1. The on-ground impact of Mandatory Reporting remains unknown. Key debates like “Whether or not mandatory reporting is responsible for increasing the number of cases being reported?” or “whether voluntary reporting working as well as/better than mandatory reporting?” remain inconclusive and at best speculative arguments.

2. There is a need to look at POCSO and assess whether Mandatory Reporting keeps in mind Best Interest ‘of every individual child’ or ‘of children in society’. The issue of who is fit to judge the best interest of the child concerned and the agency of the child herself/himself is also of concern.

3. There was a concern among doctors and counselors that mandatory reporting as defined in POCSO is at odds with right to confidentiality of their child clients. This lack of confidentiality and the compulsion to report all cases defined as sexual offences under POCSO may prohibit children and families from approaching safe channels for important services like Medical Termination of Pregnancy, Mental Health Services etc.

4. The concern was raised that the on ground implementation of POCSO is still a work in progress. In the light of incomplete and inadequate implementation of the Act, the effect on the child who is a victim of sexual offences who is mandatorily made to journey through the criminal justice systems needs to be studied.

5. There is a need to look at the mandatory reporting system from various perspectives: 1) who reports? (‘mandated reporters’ were suggested as an option) 2) to whom should the reporting be done 3) what offences should be mandatorily reported? 4) what is the punishment/penalty that needs to be put in place for non-reporting of offences?

6. There is a need to put in place and clarify guidelines for reporters of the offences. The anonymity and security of reporter needs to be preserved. Currently POCSO does not prescribe a stipulated time within which the offence must be mandatorily reported. Should there be a prescribed timeline? If so, what would be a fair timeline?

7. The courts do not have any discretionary powers when it comes to cases under POCSO. This aspect needs to be looked at.

8. There is confusion in terms of appropriate punishment given in cases of consensual sexual activity between a child and his/her lover who is also a child or relatively young. A recent judgment passed by Hon. Mridula Bhatkar says that young offenders of sexual abuse should be released on bail.

9. It was shared that this group should consult Women’s Groups to get a better perspective regarding consensual sexual relations between minors and look at it from the context of individual rights of choosing a partner.

10. It was discussed that in some cases Mandatory Reporting helps give children access to services for rehabilitation as only after reporting does the abuse that they are undergoing come to light and stop.

11. 3 Cases in Maharashtra where an offence as booked under the ‘mandatory reporting’ sections of POCSO were discussed. There was a debate as to whether the offenders could have been brought under the purview of the law in the absence of the Mandatory Reporting clause. This aspect needs to be further discussed and studied as a possible alternative to mandatory reporting.

12. A point of view was shared that Mandatory Reporting in its current form can be used by the State to target and repress the individuals and organizations it chooses to target.

13. There were concerns, which need to be conclusively verified, that the police are using/may use the stringent nature of POCSO and the mandatory reporting clause to extort bribes. There is a need to put in filters to reduce the occurrence of such misuse and corruption.

14. Reporting should be parallel with the rehabilitation of the child and should not affect the process of healing.

15. There is a need to look at protection of children from a human rights perspective as well.

16. It was discussed that the existence of ‘Mandatory Reporting’ can be used as leverage for advocacy to improve services available for children. If services provided to the child are in place then Mandatory Reporting has a better chance of functioning.

17. The learning of this working group will feed into a larger discussion on Mandatory Reporting to be possibly anchored by FACSE.

1. It was clarified that the term ‘Registered Medical Practitioner’ (RMP) refers only to MBBS doctors. It does not include AYUSH doctors.

2. As regards to the confusion around the terms ‘2 finger test’ and ‘per vaginal examination’, it was clarified that the purpose of the 2 finger test is to check whether the person is sexually active or not. While per vaginal examination is conducted to check for internal wounds, evidence collection etc. The two finger test has been banned.

3. There was a discussion regarding stakeholders who should be present during the history taking of the child. A system where the doctor takes the history in the presence of the police was discussed. However the group felt that in such a scenario, even if the child is comfortable with it, there are chances that the doctor may feel overawed by the police and that the police may use the opportunity to direct the questions and proceedings dictated by their investigative needs rather than medical history.

4. Mandatory reporting effects/contradicts/negates the right to consent of the child for medical examination & treatment. This needs to be examined further.

5. Not all cases of POCSO (e.g.:- cases of sexual harassment) need medical attention. The new guidelines do take the matter into account but there is a need to assess its on ground implementation.

6. There is an urgent need to train medical staff to respond sensitively to survivors of sexual assault. There is a need to institutionalize the trainings as a continuous process.

7. It was questioned if Multi disciplinary approach is indeed the best approach , in the best interest of the child. A case was mentioned where a child was medically examined in the presence of a multitude of doctors. This practice clearly compounded the child’s trauma. However, it was remarked that perhaps the group that gathered around the child were student doctors. The group declared that such practices were invasive and detrimental to the well being of the child. In cases of child victims of sexual offences, the hospital must show commitment to the anonymity and dignity of child victim.

8. The issue was posed that the medical curriculum has not changed in years and hence is now clearly outdated in terms of ethics and best practices.

9. There should be a clarification on whether forensic staff is required for cases of sexual offences or any MBBS doctor is capable enough to conduct the medical examination. The group was of the opinion that unnecessary specialization must be avoided and any qualified MBBS doctor should be able to handle the situation.

10. There is a need to assess the role of support person during the medical examination.

11. Since the protocol is now in place, there is now a need to focus on documenting and disseminating best practices.

12. There is a need to study the new protocol solely in the context of child victims and assess if further modifications and child friendly practices can be put in place.

13. Infrastructural needs of the hospital to address a child friendly environment need to be fulfilled.

Definition of Rehabilitation:

1. Of the three definitions of rehabilitation given, the group needs to decide on one which can be used as a standard definition of the term rehabilitation. The group has to come up with suggestions for the same.

Case Studies:

1. Organizations were asked to submit case studies in which they have been working for at least one year towards rehabilitation of a child victim. Through these cases, the process of rehabilitation can be better understood and a comprehensive checklist and best practices can be framed.

2. Organizations who volunteered for case studies include: Arpan, SNEHA, CEHAT & Chaitanya Mahila Mandal.

Flowcharts & Checklists:

1. There is need to identify and detail all processes and systems that are a part of the rehabilitation process for the child victim.

2. Prerana will prepare and send in flowcharts and checklists that address processes that CWCs and Police need to follow as per POCSO and JJ for rehabilitation of the child victim to the group to work on and finalize.

3. Majlis has sent in Checklists designed for support persons that are also relevant to all stakeholders. The group needs to use it as a template and work on it further.

4. There is a need to create a list of Do’s and Dont’s for stakeholders during the process of rehabilitation.

5. Counselors (Arpan) will assist the rehabilitation group in creating Risk assessment forms which would have around 20 indicators to be observed in Home Reports.

Children with Special Needs:

1. The group identified a need for a separate sub group to discuss rehabilitation of child victims with special needs.

2. Arpan will contact Umeed, to bring in an expert in the field.

3. There is a need to clarify under whose purview child victims with special needs fall under: The social justice department or the DWCD.

4. There is a need to push for inclusivity in shelter care, similar to the mainstreaming of children with special needs that has taken place in school.

5. Shelter homes are not well equipped to handle cases post-POCSO. There is a need for extensive training with shelter home management & staff.

6. Persons/Organizations that were suggested for this sub group are: Sarita Shankaran, ASHA, FACSE, Umeed, Justice and Care & Arpan.

Community Based Rehabilitation:

1. There is a need to have a discussion with the CWC regarding shifting the focus from shelter based rehabilitation to family and community based rehabilitation. There is a need to work with the CWC to help them assess home studies of cases in which under supervision order can be issued and the child can be returned into the community. Extensive training of CWC needs to happen on an urgent basis.

2. There is a need to connect family members to appropriate resources within the community. Outside agencies do not understand community and its dynamics. Community resources can help empower families against community pressure.

3. The group discussed that in cases of incest, community based rehabilitation needs to handled very strategically. The group has decided to wait for HAQ and CSJ in Delhi to release the protocol they are developing that is to be followed in cases of incest before taking this point ahead.

4. Community/family based rehabilitation through extended family need to be handled carefully.

5. For every community based rehabilitation, there is a need to attach an NGO or member from voluntary organization with an under supervision order from CWC. There is a need to assess whether this role of under supervision organization will be different from that of support person. And how?

6. Currently mental health services available for communities are insufficient. There is need to create a working system where community based organizations are capable to respond to mental health needs of the child victims.

7. As an alternative, it was suggested that perhaps a women’s Ngo in the community can be trained to supervise children. Arpan to suggest other alternatives.

8. In order to counter the stigma related to accessing mental health and counseling, it was suggested that the groups can take a lesson from the model adopted by organizations working with HIV/AIDS programs. Perhaps the counseling services can be provided within the premises of another NGO within the community.

9. It is sometimes difficult to deal with post-trauma behavior. There is a need to ensure that the community is empowered and does not develop cold feet during the process of rehabilitation.

10. Previous experiences of under supervision order have been that NGOs do not always report back to the CWC with updates. The group suggested that an MIS database be developed for CWC which would give them reminders i.e. so and so person must report on so and so date.

Appointment of Support Person:

1. There have been no orders, till date, issued in Mumbai city & suburb with the term ‘support person’.

2. A query was raised on whether POCSO demands any qualification (education or otherwise) for appointment as Support Person. There is a need to asses if only MSWs be appointed as Support Persons?

Articulating role of CWC is POCSO cases:

1. If and when a disclosure happens at the CWC and the members take a note of the statement for the child, some in the group have members suggested that police can consider it as an FIR if the statement is complete and need not record another statement.

2. CWC requires training on POCSO to clarify their interpretation of 164 A CrPC powers.

3. A child victim requires time to recover from trauma. When multiple statements are taken from the child, forcing the child to relive the trauma, time taken for the process of rehabilitation increases.

4. Prerana has created templates for Orders for CWC on Under Supervision, Home Investigation and Appointment of Support Person. The orders will be sent to Michelle of Justice & Care for suggestions & Inputs.

Common templates for enquiry and assessment:

1. Separate assessments are conducted for Manodhairya and CWC separately. There is need to explore if a single assessment can work for both.

2. There is a need for a common format for assessment which is simple, as it has been observed that the frontline workers need basic, uncomplicated, linear formats.

Manodhairya:

1. There is a need to study if there any parameters for the utilizations of funds received, especially if the child is in the shelter home, under manodhairya?

2. CEHAT cited a case where they managed to receive the funds in liquid form for a child victim whose education was a priority. CEHAT will share the process and the follow through in this case.

3. There is a need to check if DCPU does the Manodhairya assessment proactively or under orders/pressure.

Withdrawal of Complaints:

1. There is a need to look at the spectrum of factors which demotivate families due to which they withdraw complaints and result in re-victimization of victim