit of 18 years is not arbitrary but a well-considered legal standard. It highlighted that lowering the age could weaken protections for children, potentially increasing cases of abuse disguised as consensual relationships. The government also expressed concerns about how such a change might be misused by offenders to escape punishment.
The written response stressed that India, as a signatory to several international child protection agreements including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) has committed to treating individuals below 18 years as children in need of special safeguards.
The Debate Around Lowering the Age
Those advocating for lowering the age of consent to 16 years argue that the current law can have unintended consequences. For example, consensual romantic relationships between teenagers sometimes lead to criminal charges against the boy, often initiated by the girl’s parents. Critics claim that such cases clog the judicial system and may lead to injustice in situations where no exploitation has occurred.
On the other hand, child rights organizations and many legal experts support the government’s stance, warning that a reduced age limit could be exploited by traffickers, sexual predators, and individuals in positions of power. They argue that while certain exceptions or judicial discretion can be considered for consensual adolescent relationships, the baseline protection of 18 years should not be compromised.
Impact of the Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court’s eventual decision on this matter will have significant implications for how sexual offences involving minors are prosecuted in India. If the court upholds the government’s position, it will reaffirm the legal framework that prioritizes the absolute protection of individuals under 18 years of age. Conversely, any change could alter the balance between protecting minors and recognizing adolescent autonomy.
For now, the government’s reply makes its priorities clear: the welfare, safety, and protection of children take precedence over other considerations. Officials have underscored that laws like POCSO are not meant to criminalize innocent young people, but rather to deter those who might take advantage of them.
Conclusion
The issue of sexual consent and the age at which it is legally recognized remains a sensitive and complex topic. While debates continue about how to address the realities of adolescent relationships, the central government’s message to the Supreme Court leaves no room for doubt 18 years is the legal minimum for sexual consent in India, and this standard will remain as a shield for minors against exploitation.
The decision now rests with the Supreme Court, which will weigh the legal, social, and moral implications before delivering its verdict. Until then, the protection of minors under the current legal framework stands firm.
English