OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026
445
SAFE BUT SEEN? EVALUATING THE PROMISE AND PERILS OF WITNESS
PROTECTION IN INDIA AND THE USA
ANEELA FATIMA
afatima@jgu.edu.in
Assistant Professor, Programme Head BA Legal Studies at Jindal Global Law School,
O.P. Jindal Global University (India), ORCID: 0000-0003-1417-4880
MANYA PUNDHIR
mpundhir@jgu.edu.in
Assistant Professor, Programme Head BBA LLB (H) & B.Com LLB (H)
Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University (India), ORCID: 0009-0009-2703-6736
Abstract
In the due course of justice, witnesses tend to face hardships such as mental agony caused
by prolonged judicial proceedings, inadequate allowances with delayed payments and most
importantly the lack of security given via provisions to witnesses while they face the costs of
life-threatening risks for assisting the judiciary in attaining justice. United States has been the
most successful while carrying out witness protection, this paper will discuss the need for
India to tweak its witness protection schemes by using the US model as a base. The role of
witnesses is to provide evidence from the learnings that they possess in relation to an offence,
this information is used from the early stage of investigation to ascertaining a judgment. The
formerly known Indian Evidence Act 1872 now referred to as the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
2023, although provides certain rights to witnesses, has not laid down the privileges and
protection that need to be given to witnesses explicitly.
Keywords
Witness Protection scheme, India, USA, Article 21, Indian Constitution, Bhartiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, WITSEC.
Resumo
No devido curso da justiça, as testemunhas tendem a enfrentar dificuldades, tais como agonia
mental causada por processos judiciais prolongados, subsídios inadequados com pagamentos
atrasados e, mais importante ainda, a falta de segurança por via das provisões às
testemunhas enquanto enfrentam os custos dos riscos que ameaçam a sua vida por ajudarem
o poder judicial a alcançar a justiça. Os Estados Unidos têm sido os mais bem-sucedidos na
implementação da proteção de testemunhas. Este artigo discutirá a necessidade de a Índia
ajustar os seus esquemas de proteção de testemunhas, usando o modelo dos EUA como base.
O papel das testemunhas é fornecer provas a partir do conhecimento que possuem em relação
a um crime. Essas informações são utilizadas desde a fase inicial da investigação até à
determinação de um julgamento. A antiga Lei de Provas da Índia de 1872, agora conhecida
como Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, embora conceda certos direitos às testemunhas,
não estabelece explicitamente os privilégios e a proteção que devem ser concedidos às
testemunhas.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
446
Palavras-chave
Programa de Proteção a Testemunhas, Índia, EUA, Artigo 21, Constituição Indiana, Bhartiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, WITSEC.
How to cite this article
Fatima, Aneela & Pundhir, Manya (2025). Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of
Witness Protection in India and the USA. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. VOL. 16,
Nº. 2, November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.16.2.24
Article submitted on 01st September 2024 and accepted for publication on 05th
September 2025.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
447
SAFE BUT SEEN? EVALUATING THE PROMISE AND PERILS OF
WITNESS PROTECTION IN INDIA AND THE USA
ANEELA FATIMA
MANYA PUNDHIR
Addressing the Challenges of Witness Protection in India: A Comparative
Study with the United States
“In search of truth, he plays that sacred role of the sun, which eliminates the
darkness of ignorance and illuminates the face of justice, encircled by devils
of humanity and compassion” (Abhyankar & Abhyankar, 2018).
According to Jeremy Bentham, “Witnesses are the eyes and ears of justice”. This
information they possess is crucial from the stage of investigation to the time a
judgement is ascertained. Witness protection has been emphasised in plethora of
judgements wherein the need for an environment conducive to a fair trial was demanded,
which included the protection of witnesses (Gurbachan Singh v. State of Bombay, 1952);
statutes such as the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), previously known as the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS),
previously known as the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), have only attempted
at defining them indirectly by asserting their roles. For instance, S.180 BNSS states that
a police officer can examine an individual who is “acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case” whereas Chapter IX and Chapter X of the BSA provides for
the conditions that need to be complied with to check the competency of witnesses and
their mode of examination. Even though, the term “witness” has not explicitly been
defined in any Indian legislative text, it is a well-known fact that a witness is extremely
crucial to a proceeding. This was reiterated in the case of Sarwan Singh v. State of
Punjab, 1957, wherein Justice Wadhwa emphasised the importance of a witness and
stated that “a criminal case is built on the edifice of evidence, evidence that is admissible
in law. For that witnesses are required whether it is direct evidence or circumstantial
evidence”. Further, recognising the issues faced by witnesses, the court pointed towards
the dire need of a witness protection legislation and called upon to discourage obtaining
adjournments in cases where witness is present and accused is absent (State of U.P. v.
Shambhu Nath Singh, 2001). The court suggested that threatening witnesses should be
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
448
a ground for the cancellation of bail and maintaining anonymity for rape victims and
carved out an exception for terrorism witnesses wherein right of accused was subejcted
to certain exceptions The courts, realising the iminent threats faced by witnesses, allowed
re-trial due to such apprehension. (Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh, 2002;
Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum v. Union of India, 1995; People’s Union of Civil
Liberties v. Union of India, 2003)
This paper is strictly based on a qualitative methodological framework, derived from
existing legislation and secondary research. The authors’ research approach is deductive
with a combination of interpretivism and critical philosophy. This approach intends to
determine the factors acting as limitations for witness protection, the improvements
necessary to efficiently protect the rights of witnesses in India, and the effect on future
generations. The United States has been the most successful while carrying out witness
protection. Hence, the authors seek to examine whether there is a requirement for India
to modify their witness protection programmes and use the US model as a foundation.
Thus, with this methodological schema, the paper centres upon the dilemma between
the efficacy of witness protection through the existing laws, the need for the formation
of stronger legislation to optimally tackle the legal issues arising out of coercion, threat,
bribery, and the need to assess the effects of witness protection on the development of
children. Additionally, a comparison of India with the US model of witness protection
aptly exemplifies this dilemma, wherein they represent two very diverse models of
protecting witnesses within their territories. As to the research limitations, firstly there
exists a lack of access to confidential government records of the respective nations.
Secondly, the inability to conduct quantitative data via interviews and other forms of data
collection. Lastly, the absence of enough R&D carried out within India.
Finally, this paper contributes to the existing literature in a twofold manner; first it paves
the path for countries to lean towards refining their witness protection laws, which in turn
can not only provide a superior method of protection but also encourage witnesses to
come forth, to meet the ends of justice. Second, it showcases how the justice system
can stand triumphant in the battle against the exploitation and manipulation of witnesses
along with the wellbeing of the children of witnesses admitted in the programme.
Witness Protection in India: A Legal Overview
Why Shielding Witnesses Matters: Why Witness Protection Is Crucial for
India’s Legal System
Protection of witnesses is largely two-pronged: safeguarding against harm to the body
or property of a witness or their family, and ensuring anonymity. The current Indian
statutes identify the role of witnesses in a trial but do not provide positive rights and
protection from the hardships witnesses tend to face during trials like mental agony due
to prolonged judicial proceedings, delay in providing adequate allowances, and most
importantly the lack of security. Security concerns arise due to threats or bribery,
witnesses from lower income groups feel threatened or are coerced to wrongfully testify
especially in cases wherein powerful or influential parties are involved. These factors lead
to witnesses often turning hostile or wrongfully testifying. “One of the main reasons for
witnesses to turn hostile is that they are not accorded appropriate protection by the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
449
State. It is a harsh reality, particularly, in those cases where the accused
persons/criminals are tried for heinous offences, or where the accused persons are
influential persons or in a dominating position that they make attempts to terrorize or
intimidate the witnesses because of which these witnesses either avoid coming to courts
or refrain from deposing truthfully. This unfortunate situation prevails because of the
reason that the State has not undertaken any protective measure to ensure the safety
of these witnesses, commonly known as ‘witness protection’’ (Mahender Chawla v. Union
of India, 2018; 2019). In the case of Mahender Chawla, the bench also recognises the
loss of time when witnesses are made to appear years after the incident has occurred as
it adversely hampers their ability to recall necessary details at the time of actual crime
and they are not suitably remunerated for the loss of time and the expenditure.
Over the years courts have observed the reasons behind witnesses turning hostile which
may be monetary, deployment of muscle or political power and other forms of threat and
intimidation (Ramesh & Ors. v. State of Haryana, 2017). There have been cases where
witness protection has proved to be a moot matter and court proceedings have thereby
turned futile, which brought out severe defects in the procedure of the Indian police and
judiciary (Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2010). We have seen situations where
witnesses have had to take matters in their own hands as in the case of Bilkis Bano, a
key witness wrote a letter to the incumbent CJI on account of intimidation and threat to
life. The protection was granted and the proceedings were relocated from one city to
another to ensure the protection and safety of the witnesses. In India, the standard
practice of witness protection is typically granted only upon the witness's request, rather
than being provided by the state based on the severity of the case. Furthermore, the
level of protection offered is discretionary and not assured, as witnesses are generally
required to justify the necessity of such protection.
Unfortunately, this issue will remain until stronger protection is enforced as witnesses
would otherwise avoid any grave circumstances against themselves or their families.
Understanding the plight of witnesses and the unfortunate fact that ensuring ‘total safety’
of a witness not to mention the need to protect witnesses from gaining media attention.
These difficulties faced by witnesses have been highlighted in the 4th Report of the
National Police Commission and the Malimath Committee acknowledges the need for
witness protection laws. Courts, however, have developed practices of somewhat relying
upon hostile witnesses as well so that the entire proceedings do not go barren. Apex
court has held that evidence of a hostile witness is not totally rejected, rather can be
scrutinised and the part which is consistent with the case of either side may be accepted
(State of U.P. v. Ramesh Prasad Misra, 1996). Additionally, it is stated that if court finds
that credit of a witness is not completely shaken, one may after considering the evidence
of the witness as whole, with due caution, accept the creditworthy part in line with
evidence already on record (K. Anbazhagan v. Supt. of Police, 2004).
Justice J.M. Panchal eloquently highlighted, “As a protector of its citizens State has to
ensure that during a trial in Court the witness could safely depose truth without any fear
of being haunted by those against whom he has deposed.” The right to a fair and speedy
trial is a salient requirement imbedded in Article 21 of our Constitution. Denial of a fair
trial may have adverse effects on the victim, society and the accused. A situation where
a witness feels threatened may lead to incorrect testimony and gravely affect the
fundamental right to a fair trial.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
450
Due to abovementioned reasons, trials get further prolonged by reluctant witnesses,
making it imperative for legislation to introduce specific guidelines for witness
examination and protection.
Guiding the Way: Law Commission Reports and the Path Toward
Effective Witness Protection
Over the years there have been several attempts through Law Commission reports and
reports on the Reformation of Criminal Law Justice, to recognise and develop witness
protection. The first initiative was taken during the 14th Law Commission report
highlighting the ‘inadequate arrangements for witnesses in the Courthouse’ pointing to
situations where witnesses were made to wait for long periods due to the lack of
infrastructure forcing them to wait under trees or the witness shed which is somewhat a
barn. Moreover, witnesses were not compensated for travel, meals, or other expenses.
Although the scope of examining the witness' position was limited, the Commission
recognised these problems and recommended that they be humanely resolved.
The 14th Law Commission Report acknowledges that witnesses were not treated
appropriately, and the 42nd Report advocated an increase in witness protection from
threats. The Report proposed to add certain sections in the IPC, which in fact was
achieved by introducing S.229A which provides that any individual who threatens or tries
to influence the witness while producing evidence before any public authority shall be
fined. Furthermore, the 154th Law Commission Report reaffirmed the issue of witness ill-
treatment highlighting it as the primary cause for witnesses' unwillingness to appear in
court. Furthermore, the struggle of the witness in confronting and testifying against
perpetrators who have committed serious crimes was addressed.
The 172nd Law Commission Report worked towards the concealment of a minor’s witness
identity by preventing them from giving oral evidence. However, the Commission
stipulated that in cases involving sexual assault, no witnesses, minor or major, would be
obliged to provide oral testimony, but their identity would be concealed to protect them
from any threats from the accused. The 178th Report deals with hostile witnesses, noting
that in circumstances involving strong and wealthy persons or the mafia, witnesses
frequently turn hostile and refrain from testifying to protect themselves and their
families. The Commission suggested the insertion of S. 184 BNSS, as per which, in cases
involving the imprisonment of more than 10 years, the witness could record their
statement in the presence of magistrates. The same was even mentioned in the Criminal
Law Bill, 2003. Additionally, they suggested that the police officers should take
precautionary measures before the trial commenced, in order to avoid any fabrication.
However, the Commission much like the legislation failed to address the issue of physical
safety of witnesses. The Justice Malimath Commission, underlined the necessity for a
comprehensive witness protection plan in light of the rise in incidences of threats and
attacks on witnesses and their family members during criminal trials
Lastly, the 198th Report discusses issues related to ‘Witness Anonymity’ and ‘Witness
Protection’. It was stated that in instances involving terrorism and sexual offences,
victims and witnesses are in a vulnerable position and therefore put in risk; hence, the
necessity for a witness protection system comparable to those of other Nations; such as
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
451
USA, Germany and China, was urged. They even proposed ways to protect the witness
post-trial. This Law Commission study served as the cornerstone for the Witness
Protection Scheme 2018.
Setting the Standard: Influential Precedents in Witness Protection
Despite the absence of a particular scheme set up for the protection of witnesses or a
specific provision in any of the statutes, Courts have attempted to look after their
interests and considered protecting them in a multiplicity of judgements (Naresh Shridar
Mairajkar v. State of Maharashtra, 1966). The judgements have helped in safeguarding
witnesses and highlighted the responsibility of police to take due care of them in case of
threat. Failing to recognise the role of media today, there is no attempt to protect
witnesses from the fourth pillar of the Indian democracy (Bimal Kaur Khalsa v. Union of
India, 1988).
The court in Sakshi v. Union of India, 2004, expressed the mental trauma that a victim
or witness would undergo after he is made to confront an accused. The shock or fear
upon confrontation may make them reluctant or unable to give details and derail the
judicial process. Hence, the court stated the need for a separate screen; which serves
two purposes,; first, avoiding forcing the witness to encounter the accused saves them
from experiencing trauma and second, by supplementing the process of ensuring fair
justice for the victim and society as a whole. The court also issued guidelines concerning
the way evidence must be taken from a child witness and emphasised the protection of
a victim who has been prey to sexual abuse.
The importance and need for the Witness Protection scheme are evident from the judicial
precedents and mentions in Law reports. However, before the Witness Protection Scheme
2018 came into existence, the first guidelines regarding witness protection were laid
down in the Neelam Katara plea. Recognising dire need, the Ministry of Home Affairs
prepared the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 which was endorsed by the apex court in
the case of Mahender Chawla v. UOI, (2019). The case has been a turning point for
witnesses as it strengthened their position in the judicial system by providing the
essential right of being protected.
The 2018 Blueprint: India’s Attempt to Safeguard Its Witnesses
The main purpose of enabling the Witness Protection Scheme was ensuring a fair trial
through witness protection by giving them safety for coming forward to help authorities.
In this scheme, a witness would be provided with different measures depending on their
vulnerability and the threat they face. Ordinarily, witnesses would be provided with basic
services such as police assistance to protect them from any kind of threat and there are
additional safeguards in situations involving heinous crimes or high-end criminals They
include a new identity and residence elsewhere. To be precise, in situations such as these,
the Police Authority would be required to compile a Threat Analysis Report, which
analyses the gravity of the crime and the threat to the person's life, protection, and
several other elements such as the intent and extent of the accused issuing the threat.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
452
Based on this report, the threat would be analysed and accordingly the witness would be
provided any of the aforesaid protection measures.
The witnesses are divided into 3 categories i.e., Category A-C based on threat and
accordingly, the protection measures are laid down in Part II (7) (a-o) of the Scheme.
Some of the measures include holding in-camera trials, allowing a support person to
remain present during the recording of statements and deposition, having separate
vulnerable witness courtrooms which have special features like one-way mirrors, live
video links, and modifying the audio of the witness’s voice to protect their identity,- inter
alia. Once the protection is offered, a competent authority will monitor the
implementation of the same with the help of monthly/quarterly reports.. Hence, the
system aims to enhance protection thereby encouraging them to come forward and
testify without fear.
Behind the Curtains: How India’s Witness Protection Scheme 2018
Works and Where It Stumbles
The Scheme attempts to draw principles from such programs in other nations and has
considered wide-ranging kinds of procedures to protect the witness from. It is a great
attempt at ensuring witness’ trust in the system. However, introduction does not
guarantee execution.
Police officers play a major role in the implementation of the scheme as the witness is
expected to reach out to them for protection in situations like assisting witnesses to
court, regular patrolling, and camera trials which require the police to invest a lot of their
time and resources the reality does not align with the letter of law. India is one of the
countries with the highest vacancies in the police department according to a report by
UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime). Thereby making it clear that the
police would be overburdened whilst undertaking these measures. Additionally, there is
lack of sensitivity training for police to deal with witnesses. The Apex court acknowledged
vulnerable witnesses separately and ordered establishment of Vulnerable Witness
Deposition Complexes in all high courts (State of Maharashtra v. Bandu @ Daulat, 2018).
Another reason that can lead to the downfall of this scheme would be the lack of funding.
States are supposed to fund this program but States are not mandated to do so, rather
it is their prerogative to allocate funds as per the need. Furthermore, because the Threat
Analysis Report is made by a police officer, in cases involving powerful and influential
persons, an officer's report may be corrupted, resulting in a failure to accomplish the
ends of justice. The Scheme also fails to embrace the needs of vulnerable interests, their
mental or emotional health and issues such as cyber threats, well-being of children in
these programs. It has to be kept in mind that it is still not a legislation, i.e., there are
no punishment for not adhering to the Scheme.
United States of America
A revolutionary development of witness protection was the Organized Crime Control Act
of 1970 in the States amended by Comprehensive Crime Control Act, 1984. This led to
the creation of the federal witness protection programme also known as WITSEC. WITSEC
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
453
was formally created to protect witnesses or informants willing to testify against
perpetrators of organised crimes. While, witness protection, before was instituted under
KKK 1871 to protect witnesses testifying against the Ku Klux Klan along with which the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) occasionally created new identities to protect the
witnesses. Today witnesses go into witness protection in various criminal matters like
drug trafficking, murder and other organised crime.
The goal of WITSEC is to protect witnesses and their authorized family members whose
lives are in danger because of their cooperation with the US government. The programme
is managed by three main organizations; first, the United States Marshal service which
is responsible for non-incarcerated programme participants, second, the Federal Bureau
of Prisons (BOP) which maintains custody of incarcerated witnesses and third, the
Department of Justice Office of Enforcement Operations (OEO) which authorizes and
admits endangered witnesses into the programme. Based on the threats against a
witness and their reliability, the State or federal law enforcement agency submits a
request for their protection. A WITSEC application will then be submitted to the OEO
detailing the witness’ testimony along with the threats and risk. Depending on the
situation, the witness can be protected by local law enforcement or be moved to a safer
area. The witnesses are interviewed by investigators and psychologists in order to
determine the witness’ mental health at that point in time. Based on these findings, a
report is generated and submitted to the EOE and upon scrutiny, a recommendation is
made. The US Attorney General makes the final authority as to whether the witness is to
be admitted in WITSEC or not. If approved, the Marshals visit the witness and family
members to move them to WITSEC safe house.
This service is offered after the witness has complied with the eligibility criteria mentioned
as per 9-21.100 of the Department of Justice Manual. The Witness Protection programme
has been quite accessible to witnesses as per which they are offered complete relocation,
a new identity along with new legal documentation and basic expenses for their day-to-
day functioning. This kind of protection is even provided to their immediate family as per
which they are not permitted to disclose their new identity even to their extended family.
Cracks in the Armour: The Shortcomings of the US Witness Protection
Programme
While some witnesses have merely participated in programmes to get protection, others
are driven to do so to avoid association with previous criminal elements and unlawful
behaviour, which has resulted in the formation of a new, "non-criminal" lifestyle. Even
though most protected witnesses are convicted criminals, authorities are concerned
about the threat to third parties posed by witness protection operations, as well as the
threat to communities posed by protected witnesses who may cause harm in new,
relocated locations. Additionally, if there are erroneous expectations that crime would
end, communities may be jeopardised because witnesses may face lengthy jail
sentences, fuelling new cycles of violence. Concerns have also been raised about the
trustworthiness of witnesses, who occasionally fabricate evidence or falsely charge other
offenders.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
454
Ripple Effects: How Today’s Protection Schemes Shape Tomorrow’s
Justice
Witness protection has resulted in many beneficial improvements; yet, while analysing
the impact of acceptance into the witness protection programme, one must consider the
individual's family members. This is especially because, many of the witnesses subjected
to the programme are parents with children who have not reached the age of majority.
The impact on the youth can be analysed through the perspective of the ecological system
and in this case children whose parents are admitted into the programme. Despite the
recent amendment brought to permit families to join the witness protection program,
some parents are unable to join due to employment commitments. Children whose
parents are forced to be separated suffer a significant psychological impact due to the
imbalance in their environment. Apart from their personal lives being disrupted, social
factors that promote the healthy development of a child's interpersonal abilities may also
suffer; children who have missed school time are victims of the system. Hence, the
services need to support and ensure the preservation of the family and social
environments for their betterment and social well-being.
Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory can be employed to analyse this research
due to its emphasis on the relevance of the environmental system on a child's
development. The environment, whether at the microsystem, mesosystem, ecosystem,
macrosystem, or chronosystem level, can be beneficial or harmful to a child's growth
(McKay). It is vital to emphasise that the witness protection programme, directly and
indirectly, marginalises children via isolation, social dislocation, movement limitations,
and a lack of interaction with family and social networks. Children, therefore, suffer due
to separation from their families and placed in foreign situations without any social
networks.
At the microsystem level, children are separated from their familiar surroundings,
including family and friends, and are expected to adjust to a foreign setting. The
mesosystem gets problematic after students enter the programme because they are
placed in a new educational setting with a different academic curriculum, new teachers,
and a different teaching system.
The ecosystem has an influence when parents abandon their employment in exchange
for their children's protection, and children are indirectly harmed since parents are no
longer able to give in the same way they were before being enrolled in the programme.
The ecological perspective was not only useful in the interpretation of the research results
but also provides a framework for the development of relevant and responsive
psychosocial interventions by social workers in addressing the needs and challenges
experienced by children whose parents are admitted to the programme.
Five key aspects must be taken into consideration, the first is the children's incapacity to
adjust to the programme; the second is the children's loneliness; the third is the
behavioural manifestations; the fourth is the fact that family contact is essential to assist
children to deal with separation, and lastly social work intervention is required to help
children cope.
Concerns have been raised about children's behavioural troubles due to of their
acceptance into the programme such as refusing to go to school, mood swings, and
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
455
instigating conflicts with a parent or sibling regularly. It was also seen that some of the
children's academic performance had declined since they were accepted into the
programme.
On one hand, Children, unlike adults, struggle to express their emotions and adjust to
unexpected settings, resulting in emotional outbursts. Moving causes relocation stress
syndrome, symptoms include feelings of insecurity, lack of trust, loneliness, anxiety, and
attachment issues. Children of witnesses frequently feel ignored, having no one to
connect with at home. On the other hand, parents are overburdened with activities such
as adjusting to their new surroundings and preparing to testify in court, earning an
income in new environments. Parents feel increased anxiety and stress, and as a
consequence, they pay less attention to their children's feelings, resulting in child-parent
conflict. A lack of social interaction and official family contact may lead witnesses to
violate the terms of the protection agreement by starting dangerous communications
with their families.
Children would benefit from social work therapies that help them deal with the challenges
of separation and social dislocation, live in the absence of parents, and better adjust to
the concealed environment.
Psychosocial assistance is required to assist children with social, emotional, intellectual,
and adaptation challenges, as well as homesickness, and to help them develop to their
full potential. Counselling, access to healthcare, developing parental skills, and the
formation of social support and networks are examples of such interventions.
Next Steps: Strengthening India’s Witness Protection for a Safer
Tomorrow
There are numerous practical issues when it comes to providing security or relocation in
developing nations, such as implementation costs and infrastructure. However, a more
pressing issue that is found across nations is revolving around corruption that occurs in
both, the administration and judiciary. Hence, admitting that witness protection is a State
duty is the first step towards enacting a witness protection Statute. Another solution is
for witness statements to be recorded by a judicial magistrate; however, this becomes
practically impossible due to the number of courts and understaffed judiciary.
Additionally, expert witnesses from various forensic disciplines are not protected in India
presently. Witnesses who are content with their employment and family are unlikely to
make major adjustments in their lives merely to testify in court, which is an evident
barrier to witness protection programmes in many jurisdictions. For a variety of reasons,
proper implementation of witness protection programmes will be challenging in countries
such as India, where cultural and societal commitments must be met.
To make matters worse, witnesses are subjected to death threats, coercion, harassment,
and other forms of abuse and as a result they tend to become hostile in such situations.
To avoid this, the Indian government's intervention is critical. The administration's
Witness Protection Scheme 2018, as well as the establishment of separate vulnerable
witness deposition centres, are significant and effective steps. However, aside from the
Delhi High Court guidelines, there is no other legal mention of vulnerable witnesses'
protection. The Scheme of 2018, was the first step in the right direction to bring witness
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
456
protection under the purview of the law and place the burden of implementation on the
State.
Although the scheme provides significant relief to witnesses regarding their safety during
the trial and, in exceptional cases, even after the trial is completed, it does have some
flaws, such as the fact that the criminal justice system is the responsibility of the state,
and some states may lack adequate resources to implement this scheme effectively. An
alternative solution could be assistance from the centre; however, the scheme remains
silent on the centre having the authority to contribute financially to the Witness Protection
Fund. Additionally, the operation of the Witness Protection Order has been limited to
three months; and the district head of police has been tasked with deciding the
contents and creating the Threat Analysis Report; as a result, in high-profile cases
involving politicians or powerful persons, the involvement of the district head creates
opportunities for corruption. The Programme is costly and administratively challenging.
New difficulties for the programme include the possible disclosure of witnesses online.
Modern technology has made it easier to track a person's whereabouts, and social
networking sites could be a detrimental source of personal information.
As a result, unanimous and separate legal provisions for protecting the rights of
vulnerable witnesses, including strict penalties for those who manipulate the witness, are
urgently needed.
Depending on the type of witness and the degree of cooperation, protection may be
provided before, during, and/or after the judicial proceeding. Effective witness protection
legislation should ideally involve all three relevant agencies i.e. the government, the
judiciary and the police who must demonstrate the political will to enact necessary
legislation, investigate legal issues, and execute it respectively.
An independent witness protection cell should be established, with the responsibility for
providing false identities, relocation, and follow-up. Additionally, throughout the criminal
justice process, witnesses should be treated fairly, with respect, and dignity, and should
be free of intimidation, harassment, or abuse. They must have access to status of the
proceedings guaranteed Right to a speedy trial, and also a prompt and final resolution of
the case following conviction and sentence, deadlines to promote speed in criminal
proceedings has been introduced in the BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
2023). The police force should be given the authority to take basic witness protection
measures such as surveillance, accompanying witnesses to work and court, assisting with
emergency relocation, and so on. The courts should take steps to limit public access to
the witness's identity, such as having a witness testify under a pseudonym. Alternative
solutions may include conducting a live online cross-examination of the witness outside
of court, during the trial before the judge, or having a witness testify at a location, out
of court, designated by the trial judge with the presence of the trial judge's clerk as well
as the opposing party's attorney.
Videoconferencing, teleconferencing, voice and face distortion, and other similar
techniques should be encouraged, as should the ability for witnesses to conceal their
address or occupation. The best form of witness protection is restoring public trust in the
legal system. Witnesses should be assured that those who wish to testify have the police
and an impartial system on their side.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
457
It may also be noticed that youngsters who are left at home with grandparents or
extended relatives have difficulty adjusting to life without their parents. Witnesses are
also frustrated by the prospect of their children growing up without parental direction,
which has led to some witnesses fleeing the programme to be reunited with their children.
The disadvantage of leaving the programme is that witnesses must confront the
perpetrators of the crime on their own, without protection. Witnesses may also
experience increased worry as they sought to make sense of their lives in new and
unfamiliar places without social support.
The programme should explore encouraging witnesses to be allowed into the programme
alongside their families, particularly children, to avoid feelings of isolation and to
guarantee family preservation. This might be achieved by increasing awareness of the
programme and how it functions in communities so that witnesses who attend the
programme are aware of what to expect. Programme’s social workers might deliver
awareness programmes in partnership with social workers from the department of social
development and the police services.
Social workers should consider devising and delivering child-friendly intervention
programmes geared at meeting the needs of children accepted to the programme
alongside their parents. Such programmes should inter-alia, assist children in adjusting
to the programme and at school, as well as connect them to leisure activities in the
neighbourhood where their family is safe. This will allow the youngsters to make new
acquaintances and at the same time prevent boredom and loneliness.
Ensuring frequent family contact between witnesses and their children will lessen the
possibility of witnesses departing the programme to reconcile with the family. Children
who are left at home should also receive psychological therapy to help them manage and
better comprehend why their parents are absent. As part of family preservation, social
workers might provide several services.
Between Fear and Justice: Overcoming the Challenges of Witness
Protection in India
There is currently a long way to go for the developing nations to achieve a faultless
witness protection programme, however, the recent initiatives taken by India are a step
in the right direction. The obvious drawbacks are the lack of funding for effective witness
protection as that of the United States paired with the risk of being seen as a social pariah
as a result of leaving their family and social circles to begin a new life. This fear inevitably
could dishearten a potential witness from testifying. Additionally, as seen in the United
States many large-scale criminals have taken refuge in the witness protection
programme only to later continue a life of crime. The advantage of a mob member
attaining a clean slate in exchange for useful information seems to be a gamble which
may lead to an increase in crime rates due to the mobsters taking advantage of the
system. This is a struggle faced in the United States and will most definitely cause
damaging effects within developing nations, such as India, which have large populations
and an understaffed justice system. To allocate enough financing or find alternatives, the
Indian government must also prioritize the costs connected with witness protection. Low-
cost techniques must be evaluated. This will provide witness protection and much-needed
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
458
value in practice. Additionally, India must encourage witnesses by adopting and
maintaining witness anonymity and freeing the witness from all forms of intimidation.
Admission of parents into the programme disrupts family functioning, strains emotional
relationships, and has a detrimental influence on children's lives in general. However, it
is hoped that the availability of knowledge and understanding of how children experience
the admission of their parents into witness protection programmes, as presented in this
study, will enable social workers to devise interventions that will assist children in coping
with the trauma associated with their parents' admission into the programme and,
ultimately, restore, reunify, and preserve families.
This article aims to contribute to future research by enticing academicians and
lawmakers to assess the current barriers to witness testimony by enhancing the witness
protection programme by taking into account social and cultural factors and incorporating
affordable programmes that will give potential witnesses the security and safety required
to uphold the ends of justice. There is a need for a fair and impartial criminal investigation
and therefore witness protection is the first step forward.
References
Books
Atrey, A. (2020). Law of witness (1st ed.). Lawmann's.
https://www.kamalpublisher.com/BookDetails.aspx?id=130&ISBN=978-93-85114-02-1
Case Laws
Bimal Kaur Khalsa v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1988 P H 95.
Mahendra Chawla v. Union of India, 2018 SC 2678.
Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar and Ors v. State of Maharashtra and Anr, 1966 SCR (3) 744.
Sakshi v. Union of India, (2004) 5 SCC 546.
Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1957 AIR 637.
Journals
Abdel-Monem, T. (2003). Foreign nationals in the United States witness security
program: A remedy for every wrong? American Criminal Law Review, 40(3), 1235–1269.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280660310_Foreign_Nationals_in_the_Unite
d_States_Witness_Security_Program_A_Remedy_for_Every_Wrong
Allum, F., & Fyfe, N. (2008). Developments in state witness protection programmes: The
Italian experience in international comparative perspective. Policing, 2(1), 92–102.
https://doi.org/10.1093/police/pan001
Compas, B. E., Connor-Smith, J. K., Saltzman, H., Thomsen, A. H., & Wadsworth, M. E.
(2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Problems, progress, and
potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 87–127.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.87
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
459
Dedel, K. (2006). Problem-oriented guides for police problem-specific guides series No.
42: Witness intimidation. Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, The U.S. Department of
Justice.
https://popcenter.asu.edu/sites/g/files/litvpz3631/files/problems/PDFs/witness_intimid
ation.pdf
Demir, M. (2018). The perceived effect of a witness security program on willingness to
testify. International Criminal Justice Review, 28(1), 62–81.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1057567717721298
Fontes, P. V. (2020). Axel Honneth’s normative proposal for the renewal of human rights.
JANUS.NET e-journal of International Relations, 11(1), May–October.
https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.11.1.1
Fyfe, N. R., & McKay, H. (2000). Desperately seeking safety: Witnesses’ experiences of
intimidation, protection, and relocation. The British Journal of Criminology, 40(4), 675–
691. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/40.4.675
Fyfe, N. R., & Sheptycki, J. (2006). International trends in the facilitation of witness
cooperation in organized crime cases. Policing, 2(1), 1–20.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370806065585
Hifajatali Sayyed. (2019). A comparative analysis of witness protection in India and
developed countries. Criminal Law & Justice, Jus Dicere.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341622557_Witness_Protection_A_Compara
tive_Analysis_of_Indian_and_Australian_Legislation
Lee, N. (1983). Witness involvement in the criminal justice system and intention to
cooperate in future prosecutions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 11(2), 143–152.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(83)90049-1
On human rights – particularly crimes against humanity. (2018). JANUS.NET e-journal
of International Relations, 9(1), May–October. https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-
7251.9.1.5
Rahangdale, P. (2020). Witness protection: A fundamental need in the criminal justice
system. Purakala Journal, 31(28).
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3606181
Legal Acts
Constitution of India. (n.d.). https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india (Last visited
June 24, 2024)
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1996. (n.d.).
https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1974-02.pdf (Last visited June 24, 2024)
Witness Protection Program Act. (n.d.). https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/W-11.2/
(Last visited June 24, 2024)
Reports
Justice Malimath Committee Report. (2003). Reforms of the criminal justice system.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 445-460
Safe but seen? Evaluating the Promise and Perils of Witness Protection in India and the USA
Aneela Fatima, Manya Pundhir
460
Law Commission of India. (n.d.). Consultation paper on witness protection.
https://cjp.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/law-comm-consultation-paper-on-
witness-identity-protection.pdf
The Law Commission of India. (1984). Indian Penal Code (Law Com No. 42).
The Law Commission of India. (1997). Reforms in judicial administration (Law Com No.
14).
The Law Commission of India. (1998). Recommendations for amending various
enactments, both civil and criminal (Law Com No. 178).
The Law Commission of India. (2002). Review of rape laws (Law Com No. 172).
The Law Commission of India. (2006). Witness identity protection and witness protection
programs (Law Com No. 198).
The Law Commission of India. (n.d.). Witness identity protection and witness protection
programme.
