SC Women Lawyers Association moves Apex Court seeking blocking of all Porn sites, formulation of National Policy on Pornography to curb Child Porn [Read Petition]

Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association has filed an intervention application in Kamlesh Vaswani Vs Union of India. Mr. Vaswani has petitioned the Court challenging the Constitutional validity of Section 66, 67,69,71,72,75,79,80 and 85 of the Information Technology Act 2000 till amendment and has sought to recognize the harmful effects of Pornography.

The application, filed on Saturday, comes one month after the Centre revoked its order blocking 857 porn websites after facing flak from social media and votaries of the Right to Privacy. It is likely to be considered by a bench headed by Chief Justice H.L. Dattu on October 13.

The Association’s application prays for implementation of laws prohibiting porn and consequently blocking of porn sites. It has also prays for directions to the concerned authorities for taking strict measures to prevent distribution and access to pornography including measures regarding file sharing software.

The Petition further prays for strengthening of protective measures to reinforce support for victims as well as blocking of Child pornography on the Internet in order to eliminate child pornography.

The intervention application filed by SCWLA’s secretary Prerna Kumari and settled by senior lawyer Mahalakshmi Pavani reasons that the application has been filed due to the “constant rise of pornography in the country”. It says, “Pornography corrupts the mind of the young generation today, who tend to commit crime against women/girls/children. Crime against women has been increasing at a very high rate in the country today. And it is an important matter of concern for the country today”.

The Petition says that the “root cause” of most offences against women is the easy availability of porn. “The issue of pornography and the pornographic content has serious implications on human mind and behavior. Studies have shown that pornography leads to sexual crimes, violent sexual behavior, aggression, frustration and depravity of mind,” it adds. It also blames accessibility to porn for the increasing sexual crimes by minors. It has hence demanded that a National Policy on Pornography and guidelines be formulated in order to curb the issue of child pornography.

The Association has relied on a compilation of research materials on legal status of pornography in 5 Countries, “taken from reliable internet source that is from Wikipedia” and a TOI report.

SCWLA has also sought a direction to all the schools in India to install jammers in the buses to prevent access of pornographic sites on the cell phones by the Driver or anyone who is in charge of the children in the Buses.

It argues, “That due to the easy access to porn these days, even the bus drivers and conductors of school buses, Cabs, taxis have porn clippings/videos on their mobile phones. As these are publicly shared without compunction, even the children would be exposed to this, critically affecting their emotional and psychological well-being. It is a serious matter of concern and such type of behaviour cannot be tolerated. It has become very common these days for the drivers, conductors/cleaners to take advantage of innocent children, induce them to watch porn on their mobiles and indulge in molestation and sodomization of the child.”

The Petition says that the Information Technology Act, 2000 has not been very effective in dealing with several emerging crimes like cyber, defamation, stalking, etc. These crimes have been termed as “associated crimes of pornography”.

Alleging that the existing legal frame work is inadequate to tackle the “menace of porn”, they cite various provisions under the Indian Penal Code, Information Technology Act 2000, The Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act, 1956, Indian Post Office Act, 1898, The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and International Convention of United Nation: Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) 1990 that deal with distribution of pornographic material and awarding punishment to the offender.

Earlier in July, the Union Government had told the Supreme Court that it would take all possible measures to block porn sites, particularly those dealing with child pornography. You may read the LiveLaw story here. Following this, the Government had asked telecom operators and internet service providers (ISPs) to block 857 porn sites, only to revoke it later.

You may read: The 857-Site Porn Ban and the Contours of Indian Public Discourse by Nandita Saikia

You may also read: #Porn Ban: If someone wants to watch Porn in the Privacy of their Bedroom, State cannot be a Moral Police or enter Peoples Bedrooms: Centre to SC by Sarvjeet Singh

Image from here.

Read the Petition here.