“A criminal justice system cannot measure its success only by what happens after an offence is committed. Prevention has to be equally important. If sexual offences continue to occur at the rate of four cases every week, the State must seriously examine whether enough is being done to identify vulnerabilities, deter offenders and protect those at risk.
High detection is important. But high prevention should be the ambition.
Goa needs to ask whether vulnerable public spaces are adequately monitored, whether complaints of harassment are acted upon before they escalate, whether repeat offenders are being watched, whether schools and institutions have adequate safeguards and whether women and children have confidence that approaching the authorities will lead to immediate protection.
These are questions that cannot be answered by detection statistics.
There is also a tendency to explain individual sexual offences through relationships, alcohol, social media, family disputes or personal choices.“
Four cases of rape or sexual assault every week.
That is not merely a statistic. It is a warning.
It means that almost every two days, a woman or child in Goa is allegedly becoming a victim of sexual violence. Behind every case is a person, a family, trauma and a long battle for justice.
Yet Goa appears to be increasingly comfortable discussing crime through statistics rather than confronting the uncomfortable question of why these crimes continue to happen.
The government and police often highlight Goa’s high crime detection rate as proof of an effective policing system. Detecting a crime, identifying an accused and completing an investigation are certainly important. But there is a fundamental question that needs to be asked.
What is the use of a very high detection rate if the system cannot prevent the crime from happening in the first place?
Detection begins after the damage has already been done.
A woman has already been assaulted. A child has already suffered trauma. A family has already been devastated. No detection percentage can reverse that moment.
The police may identify the accused. An investigation may be completed. A chargesheet may be filed. The government may then point to the detection figures with satisfaction.
But what happened before the crime?
That is where the real test of policing lies.
A criminal justice system cannot measure its success only by what happens after an offence is committed. Prevention has to be equally important. If sexual offences continue to occur at the rate of four cases every week, the State must seriously examine whether enough is being done to identify vulnerabilities, deter offenders and protect those at risk.
High detection is important. But high prevention should be the ambition.
Goa needs to ask whether vulnerable public spaces are adequately monitored, whether complaints of harassment are acted upon before they escalate, whether repeat offenders are being watched, whether schools and institutions have adequate safeguards and whether women and children have confidence that approaching the authorities will lead to immediate protection.
These are questions that cannot be answered by detection statistics.
There is also a tendency to explain individual sexual offences through relationships, alcohol, social media, family disputes or personal choices. Such factors may emerge during investigations, but they cannot become convenient explanations for the larger problem.
The fundamental principle is simple. No relationship, disagreement, promise, lifestyle or circumstance gives anyone the right to sexually assault another person.
The State’s responsibility begins much before an FIR is registered.
It begins with prevention, awareness, safe public spaces, responsible institutions, responsive policing and creating an environment where victims can report abuse without fear.
And when a crime does occur, justice must follow swiftly.
How quickly are investigations completed? How many cases result in chargesheets? How many reach trial? How many end in conviction? How long do victims have to wait? How many accused remain out on bail while survivors are forced to repeatedly relive their trauma?
A high detection rate means little to a victim if justice takes years.
The State must also look beyond the police station. Every serious sexual offence should raise questions about whether warning signs existed before the crime and whether something could have been done differently.
If the accused had previously threatened or harassed the victim, was the complaint taken seriously?
If an offence occurred in an area where previous complaints had been made, was anything done to address the vulnerability?
If an accused had a history of similar behaviour, was that information available to the system?
These are the questions that turn policing from a reactive exercise into preventive policing.
The issue becomes even more serious when children are victims. Children require stronger institutional protection because they cannot be expected to understand or navigate adult power relationships. Schools, families, institutions and law enforcement agencies must work together to recognise warning signs and intervene early.
Goa also needs greater transparency in its crime data.
Citizens deserve to know not just how many cases were registered and detected, but what happened afterwards. How many investigations were completed within reasonable timelines? How many chargesheets were filed? How many cases reached trial? How many resulted in conviction? How long did the process take?
Otherwise, statistics risk becoming a shield against accountability.
Goa cannot continue to confuse its tourism image with public safety.
A State is not safe simply because tourists arrive in large numbers or because crime detection figures look impressive. It is safe when women can travel without fear, when children are protected, when victims are heard and when potential offenders know that the system will act before and after a crime.
Four cases ev
