NEW DELHI: A day before the monsoon session of parliament civil society representatives, labour unions, sex workers, human rights groups and child rights activists came together to demand that the government should defer the introduction of the ‘Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018’ in the Parliament. Citing many loopholes in the Bill, they also warned that certain provisions can be a potential threat to “civil liberties and freedom of expression.”

This pertains to Section 39 (2) of the Bill which states “whoever solicits or publicises electronically, taking or distributing obscene photographs or videos or providing materials or soliciting or guiding tourists or using agents or any other form which may lead to the trafficking of a person shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but may extend to ten years.” The accused will also be liable to a fine which shall not be less than Rs 1 lakh.

Anand Grover, senior advocate, Lawyers Collective said, “the Bill criminalises a host of activities including electronic communication through websites, social media and what’s app which “may lead to” or are “likely to lead to”, trafficking. This is dangerous for civil liberties and the freedom of expression.” He pointed that the Supreme Court has struck down similarly vague provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000. “If this Bill is passed, it will meet with the same fate,” Grover added.

In a statement released by the civil society groups, lawyers and activists point out that, “The Bill criminalises electronic communication that “may lead to” trafficking. There is no need for trafficking to have actually taken place. A mere possibility of someone getting trafficked sometime in the future is sufficient for the Police to arrest and prosecute.”

They have also submitted their representation on the gaps in the Bill to Union minister Maneka Gandhi and shared their concerns on various issues. At a press conference on Tuesday, they made a public appeal to the WCD minister to defer the introduction of the Bill in its current form in the parliament. “If the government goes ahead and introduces the Bill, then we appeal to the parliamentarians to refer it to a parliamentary standing committee for scrutiny,” lawyer Tripti Tandon from Lawyers Collective added.

In their statement, it is pointed that “contrary to claims, the Bill targets sex workers” even though on the face if it the Bill appears to have no impact on sex workers due to the absence of words like “prostitution” and “sexual exploitation and abuse for a commercial purpose.” “Yet, the Bill will rely on existing Section 370 to criminalise trafficking for “any form of sexual exploitation” and be enforced in sex work settings,” it is claimed by activists. They point out that ‘aggravated forms of trafficking’ under the Bill include exposure to HIV and trafficking resulting in pregnancy. This they say indirectly targets sex workers. “Moreover, the Bill does not repeal the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. So, sex workers will continue to be arrested and jailed,” they have stated.

