Lowering India’s statutory age of consent from 18 to 16 may unintentionally facilitate child marriages and increase the likelihood of teenage pregnancy, says a new report.It also said the problems created by consensual adolescent relationships should be addressed through better implementation, judicial sensitivity and institutional reforms, rather than weakening the protection provided by the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.The report titled “Beyond the Debate: Age of Consent in India – The Road Ahead”, prepared by the Network for Access to Justice and Multidisciplinary Outreach Foundation, strongly argues against lowering India’s statutory age of consent from 18 to 16.“The debate should move from ‘Should the age of consent be lowered?’ to ‘How can India make its existing child-protection system work better?’ POCSO treats everyone below 18 as a child for sexual offences, which is a clear, uniform and gender-neutral protective standard,” National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) member Priyank Kanoongo said at the unveiling of the report here.“The 18-year threshold is consistent with the Constitution, the Juvenile Justice Act, the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and India’s international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. So, lowering the threshold could create ambiguity that perpetrators could exploit,” he said.Another key aspect highlighted in the report is that implementation, rather than the law itself, remains the biggest challenge. It identifies delays in investigations and trials, inconsistent police procedures, inadequate psychosocial support, weak coordination between institutions, insufficient child-friendly procedures, lack of professional training and delays in involving Child Welfare Committees (CWCs) as the prominent reasons behind the injustice faced by victim children.The report argued that these are institutional failures rather than evidence of defects in the basic framework of the POCSO Act.“Every POCSO case should be communicated to the jurisdictional Child Welfare Committee within 24 hours of registration of the FIR or receipt of information about the offence. The objective is to allow early assessment of the child’s safety and protection needs, counselling, appointment of a support person and rehabilitation planning,” it said.Talking to The Tribune, Supreme Court advocate Pinky Anand said there should be no scope for any ambiguity or contradiction when it comes to sensitive issues like age of consent.“If the age of consent is reduced to 16, other thresholds should also be changed. Why should then the marriageable age be 18 or the one for voting? It is contradictory. The age of consent at 18 years is also crucial from the biological perspective. Adolescence is a period of rapid biological, neurological and psychological development. While physical maturation may occur during this stage, the developmental processes associated with cognitive functioning, emotional regulation, impulse control and long-term decision-making continue well beyond the onset of puberty,” she said.In a controversial suggestion, the report expressed reservations about courts using marriage as a reason for leniency in addressing sexual assault cases.The report examines cases where courts have reduced or waived criminal consequences after an accused person married the minor victim, including cases involving offences under the POCSO Act. It strongly criticises this approach, arguing that marriage should not effectively erase sexual offences committed against children.“…some cases involve genuinely consensual adolescent relationships, and courts may be confronted with difficult situations involving young couples and children. The appropriate response should be a principled legislative solution, not ad hoc judicial discretion,” it added.