Punitive Protection or Preventive Safeguarding?: A Comparative Study of India and the United Kingdom’s Legal Frameworks on Child Sexual Exploitation

The article critically analyses the legal framework on protecting children against sexual exploitation in India and UK. India ratified the UNCRC, 1989, in 1996, because it was fully committed to ensuring that children are not sexually exploited. The article discusses the provisions of the POCSO Act to find out whether it is largely punitive as opposed to the very purpose of bringing about the Act as enshrined in its preamble. Article specifically focus on its gender-neutral format, reverse burden policies, and compulsory reporting measures, and discusses the problems associated with the consent of adolescents, constitutional protections, and gaps in its enforcement. The paper also deals with the legal context of UK by examining the three fundamental Acts; the Children Act 1989, the Children Act 2004 and the Sexual Offences Act 2003. It analyses the multi-agency model of safeguarding used in the UK, the focus on welfare, preventive approaches, and incorporation of criminal responsibility into a wider system of child protection. The paper provides a comparative analysis of the legal and structural frameworks used by the two countries to protect children against sexual abuse, and their respective weaknesses, such as the presence of over-criminalization, presumption of evidences, and difficulties in enforcement, and constraints in rehabilitation. The article demonstrates the conflict between punishment and welfare-focused protection. It summarizes by providing solutions that could fix the inadequacies by adapting the unique aspects of both nations by proposing a moderate approach involving deterrence and due process, prevention and child-focused rehabilitation.