Second-guessing the licentious stare law?

Since the sale of stopwatches and sunglasses has not gone up exponentially after a senior Kerala police officer’s surprising revelation of a 14-second duration for filing charges for casting lascivious gazes at women, it does not seem to have caused any panic even among those presumably inclined to prolonged perusals. All professions have their unorthodox — and often undocumented — conventional wisdom born out of the practicalities of execution.

However, the stipulation of a second less than a quarter of a minute as the crucial borderline between an innocent gaze and a criminal gape seems both curious and arbitrary. Those at the receiving end of lecherous attention will vouch that quality is more important than quantity as plenty of lust can be packed into the briefest of stares.

Even if the timespan is the personal opinion of that police officer, it does give rise to the question of how he arrived at the figure — and if his colleagues and subordinates subscribe to it as well. Laws do often list uncomfortably detailed specifics to reduce chances of misuse, but it is apparent that at least some of their upholders may not be above adding a few extra criteria of their own. Governments and civil society should forthwith compile exactly how many and what other caveats are in informal operation. Every second may count.