Sex offenders: Branded for Life?

Kerala will be the first state to start such a registry in an attempt to reform these criminals and keep better track of them. But it will have to be implemented well so that it becomes reformative, not retributive

~By Shobha John

In what seems like a positive move, Kerala has decided to start a sex offenders’ registry, the first in the country. With 2,568 rapes cases reported last year and an abduction and molestation of a well-known actress rocking the state, urgent action in this regard was imperative. But is a registry the right way to go about it?

The registry will contain all identification details of the sex offenders: their photographs, addresses, PAN card details, Aadhaar card number, fingerprints and DNA samples. Kerala has claimed that the registry would enable job providers in profiling their prospective employees and law enforcement agencies in keeping an eye on them.

Initially, the need for a national sex offenders’ registry was felt in 2012 when the horrendous gang-rape and subsequent death of Nirbhaya took place. Minister for Women and Child Development Maneka Gandhi had even proposed that the registry include undertrials and juvenile offenders committing such crimes.

Sex offenders’ registries are there in several countries such as the US, Australia, UK, Canada, Maldives, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica and Ireland. However, only the US, South Korea and Maldives have made them public, whereas the others are accessible by law enforcement agencies.

Kiren Rijiju, minister of state for home, had reportedly said last year that a draft for a national registry was being prepared in consultation with relevant ministries/organisations. The home ministry had filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court following a PIL by social activist Sunitha Krishnan, founder of the NGO Prajwala. Rijiju had said: “The initial consultation draft includes the registration of individuals convicted for offences like rape, voyeurism, stalking and aggravated sexual assault and includes possibility of registration of offenders below and above 18 years.”

Krishnan, incidentally, is also Kerala’s Nirbhaya project’s honorary director and she had sought such a registry. She reportedly rescued and rehabilitated more than 10,000 rape victims and had received 200 such videos from victims and forwarded them to the SC bench that ordered a CBI probe.

Speaking to India Legal, Krishnan said that this registry would be a robust mechanism whereby the convicted sex offender would himself register, thereby acknowledging his act of crime and living it every day of his life. “It will be a legally mandated registry and if the convict does not register, there will be punitive action. Based on the severity of the sex crime, offenders will be put into various tiers or groups. Based on this classification, the number of years of public visibility on the registry will be decided. He won’t be there all his life if he reforms,” explained Krishnan.

This registry, she said, would achieve three things:

• Act as a deterrent to the convict so that he doesn’t commit the crime again
• Reformation: The convict would make an informed choice to reform as he has to come back again and again to register
• Better tracking mechanism

While it all depends on how this registry would be implemented, some experts had doubts about how it would work. Dr Rajat Mitra, a clinical psychologist and director of Swanchetan Society for Mental Health, who closely studied 242 sex offenders in Tihar Jail between 1999 and 2004, said: “The idea of a registry is good but it may not be the best thing to do. The main aim of a registry should be reformative, not retributive. From a purely legal point of view, a person who has served a term after being convicted of a sex crime should not be put in such a registry.”

While other countries have registries, they are meant to be therapeutic and are not meant to name and shame sex offenders as may be the case in India, he said. In Sweden and the US, sex offenders are seen as separate from their behaviour. “This is the scientific way to go about it, whereas in India, I have had policemen tell me that these offenders must be humiliated. Such a registry should not be made public but be restricted to only the stake-holders, be it the courts, police, survivor families, schools or principals. Checks and balances are needed,” said Mitra.

Collective shaming is part of the Indian psyche. Mitra revealed that sex offenders don’t change their behavior as the core areas of their personality don’t function. “So it is difficult to rehabilitate them as in the case of alcoholics or others addicted to substances. In fact, there is 50-70 percent chance of recidivism (repeating the offence) in the case of sex offenders targeting children as they find women unattractive. It is best to restrict them and allow them to operate within certain boundaries as many have high psychopathic traits but India may be ill-equipped to do so,” said Mitra.

However, the West is more organised in tackling such criminals. In the US, which had nearly 7.5 lakh registered sex offenders in 2011, convicted sex offenders while on probation are subject to residency restrictions, said Arvind Verma, an ex-IPS officer who works with the department of criminal justice, Indiana University, US. “They cannot live within a predetermined distance (typically 1,000 ft) of locations which children frequent (parks, schools, pools, etc). In places like Southampton, they’re housed in trailers. Often, internet and mobiles are banned and they find it difficult to get housing and jobs,” he told India Legal via email. UK, with some 42,000 registered sex offenders in 2012, even has a map marking the location of every paedophile and rapist.

Verma said an Indian registry should be done by the order of the court. “Within their record systems, the police must maintain information about all suspects including sex offenders,” he said. He admitted that it would be difficult for such sex offenders to get back into society since there is an inherent bias. “Social attitudes will prevent reform,” he said. Therefore, it remains questionable whether such a registry would act as a deterrent.

While activists are all for such registries considering that the crimes against women have gone up, it is a moot question whether they have helped to reduce sex crimes. Reports have said that they haven’t and have only alienated and further hardened such criminals. Further, they would find it hard to find employment or housing after being released from prison and could even be threatened and branded as sex offenders. And if as Gandhi suggested juveniles also be included in the register, it will indeed be a life bereft of hope and future for them.

If handled and implemented well, perhaps such a registry could help sex offenders and society. More importantly, the registry should keep in mind one vital principle about the criminal justice system: An accused is innocent till proven guilty.