A potentially significant change to Nepal’s statutory rape laws is proposed to help protect consensual romantic relationships for teenagers of similar age. Commonly known as a “Romeo-Juliet clause,” this type of provision protects teens from being considered statutory rape victims if their partners are within three years of age of them.
What Is the Romeo-Juliet Clause?
Supporters of free will in teen relationships see the proposed change as a pragmatic response to existing laws and some see the possibility it would lead to less protection for minors through the acceptance of sexual exploitation. Advocates of the provision internationally have called such exceptions a necessary addition to these laws, in order to make an intentional distinction between the relationships of teenagers, and the exploitation or abuse of minors by adults, and to not criminalize the consensual relationships between teenagers for similar ages.
Currently, in the proposed statute, it is expected that exemptions will apply to adolescents between 16 and 18 years of age, with the provision of a maximum permissible difference of three years of age between the two consenting parties.
read also: IAS Tukaram Mandhe gets transferred for 25th time
Nepal’s Current Law
Currently, Nepal’s legislation defines any sexual conduct where a person is under the age of 18 as rape, with no consideration given to the consent of the parties involved. Therefore, if an underage person engages in a consensual sexual relationship with another person and their parents become aware of it, they can file charges against the other person. There are concerns that the current law will cause groups of teenage boys (and sometimes girls) to be treated as rapists within the criminal justice system.
read also: West Bengal Transfers 120 Acres of Land to the Centre
Why is Nepal considering the change?
Critics of the current law say that it is out of touch with the realities faced by teenagers. The legal age of marriage in Nepal is 20, and as many teenagers become romantically involved prior to reaching this age, the current law prevents the establishment of their independence and autonomy. Critics of the law also say that it doesn’t adequately separate true incidents of abuse from consensual adolescent sexual relationships, leading to the prosecution of many teenage boys and girls as rapists.
Some legal scholars and youth organisations express concern that current legislation on sexuality among teens is often inappropriately treated as a crime rather than as an opportunity to deal with genuine incidences of sexual violence. A close-in-age exemption will allow for a more balanced and realistic approach to the issue.
read also: BJP changes street colors post its victory in West Bengal
Concerns Raised by Child Rights Groups
Child rights organisations have expressed concern. However, while the proposed legislation may have some support from many young people, child rights and women’s groups are very concerned about the implications of this proposed exemption.
There is concern that the creation of a Romeo-and-Juliet exemption could lead to the creation of loopholes for sexual predators. In addition to this, there are also fears that relationships that involve coercion or an unequal degree of maturity could be falsely represented as consensual in order to avoid prosecution.
Child rights activists have raised questions about the nature of the relationship between an 18-year-old and a 15-year-old, as an example, and whether or not consent would be granted equally. There has been public discussion on this issue on social media, and this is indicative of the concerns raised by child rights advocates.
Some advocates are concerned that there are still serious issues in Nepal with regard to child marriage, inequality between genders, and sexual abuse; therefore, a relaxation of statutory rape laws would be unwise.
Similar Debate in India
A legal debate in India related to the POCSO Act mirrors the current discussions that are happening in Nepal. As recently as this year, the Supreme Court of India advised that the government should consider creating a Romeo-Juliet clause; one meant to provide legal protection against prosecution for genuine consensual relationships of adolescents.
From the courts’ perspective, families have misused protective legislation to “settle scores” or oppose the relationships of their teenagers. Though, there are child rights advocates within India that have expressed similar concerns as those being expressed in Nepal.
A Complicated Issue
This controversy outlines a larger issue, both legally and socially, of how minors can be provided protection from abuse, while also acknowledging that there are some minors who are in consensually based relationships.
Supporters of the proposed new clause would argue that it may prevent the unnecessary criminalization of thousands of youth; whereas, opponents of the new clause would argue that by removing the statutory rape provisions, the sexual assault of minors will also increase.
As lawmakers in Nepal consider the substance of the proposed clause, they can expect to be faced with pressure from both youth advocates and child protection advocates. The eventual conclusion of this issue could become a pivotal moment for the continual evolution of South Asia’s perspective regarding the rights of adolescents, consent laws and child protection.
