Daily Current Affairs : 25-September-2024

In an enormous ruling, the Supreme Court of India has reinforced the seriousness of child sexual exploitation by maintaining that viewing, downloading, storing, or distributing child sexual exploitative and abusive material (CSEAM) is a criminal offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Information Technology (IT) Act. This decision marks a significant step forward in the fight against child abuse and exploitation in the digital age.

Harm Beyond the Abuse

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud emphasized that the harm caused to children does not end with the abuse. Even after the abuse occurs, the circulation of CSEAM online continues to victimise children by perpetuating the trauma. The court highlighted that the victim suffers long-term psychological damage, as the material remains accessible and can be widely distributed on the internet.

  • The continuous availability of such material increases the victim’s suffering.
  • The emotional scars caused by the abuse are compounded by its public distribution.

Replacing “Child Pornography” with CSEAM

The court also criticized the term “child pornography” because it diminishes the severity of the crime. Instead, the court urged Parliament to amend the POCSO Act to replace this term with CSEAM, which more accurately reflects the nature of the crime. The use of the word “pornography” in the context of child abuse is misleading, as it could suggest consent or a less severe violation. The court mentioned that both the act of sexual abuse and the viewing or sharing of exploitative material are driven by the same harmful intent—sexual exploitation for gratification.

  • “Child pornography” is seen as trivializing the exploitation.
  • “CSEAM” better describes the violence and exploitation involved in these crimes.

Constructive Possession of CSEAM

In another crucial aspect of the ruling, the court introduced the concept of “constructive possession.” This means that individuals can be held accountable even if they do not directly possess or download the material but have the ability to control or delete it. The idea is that anyone who has access to, or control over, such material is responsible for its distribution and must be held liable.

  • Individuals can be punished for having control over CSEAM, even if they don’t physically store it.
  • This expands the scope of accountability for those who enable the circulation of harmful material.

Need for Legal Reforms and Public Awareness

The judgment called for immediate legal reforms to ensure that laws remain relevant and effective in addressing modern challenges. It also urged people to report any suspicious links or material related to CSEAM. This reinforces the importance of collective responsibility in protecting children from online abuse.

  • Immediate reforms are needed to keep up with digital trends.
  • Public vigilance and reporting are essential in tackling online child abuse.

Important Points:

  • Supreme Court ruling: Viewing, downloading, storing, or distributing Child Sexual Exploitative and Abusive Material (CSEAM) is a criminal offence under the POCSO Act and the IT Act.
  • Harm Beyond Abuse: The Court emphasized that the trauma to the child continues even after the abuse, as the material circulates online, perpetuating the victim’s suffering.
  • Term “Child Pornography” Criticized: The Court urged Parliament to replace the term “child pornography” with CSEAM, as the former diminishes the severity of the crime and may imply consent.
  • Shared Intent of Abuse and Exploitation: Both child sexual abuse and the viewing/sharing of exploitative material are driven by the same harmful intent — sexual exploitation for gratification.
  • Constructive Possession: Individuals can be held accountable for CSEAM even if they don’t physically store or download the material but have control or access to it (e.g., ability to delete or distribute it).
  • Call for Legal Reforms: The judgment urges immediate updates to existing laws to address modern challenges posed by digital platforms in child exploitation cases.
  • Public Awareness and Reporting: The Court encouraged the public to report suspicious links or material related to CSEAM, emphasizing collective responsibility in child protection.
  • Impact on Legal Framework: This ruling strengthens legal measures against child sexual exploitation, encouraging stricter punishment and greater societal awareness.

Why In News

The Supreme Court of India has ruled that viewing, downloading, storing, or distributing child sexual exploitative and abusive material (CSEAM) is a criminal offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Information Technology (IT) Act, reinforcing the legal framework to protect children from digital exploitation and holding individuals accountable for their actions in the online space.

MCQs about Supreme Court’s Strong Stance on Child Exploitation Material

  1. What does the Supreme Court ruling declare about Child Sexual Exploitative and Abusive Material (CSEAM)?
    A. It is a criminal offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
    B. It is a civil offence under the POCSO Act.
    C. It is a criminal offence under the POCSO Act and the IT Act.
    D. It is not a criminal offence under Indian law.
    Correct Answer: C. It is a criminal offence under the POCSO Act and the IT Act.
    Explanation: The Supreme Court ruled that viewing, downloading, storing, or distributing CSEAM is a criminal offence under both the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Information Technology (IT) Act, strengthening the legal framework against child exploitation.
  2. What does the Supreme Court recommend regarding the term “child pornography”?
    A. It should be used in legal documents as it accurately reflects the crime.
    B. It should be replaced with the term CSEAM.
    C. It should be eliminated from the law completely.
    D. It should be limited to only physical abuse cases.
    Correct Answer: B. It should be replaced with the term CSEAM.
    Explanation: The Court criticized the term “child pornography” as it diminishes the severity of the crime and suggested replacing it with “Child Sexual Exploitative and Abusive Material” (CSEAM), which more accurately describes the crime.
  3. What concept did the Supreme Court introduce in its ruling regarding possession of CSEAM?
    A. Possession by intention
    B. Constructive possession
    C. Temporary possession
    D. Shared possession
    Correct Answer: B. Constructive possession.
    Explanation: The Court introduced the concept of “constructive possession,” holding individuals accountable for CSEAM even if they do not physically store or download it but have control over or access to the material (such as the ability to delete or distribute it).
  4. What did the Supreme Court urge the public to do in relation to CSEAM?
    A. Ignore suspicious material to avoid involvement.
    B. Report any suspicious links or material related to CSEAM.
    C. Share the material with authorities.
    D. Limit online activity to avoid exposure to CSEAM.
    Correct Answer: B. Report any suspicious links or material related to CSEAM.
    Explanation: The Court emphasized the importance of public awareness and urged people to report any suspicious material or links related to CSEAM, reinforcing collective responsibility in protecting children from online abuse.

Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions

Loading