According to a report in The Star, they are suggesting that couples with a small age gap between them should be spared the harsh penalties of child sexual crimes.

Voice of the Children chairperson Sharmila Sekaran, a practising lawyer who attended a parlia­mentary briefing on the bill yesterday, was quoted as saying: “To illustrate, a 40-year-old man who tells a 12-year-old girl or boy to undress is 100% a sexual offender.

“But a 19-year-old boy who has sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend can be prosecuted under this bill, which we don’t want.”

In agreeing with this, Association of Women Lawyers president Goh Siu Lin noted that it was a “reality” that teenagers would engage in sexual activity.

“Teens aged 16 to 18 are sexually active because they have the capa­city to consent to sexual activities,” The Star quoted Goh as saying.

However, Goh said, the accused would have to prove that they were in a genuine relationship.

This is referred to as the “sweetheart defence”. Basically, the accused have to provide evidence, such as love letters, that they are indeed sweethearts or lovers.

Goh and Sharmila both recommended an age gap of three to five years to qualify for the sweetheart defence, based on laws in other countries. However, they added, it would be good for the government to carry out its own studies locally.

Sharmila said instead of being punished, those who were acquitted should be given counselling.

Srividhya Ganapathy, co-chairman of the Bar Council’s Child Rights Committee, wanted whipping as a punishment to be removed from the bill, The Star reported.

However, if the provision for whipping were to be included in the bill, then it should state clearly that a medical officer would have to be present during the whipping, she said.

The bill has been tabled in the Dewan Rakyat and is expected to be passed as both government and opposition lawmakers are agreed on the need for it.