Please - Odhikar

law not only brings the evidence, it is the task of the law and state to make the law visible, to
recreate the event, so that the trail may go on. When the trail goes on, law interprets law in the
court and it becomes a further law. The justices present here are familiar with the term of
precedence of law.
The second issue is the trauma and stigma put on trafficked women and children and our own
perceptions regarding trafficking. I witnessed one such People's Tribunal, where these women
raised their voice. Their methodology was to make the silent voices heard in the society- without
making the women victims embarrassed. We must integrate this aspect in the law to protect
victims and witnesses. Coming to the third issue, caste cases are a difficult issue for the law. If
caste is a law in a particular culture, how can a law be formulated against such existing law? We
have to make justice available for everybody - irrespective of religion, nation and race.
Justice Sharif Uddin Chaklader: As SAARC nations, we are facing the problem of trafficking.
As the justice of the High Court, dealing with cases of trafficking, I face the difficult and almost
impenetrable hurdle that we have evidence up to our border, and no evidence coming from
across the border. In such a situation, we have no other option but to give the benefit of doubt to
the offender. There is a special law called Women and Children Repression Prevention Act to
combat trafficking. But we have no special court. So, I suggest that there should be a special
court to deal with cases of trafficking. Recently I visited the lower court to find that women and
children victims of trafficking have been jumbled up and kept with offenders of other crimes.
The judges of the district level face difficulty in identifying laws provided for trafficking and
also lack awareness and training in the issue of human rights and gender issues. Another point is
that we are still following the British system of law in which compensation is a must. In these
types of offences there should be no relaxing of justice and the deposition and statement of the
victim must be taken to be the truth.
The accused must be given the chance of self-defence. Everything lies on the victim to prove the
accused guilty. When victim is controlled, there is no legal evidence to support him. Under the
British system there is a Section in the Code of Criminal Procedure called section 161, which
provides for the statement given by the victim when he or she is rescued. Unfortunately, such
statements are not taken seriously immediately. My suggestion is when the victim is rescued; his
or her statement must be taken immediately. If the statement is taken immediately, it is almost
always probable that in these cases she is telling the truth. If the statement is taken later, after a
span of time she may not speak the truth for different reasons - fear, intimidation, threats, etc.
So, this system of not taking the first statement into consideration must be abolished. When a
case is filed by FIR or by complaint, there is an investigation according to procedure. In many
cases the report of the investigative officers are considered as the final report in the absence of
any naraji petition or objection by the court. Before accepting the final report, the investigative
officer must be examined by the court in order to prove his report. In our society the
investigative officer is not free of influence by the powerful people. Mr. Tariq ul Hakim and I
were in Nepal, where we witnessed a declaration that there should be a SAARC court for
trafficking, since it starts in one country and involves other countries afterwards. My law may
not be acceptable to the Indian law. Indian law may not be acceptable by the Nepalese. So, there
must be a common law to combat trafficking because this is a regional problem. Without a
single law the influences by the people concerned cannot be ruled out.
70
Report 2005