Crimes without Addresses: The State of Abused Children and Child Rights in Sri Lanka
Shabeer Mohamed
In July 2021 alone, four serious incidents of child abuse – among them the death of a minor employed by an MP, Rishard Bathiudeen – received nationwide media attention in Sri Lanka. This included the case of a 13-year-old girl who was sexually abused by her father and several others over six years in Nawalapitiya, the case of a 15-year-old girl sold for sex online, and two girls aged 12 and 14 who were impregnated by their father. The body of the 16-year-old girl who worked at MP Bathiudeen’s house was found with severe burn injuries.
Among the common factors of the above cases, the gender and age of the victims – all of them, girls under the age of 18 – draw immediate attention. Globally, a person below the age of 18 is considered a child. In Sri Lanka, the provision of education to those under the age of 16 is compulsory by law. Children below that age cannot be employed. It is the duty of child rights officers attached to the Divisional Secretariat to monitor families living in areas under their purview and to safeguard children’s access to education.
In support of minors, Article 3 on Children’s Rights states that decisions taken by elders about children should be done to ensure the child’s best interests while Article 12 of the same document outlines that a child has the right to opinion and that opinion must be taken into account by elders acting on behalf of the child (https://noolaham.net/project/31/3080/3080.pdf). Furthermore, these articles recognize the state as the authority to ensure that parents and adults respect children’s rights.
In the practical domain, authorities have often found it challenging to bring to book a family-head who undermines children’s rights. Most parents who employ children in unsafe places outside home cite poverty as their motivating factor. The question remains whether they do so with a clear conscience. The vulnerability of children is often noted in their own lack of awareness even when abuse is being committed on their persons. Sometimes, children object by crying out. In other times, they let their anger be shown in spite of it rarely being effective in facing an enemy.
How did Ishalini, a girl of 15 years and 11 months from Dayagama, end up working as a domestic servant in MP Bathiudeen’s house? Why did Bathiudeen, a high-ranking member of society and a member of parliament, violate children’s rights? In what way is it justifiable for the country’s legislators to use school-age children of poverty-ridden families to work as domestic servants? These questions pricked the conscience of society in the wake of the tragedy. They remain unanswered.
Two weeks before Ishalini’s death, the police arrested 35 people related to a case where a 15-year-old girl was trafficked for online sex. The Deputy Chairman of the Kantale Pradeshiya Sabha, a medical specialist of the Sri Lanka navy, a Sub-Inspector of the Police Sports Division, a former bank manager from Ratmalana, a ship’s captain, a well-known actor from Kandy, a gem merchant from Ratnapura, and a Buddhist monk were among the accused. These were by no means ordinary members of society.
Five years ago, social media activist Chanya Herath wrote on her Facebook page that social networking sites promoting internet sex were rife and cautioning that the inaction of authorities would lead to an escalation of this crisis. Following up, Herath has lodged several personal and written complaints with the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka (TRCSL) which haven’t received satisfactory attention. The 15-year-old girl sold through the internet was sexually-abused in 2013, and a complaint was lodged with the Meegahatenna Police. When asked about this, the Police Media Spokesman Ajith Rohana stated that although they have received such a complaint about the girl, it was not related to the incident of sex-trafficking. This evasive response draws attention to the lack of a proper programme to monitor and protect vulnerable children. It also hints at the lack of a comprehensive effort to find a far-reaching and effective solution to the crisis at hand.
Following the incident of the 15-year-old girl the ill-famous website was taken down. But, it had been active for 12 years without intervention while many other such sites continue to operate unmonitored. A recent statement by the Chairman of the National Child Protection Authority, Prof. Muditha Vidanapathirana, has drawn much public attention: “There were 8,558 incidents in 2019 and 8,165 incidents in 2020. In the first six months of this year, there have been 4,740 incidents. Therefore, there has been no increase in that percentage.” To say the least, this was a shocking statement by a bureaucrat in a responsible chair. How fair was it to conclude on the increase or decrease of incidents without taking any transformative action to eradicate violence against innocent children? What scientific method was this conclusion based on, but the superficial comparison of statistics of two years?
Looking at the number of child abuse cases reported from 2010 to 2020, there is little reason for optimism. When inquired, Vidanapathirana said that all countries in the world were prone to child abuse. He concluded that Sri Lanka was comparatively one of the better countries in this index. In a recent report The Economist reported Sri Lanka as 60th ranked for having the best environment for children. The National Child Protection Authority was established in 1999 to formulate a policy for preventing child abuse and to set in place policies and mechanisms for the protection of children who were victims of abuse. It took twenty years for the Board of Directors to approve the policy. However, the National Child Protection Authority (NCPA) has yet failed to implement the policy effectively. In the last eight years, 79,259 complaints related to child abuse had been received out of which 42,073 remain unresolved, which is 53% of the total complaints received.
Statistical-Data-of-Child-Abuses-From-2010-to-20-1
Awareness of children’s rights must be boosted in the widest possible way while empowering society to support children from being vulnerable. The state response to children’s welfare needs to be more proactive and oriented towards producing positive results. Active involvement from individuals in being vigilant and in responding to children in potential danger is a necessity of the age. We all have a duty and a responsibility to protect the custodians of our future.
விடையற்ற கேள்விகளுடன் சிறுவர்கள் மடிகிறார்கள்! ஏன்??
