|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Legal Needs Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | Make your comments on Rape | Views: 934 | | Jan 17, 2008 2:00 pm | | Make your comments on Rape | # |
charuhasan | | The Delhi High Court Judgment on women's age of consent as sixteen has really opened Pandora’s box. The rationale behind the finding of their Lordships of The Delhi High Court is based on the exception provided under Indian Penal Code in defining rape under section 376. The Exception reads.
“Sexual intercourse by a man with ones own wife, the wife not being under 15 years of age, is not rape.”
Statutory rape comes under the sixth description, which reads.
“ With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age.”
An interpretation of the sixth exception makes it very clear that a man is entitled to have sexual intercourse with his wife against her will once she is above fifteen. By same token a man can sexual intercourse with consent when the girl is above eighteen. Since the penal provisions accept the consent of a girl to have sex as legal once she is sixteen that seems to be the guideline on which the Delhi High Court Judgment is based.
While sec 366A deals with abducting a minor girl from her guardian, nothing stops the parents from giving away a girl under eighteen without her consent. So in all cases of marriage of girl under eighteen the consent to have sex with her is given by the parents. The reasoning of the Delhi High Court seems to be that if the parents can consent to the girl under 16 to marry a man and have sex, why not the girl herself? But the reasoning works against the provisions of sec 366A of the Indian Penal code the age of discretion seems to be eighteen years.
Now let us see what is the remedy for a wife above the age of fifteen if the husband has intercourse against her will, if he cannot be prosecuted for rape. Any use of force becomes an offence under 353 of The Indian Penal Code. There is another provision under 354 I.P.C, which is “assaulting a woman with an intent to outrage her modesty. While modesty is not defined in the Penal Code we cannot claim that there is no modesty for a woman with respect to her husband. Sec 354 does not specifically exonerate a husband as the provisions for rape under sec 375. After all Delhi High court thinks that Parents can make their daughter submit to sex if she is above fifteen, why not the girl herself?
S.Charuhasan
14-10-2005
Private Reply to charuhasan | | Jan 18, 2008 9:46 am | | re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
Anuradha Sarup | | Why is there so much confusion in our legal systems? When the age for marriage is legally 18 for a girl, then why is any law looking at an age below that as 'lawful'? When even the marriage is not legal then how can there be a legal cover for sex?
Really wish someone would sit with the law books and clear them them.
As for consent .. rape is rape irrespective of age, gender or relationship. Infact even irrespective of the fact that it was genuinely physical or it was a mental, emotional one through words and actions. Private Reply to Anuradha Sarup | | Jan 18, 2008 1:39 pm | | re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
deepika | | i second anuradha on every word. Private Reply to deepika | | Jan 18, 2008 4:47 pm | | re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
Anuradha Sarup | | A private correspondence I'm sure Mr Charuhasan would not mind my sharing on this forum....
Mr Charuhasan's mail to me
writes:
> Dear Madam,
> You must forgive me for the PM instead of a reply by the usual post. I am a 77 year old man who had been fighting for women’s rights for 30 years. I was also a male chauvinist till then for that was the way I was brought up. I have my wife who was my intellectual superior who unlearned everything to be my subordinate. I have been a lawyer for 30 years and an actor for 25 years. I want you to look at the treatment meted out to Sania Mizra, Taslima Nastreen and actress Kushboo. That much is for the inequality that you have not worried about for you are successful in your own way.
>
> Now come back to law. Why men cannot be raped? You believe that he has nothing to lose. Rape is an offence against human body as any other offence. If I were a woman I shall lose my chastity better than lose my front teeth or my bones broken. Forgive me for saying this and take your own time.
>Regards
>charuhasan
and my reply...
Dear Mr Charuhasan,
1. If you re-read my reply to your post you would notice that I had said 'all age, all 'gender'...
So yes I fully agree that men can and are at times raped too.
2. As for saying rape is better than broken bones or front teeth,I am silenced by the simplicity and indeed crudity of your statement!
A broken bone heals without long term emotional scaring .. broken teeth are easily cured and covered today (as indeed I know due to a childhood accident) and in both these cases the person gets the sympathy of family and friends. There is no social shame attached.
With rape unfortunately the victim also gets saddled with the shame of having being victimised.
3. I did not understand your comment about Sania Mirza and the other two ladies. Do please clarify.
I will be posting your message to me and my reply to it on the discussion page. I think they both add to the debate that is already in progress there.
Regards
Anuradha
Private Reply to Anuradha Sarup | | Jan 19, 2008 12:07 pm | | re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
charuhasan | | Sania Mirza is taken to court of law on a charge of dishonouring National flag while posing for a snapshot. She has an FIR registered against her for entering the steps of a Mosque while rest of the shooting crew who probably took her along were excused. Salmon Rushdie was never attacked while Taslima Nasreen was criminally assaulted with impunity by afew Andrah state legislators. Actress Kushboo is being prosecuted for wearing sandals in dais where 15 others had sandals. These are for your information Private Reply to charuhasan | | Jan 25, 2008 2:06 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
RVIyengar | |
Untitled Document
It is a known fact that a good number of laws need a thorough overhaul. The original post by Mr. Charuhasan, which talks about court judgments regarding what constitutes rape, just goes to strengthen our case for a re-look at these outdated laws which defeat the very purpose of having laws.
The law states that a girl ceases to be a minor when she attains the age of 18. Which means she can legally marry a person of her choice and have sexual relationship with any person of her choice once she attains the said age.
When this is the legal position, any marriage between a man and a girl below 18 is legally null and void. When such is the case, sexual relationship with a girl below 18 amounts to sexual abuse and rape (remember, a girl below 18 is a minor – i.e. she has not legally attained the maturity to decide certain things for herself). Even if her parents give her in marriage before 18, her parents should be tried for committing a crime.
Unfortunately, this is not the case, and the judiciary with its cross-readings and references of different laws only adds to the trauma of the girls.
Re: Your words, "So in all cases of marriage of girl under eighteen the consent to have sex with her is given by the parents."
True, and precisely why the parents should be punished for going against the law of the land that expressly states that a girl should not be given in marriage before she turns 18.
In other words, the parents who give their daughter in marriage before she turns 18 and the groom/husband and his parents deserve to be penalized for indulging in something that is unlawful.
For, any sexual relationship with a girl who is below 18 – with or without her consent / with or without her parents' consent – is sexual abuse and rape and nothing else.
Re: Your words, "After all Delhi High court thinks that parents can make their daughter submit to sex if she is above fifteen, why not the girl herself?"
You speak as though courts and parents own all the girls below 18 years!
What we should be discussing here is how to change such ridiculous interpretations of the courts and educate and dissuade parents from giving their daughters in marriage before 18, not why the minor girl cannot submit to sex herself!
Re: Your words, "If I were a woman I shall lose my chastity better than lose my front teeth or my bones broken. Forgive me for saying this and take your own time."
I’m surprised that you could make such a reckless statement. By the same logic, should the head of a family do the same thing when a rowdy tries to attack his family members, i.e. hand over his family members to the rowdy and vacate the place to save his "front teeth and bones"? Should a father of a girl hand over his daughter to an aggressor to be raped to save his and her front teeth and bones? Hope you get the drift…
Re: Your words, "Why men cannot be raped?"
Interesting question!
That depends on how you define the word rape. The word ‘rape’ almost always refers to forcing a woman to have sexual intercourse against her will.
Even if a man, who has attained legal age, is forced to have sex against his will it should be termed rape. However, such happenings are very rare, perhaps due to the biological, social and other factors.
Of course, a man can be sodomized against his will by another man, which is kind of rape. However, sodomy itself is a crime in the eyes of the law (be it is with a man or woman).
However, sexual crimes and discriminations are committed more against women than against men.
You have cited the example of Kushboo, Sania Mirza and Taslima Nasreen; and, in another context, you have also asked why can't girls submit to forced sex to escape injuries. Applying your logic, you can think of asking Kushboo to stop appearing in public, ask Sania Mirza to stop playing tennis and disappear behind a veil, and ask Taslima Nasreen to stop writing and get out of India – for what, in your words, should matter to women are their teeth and bones and nothing else!
Private Reply to RVIyengar | | Jan 25, 2008 4:40 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
charuhasan | | Dear Mr. Venkatesa Iyengar,
Using the term "by your words" cannot become "my words." It is very nice of you to point out that I have meant that Taslima Nasreen should leave India to save her from being assaulted. That Sania Mirza must wear a veil and stop tennis. Kushboo must hide herself from public. But one thing I meant is certain. If any woman wants to lose her chastity Charu Hasan Iyengar shall not lay down his life to protect it. I shall also think some more about your concept of law. Thanking you Private Reply to charuhasan | | Jan 26, 2008 4:48 am | | re: Make your comments on Rape | # | 
Kiran Relangi | | What demands important change is not the law so much as the social, cultural and religious view of rape. We make such a big deal out of the issue that victims of rape are further traumatized by stigmas and veiled accusations. In fact, most emotional trauma experienced by the victim is in direct response to cultural, religious and social outlook on rape.
If rape were simply treated as another physical assault on a person - just as we would treat a man being attacked for his money - the victim would experience only that trauma that is a direct result of the attack.
But with rape made a big banner of red color in our eyes, victim is extremely traumatized by the feelings of shame, guilt, self-blame, second victimization, victim blaming and whatnot!
We all spend much time on making codes of behavior and formulating punishments for those who flout those codes. But we do not spend even a fraction of that time in working out how to react and behave if we were victims of violated rules or if we were with those victims. Such things are neither taught in schools or colleges nor through any broadcast medium at large. Media reports on rape but on recovery of rape victims. Law prescribes punishments for abusers but has nothing offer rape victims. Instead rape victims are further subject to secondary victimization through interrogation and treatment of medical authorities. Religion teaches us principles of behavior but not how to take violation of codes.
Reason has become so clouded by natural acceptance of social mores, religious codes, stigmas and whatnots. But if we all chose to discard all stigmas and reason out the hype and myth around sexuality, torment of sexual abuse for the victim is nominal.
That change can take place within each of us. That, I deem, is far more important than laws being changed.Private Reply to Kiran Relangi | | Jan 26, 2008 9:53 am | | re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
Anuradha Sarup | | Bravo Venkatesan and Deadmanswill! very well said. Private Reply to Anuradha Sarup | | Jan 26, 2008 3:13 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
7 Th Thinking Hat | | Reg disc. between V Iyengar and Charuhasan.
I agree with Charuhasan on the teeth and bones issue-- from a certain perspective.
Our instictual behaviour is to protect against a lasting damage as compared to a lesser damage. That is why a victim in a threateneing situation chooses to protect the bones and teeth. Not that it is a consious process like after a laboured arguments in court. It just happens that way. I said 'instictually'. This does not autotomatically transalate into saying 'Rape is sweet'
V Iyegar says'"...........Applying your logic, you can
think of asking Kushboo to stop appearing in public, ask
Sania Mirza to stop playing tennis and disappear behind a
veil, and ask Taslima Nasreen to stop writing and get out
of India – for what, in your words, should matter to
women are their teeth and bones and nothing else!...."
My Dear Iyengar, that is exactly what countless men and women are doing. Don't you agree? What else is most of the 'out of court settlements' are. In this country securing justice is so expensive and painfullly long process that going to court is often not an intelligent man's choice.
Can you ever fight a corrupt RTO? Ever tried to purchase a stamp paper without paying 'a little more'? Why many people choose not to report a theft case? I am personally of a case of PSU employee who chose not to persue a case of criminal assault on him because he was threatend, " take care of your teeange daughter'
'Teeth and bones' are not merely my body parts. They are what will available from my funeral pyer earlier than the court delivered justice.
That is regarding civil issues. What to say of a rape case?
Now we can start using "teeth and bones" as a paradigm. Private Reply to 7 Th Thinking Hat | | Jan 26, 2008 3:39 pm | | re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
7 Th Thinking Hat | | Daedmanswill make an interesting point. Rape is a more gruesome form of assault though motives may be different.
Our sense of justice is funny and lopesided. Female foeticide is a populistic topic. If our constitution prohibits gender based disparity, then how abortion is legal but female foetus killing is illegal? Law will not protect male foetus?
The point is: Talking about the 'rights to life of an unborn baby' is a boring topic. Law makers will discuss only 'juicy' matters. So it is very gratifying to talk about female foeticide and enact laws on it. By the same mindset we are 'excited and entertained' to talk about rape. But 'Assualt'? what is in it for me?
Likewise 'AntiDowry' will be a perinnially green topic. But which is girl willing to marry principled but poor man except in the movies of the sixties.
Are you now reminded of 'muslim poverty'?Private Reply to 7 Th Thinking Hat | | Jan 28, 2008 4:14 am | | re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
RVIyengar | | 7 Th Thinking Hat,
I always stand up for my rights and fight the system wherever it impinges on my basic rights. Period.
However, I feel you’re confusing a serious crime like rape with something like general corruption (‘fighting corrupt RTO’). There is a vast difference between a male RTO’s demanding bribe and his seeking to outrage the modesty of a woman. In the former, the RTO is just trying to grab a few bucks from you unlawfully, and in the latter he seeks to violate your personal space, your body, your life. There is a vast difference in the degree and nature of the crimes.
In other words, there is surely a lot of difference between someone trying to steal a few bucks from you and someone trying to murder you. Rape is akin to murder, for it is physical violence against an individual.
I’m afraid that you and Mr.Charuhasan choose to look at ‘rape’ as mere sexual intercourse. But it is much more than that. It is violation of one’s personal space, of one’s right to choice, of one’s fundamental right to “personal liberty”. It is akin to trespassing into another person’s life. It is extreme violence against a person – her/his body and mind.
Of late, the electronic media has been giving much attention and space to crimes against women in metros. If the resultant public outrage could put some good sense into at least a few prowling men, the purpose would be achieved.
In other words, the solution to such crimes against individuals lies in you and me standing up and making our voice heard, and fighting the perpetrators tooth and nail, not in acquiescing.
I’m afraid that your open apology for rapists would warm the cockles of some would-be rapists’ and womanizers’ hearts. They will only be glad to give your household a visit.Private Reply to RVIyengar | | Jan 28, 2008 9:11 am | | re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
7 Th Thinking Hat | | No Mr V Iyengar. I have no confusion.
My comments could be summarised in to two points.
1) The hopelessness of the legal system
2) Behavioural psycology of a victim under attack.
My ref. to RTO, etc is in a generic context. That was to illustrate what happens when we are powerless and the criminal is powerful. This does not mean I am equating corruption and rape.
To say that I made an open apology for rapists is same as saying that you made an active invitation to the rapist to make a household visit to me.
Statements made here must be interpreted within the context. Stretching beyond the context will only lead to misnterpretation- explantions-counter replies cycle. Such discussion will hijack the original subject of discussion and rather dominate it and distract from it.Private Reply to 7 Th Thinking Hat | | Jan 29, 2008 10:58 am | | re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
RVIyengar | | 7 Th Thinking Hat,
True, the common people “are powerless and the criminal is powerful”. However, of late, there have been a lot of cases where collective public effort and outrage at injustice have forced the powers-that-be to reopen cases and punish the “powerful”. To speak metaphorically, instead of cursing the darkness, let us light a candle.
By the way, sorry for getting personal in the last sentence of my previous comment. I was in two minds while writing that comment. However, I decided to go ahead with that because it is often easy to tell others to lose a few teeth instead of putting up a fight, but when it comes to us we will have second thoughts. Hence that sentence.
Recently I watched a Tamil movie “Pachai kili Muthu charam” on TV. The movie is about a medical rep who is taken for a ride by a money-fleecing gang that traps him into a situation and blackmails him into submission. When the hero finds out that the woman, whose reputation he was trying to save with his hard-earned money, belongs to the gang, he decides to take on them. Though the movie is glitzy and clumsy in patches, it has a message: Unless you stand up against crime, there is no salvation.Private Reply to RVIyengar | | Jan 29, 2008 11:04 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # | 
Vijay Nair | | Venky Sir,
Just a digression.
When you say that, I am reminded of Kamal's Mahanadi.Private Reply to Vijay Nair | | Jan 29, 2008 2:28 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
7 Th Thinking Hat | | V Iyengar says:".....However, of late, there have been a lot of cases......"
How may cases? Are we carried away by a few cases that we see on TV? The 'collectve ourtage' is sustained by TV news which are driven by TRPs. Or a 'minorities angle' which will give mileage for a certain political party. If your case will bring no TRP or political advantage, not even a stray dog will sniff at you.
I am not telling anybody to loose a few teeth. I am confessing that the average man is a toothless tiger. All the law, police, court, press, TV, Human rights activists etc may let you down if you don't fit in their agenda. Even your wife will not be with even for moral support.
Drawing inspiration from movie? Sorry, I am deflated by the real life stories of movie stars getting of the hook. 'The long arm of law' has released them! If you are a filmstar the whole industry has a big stake in you and that takes care of you. Ordinary Mr X should feel fortunate if he is sniffed by stray dogs!
Ligting a candle is such a bookish notion. Remeber the case of Satyendra Dubey or Manjunath Shunmugam? Now only their family lights a Diwa on thier death( read Murder) annivarsary.
The point is that, an expensive and slow judicial system, Corrrupt or inadequately equipped police and the Dada- neta-lala-babu combo- all of them make a formidable grid of landmines that if you trip on any one of them you will be a loser, even if all the other elements are in working condition. Individuals who fight against the system will be martyers who will not be remembered beyond their funeral.
Any housewife understands that. We can talk romantic concepts because we are typing on a keyboard anaymously (BTW No one is that ananymous. Big brother can track you down in no time.)
That is why the teeth and bones paradigm exists. It is a sad statement but a true one.Private Reply to 7 Th Thinking Hat | | Jan 29, 2008 5:50 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # | 
Marielena Alvarez | | Rape is not about sexual intercourse it is about control, domination and humiliation of another person in the most personal private way. Rape also exposes women to sexually transmitted diseases, some incurable and others that are fatal.
Rape of men occurs in some Middle Eastern countries, where unsuspecting foreigners are targeted. In the movie Deadly Justice (1985) The Rape of Richard Beck, which starred Richard Crenna, the matter is discussed in a way that may make you reconsider your position on whether a man can be raped.
Rape destroys the lives of women who live in countries where virginity is highly valued, such as in Muslim countries. In the early history of America, after a woman had been captured by Indians (Native Americans), no white man who knew, would touch her, regardless of whether she was raped, prior to being “rescued” and returned. She was stigmatized and would have to move where no one knew her to have a normal life. Women were armed and told to kill themselves rather than be captured by Indians. Some women returned to the tribes from which they were rescued, having found that they had more rights as a tribal member than in the "civilized" world (could not vote, own property or inherit, considered the property of their husbands, had no rights even if abused by their spouses). This is an issue in countries where woman do not have the same rights as men and traditional cultural views of women and their place in society.
In Eastern Europe, during the racial/ethnic/religious conflict between Christian and Muslims, Serbs and Croatian, some women found themselves pregnant with the child of the rapist and sought abortions or suicide rather than have the child of their enemy.
In the United States, a woman who is forced to have sexual intercourse without her permission may claim rape, even against her husband. It is pretty sick when a son has to pull his father off of his mother (in the case of a friend of mine), a case of domestic abuse which thankfully ended in divorce.
Sometimes in the courts, the sexual history of a woman is brought up to say she was "asking for it" by the way she dressed or had behaved in the past. A person under the influence of a drug slipped into their drink or who is intoxicated is not able to give consent. Some men gamble that she will not remember or will be too ashamed or embarrassed to press charges. Often women are "date raped" by a boyfriend or acquaintance, the man will not take no for an answer. Sometimes it is easer to let them do what they want and get it over with rather than to fight back. If she says no at any time and he forces her it is rape. No means NO ALWAYS!
Some problems come with how the media sensationalize and treat victims of rape and age of consent (in south and central America the age of consent is lower than in the US and even here it varies by state and age of the male vs. the female). Pornography may lead men to think women enjoy the activities that the women in these movies are paid to do perform, which is not necessarily the case. One can find pornography that makes the most bizarre seem pleasurable. Some men and women have rape or domination fantasies, these are sexual fetishes, BDSM (bondage-discipline, DOM-sub/slave and sadomasochism), not mainstream behaviour. True victims of rape; find it a nightmare rather than a fantasy. It is something that stays with you and pops up later in life when something triggers the memory.
Rape is a personal, private nightmare, even worse for a child. My sister was raped as a child (under the age of five), by a boy, both were under the age of consent. My father wanted the boy prosecuted, but his wife refused, the marriage ended and she took my sister from him. Any interrogation of children must be undertaken carefully, by trained professionals, to avoid traumatizing young victims. Fortunately my sister is able to talk about it and has a wonderful, understanding husband who treats her well. My older sister thinks intercourse with her husband is an obligation (out of lack of experience on both their parts?). Does a particular cultural or religious mindset reinforce these negative ideas? Europeans have more open with their attitudes toward sex than Americans, who still cling to outdated puritanical views.
Another woman, who was not very interested in intercourse with her husband, told him to go elsewhere to get his needs met. In couples counseling, it was suggested that her husband was a sex addict (untrue) and it all focused on his behaviour rather than a dual approach that may have revealed her secret. Later it was revealed that she had been molested by her father's younger brother. Her gentle understandably frustrated husband suspected but only learned the truth after they were in divorce proceedings. His daughter had observed her mother's reaction to a visit by the uncle, his unusual behaviour of kissing everyone on the mouth and inappropriate touching when giving chiropractic adjustments (never witnessed by the spouse). Therapy along with good communication could have helped but she may have been in denial or too ashamed and embarrassed to tell her husband of 20+ years.
Sexual incompatibility exists but is rarely if ever discussed. This may be one reason spouses go elsewhere to get their needs met, rather than force their partners and likely a major reason behind many divorces (it is not valid grounds for divorce, but should be), many save face by the option of irreconcilable differences, no fault divorces. This is not a solution to the problem of incompatibility, low sex drive (hormone imbalance, as the result of surgery or cancer treatment), previous abuse or rape.
Private Reply to Marielena Alvarez | | Jan 30, 2008 5:55 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
RVIyengar | | Marielena,
A very thought-provoking read. Hats off to you!Private Reply to RVIyengar | | Jan 31, 2008 1:55 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
RVIyengar | | Vijay,
Yes, Mahanadhi also has a similar theme (chit fund fraud), I guess. Haven’t seen the movie yet! :)
7 Th Thinking Hat,
There, you got emotional and introduced a lot of digressions. :) As consumer activists, we’ve won a few cases against a few unholy cartels, and out of that experience I speak.
Let me stay with the main argument. Agree with you that the “corrrupt or inadequately equipped police and the Dada- neta-lala-babu” make a formidable combo. However, they have not become too unwieldy yet. The very fact that the law and order situation in India, despite the usual percentage of crimes that you come across in any country, has not gone out of hand testifies to it.
As long as there are human beings on the planet there are bound to be crimes. The challenge before civilized mankind is how to reduce the level and degree of crimes and curb certain instinctual tendencies of men that pose a threat to the accepted norms of society.
One such crime is rape, which is the focus of our discussion here. Our argument here is: acquiescing never helps. Our view here is that advising women to accept forced sex to avoid physical injuries is preposterous.
We believe that women should stand up and take whatever support they could get and fight it out. That would usher in a new order. If you compare the status of women a few decades back to what it is today in India, you'll understand that women have achieved a lot by standing up against sexual discrimination and crimes.
It would be better if you clearly express your views on the original post by Mr. Charuhasan instead of bringing a host of unnecessary issues to this topic.
PS:
As for your digressions:
I understand your cynicism. However, I choose to focus on the positive aspects of a situation.
You see the media campaigns (a few though they are) as TRP-driven exercises. I’m happy with the media for whatever they have done, despite their constraints (business interests, etc.), for creating whatever social awareness they have created. Certainly but for the sustained media campaign, certain cases like the Priyadarshini Mattoo case, Jessica Lal murder case, Alwar rape case would not have seen the light of the day and got justice.
There have been umpteen instances where dowry harassment victims have got justice due to local media campaign. Human trafficking has come to an end due to media exposure. Not all these cases involve celebrities. I applaud the media for contributing their mite to creating awareness and for showing the people that there is another avenue for them to make themselves heard. However, much needs to be done still. May be, when like me many citizens focus on the constructive role of the media, the reverse TRP rating would see them focus more on such cases.
I wouldn’t say that I drew inspiration from the movie cited above. I cited the example of the movie because it supports my belief: i.e. every individual has to stand up against crime and injustice. By the way, there is nothing wrong in drawing inspiration from a movie if it can help someone like you shed your sense of hopelessness and skepticism. If movies like Taare Zameen Par could make at least a few people think about the plight of the dyslexic children, the purpose is served.
RE: Your words, “Lighting a candle is a such a bookish notion.”
Really! May be it is a bookish notion for people like you. For those of us who are making a positive difference in our vicinities, it is not!
Not that I believe that I can change the whole nation or world. I believe that I can make a difference by fighting injustice within my sphere of influence. As an individual I can do this much and I have done thus far. And, I believe that every individual can do this. One of my professors who introduced me to consumer activism is my inspiration. He has done a lot, fought many a pitched battles against forces and is doing fine. There are many individuals like him who have been doing what they could in a small way. This is what I meant by lighting a candle. It is people like these who make a difference – not the whining and the doomsday prophets who are dime a dozen
RE: Your words, “Remeber the case of Satyendra Dubey or Manjunath Shunmugam? Now only their family lights a Diwa on thier death( read Murder) annivarsary.” “Individuals who fight against the system will be martyers who will not be remembered beyond their funeral.”
You look at the few people who stood up against crime and lost their lives. And you fear for your life. You are cynical enough to think that even your wife will not give you moral support. Understandable!
Instead, look up to the remaining majority who have stood up against crime and injustice and are the ‘living’ role-models.
RE: Your words, “We can talk romantic concepts because we are typing on a keyboard anaymously.”
You sure are hiding behind a “Hat” and typing anonymously! :) Well, it has become a romantic thing with a few to dismiss everything as “romantic concepts”; and all that they have to offer in return is arm-chair blaming of everything and everyone. However, your joining a network like “Legal Needs” shows that you still have not lost hopes. Keep it up!Private Reply to RVIyengar | | Jan 31, 2008 2:55 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
7 Th Thinking Hat | | Here is another case study of how the system works.
This iten appeared in today's Times of India
Whistle-blower’s family wait for justice
Vijay Pratap Singh | TNN
Allahabad: After Manjunath, here is another ‘whistle-blower’ waiting for justice. Although the alleged killers of the Indian Oil Corporation official, who had launched a drive against oil mafia in the state, were punished by law, those involved in the murder of deputy jailer Narendra Dwivedi are roaming scotfree. His family, on the other hand, is still waiting for the compensation despite the fact that Dwivedi was given the President’s medal posthumously.
Dwivedi was shot in Meerut on August 7, 2007, for reportedly his efforts to expose the nexus between criminals and corrupt politicians. Even senior officials of police department had then accepted the involvement of some jail officials in the crime.
Police had lodged FIR against ten persons including senior jail superintendent, Meerut, Yadvendra Shukla and deputy jailers Avinash Chauhan, and RP Singh. The last two were even arrested but got bail from the high court.
Dwivedi was shot near the Meerut jail by three hardcore criminals who had escaped from Bijnore jail on while he was waiting for his wife in his car. The jail department had recommended for Rs 10 lakh compensation for his family. But, let alone the compensation amount, Dwivedi’s family is yet to get even the gratuity and GPF amount, and the extra-ordinary pension. His father, DR Dwivedi, has been running from pillar to post to get justice for his son.
While narrating the stories of the Meerut police’s apathy, he just breaks down. “They did not mention the report of the surveillance in the court which ultimately gave benefit to the accused Avinash Chauhan and RK Singh and they managed to get bail from the high court despite the fact that the senior police officials, during a press conference, had accepted their involvement in the murder of his son. The police that time claimed that they had clinching evidence through surveillance against the deputy jailers,” he said, demanding a CBI inquiry in the case.
“My son has laid his life fighting against criminals but the state government refused to give service to his wife, even after the recommendation from the jail department,” he said, adding that the family has yet not received any compensation from the government.
Besides, the files related to his gratuity, GPF and pension have been gathering dust despite the lapse of over six months.Private Reply to 7 Th Thinking Hat | | Feb 02, 2008 1:27 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
RVIyengar | | Hope the publication of the news-item prods some Good Samaritan(s) to take up the case with the authorities and help the family get justice.
At Peace, At Last...
(Excerpts)
Courtesy: Outlook, 4 February 2008
There is something surreal about asking a mother about the day her three-and-a-half-year-old daughter Saleha was snatched from her arms, her skull smashed to the ground. March 2002 will always remain a month of horrors for Bilkis Bano. Familiar neighbours went on to gangrape the pregnant Bilkis and slaughter eight members of her family, including her mother who was also raped. The facts of the case are a matter of public record. So we chose instead to ask Bilkis what life is like today. "It's been very tiring for two days. We have talked to the media endlessly, answering questions.I have never faced this before."
The good news is that Bilkis only faced the media onslaught on January 21, when a Mumbai special court sentenced 11 accused to life imprisonment for the gang-rape and murders. Her case, for once, was intelligently handled and not allowed to degenerate into a circus. Away from the public glare, it moved slowly but consistently. Today, it appears quite a feat for a woman to have fought a case for six years against all odds, in the face of a hostile state government and police force. It requires nerve and resolve to face up to the men who brutalised you and your family, leaving everyone for dead. Bilkis managed this with a lot of support from individuals, the Muslim community, some activists (all of whom have chosen to keep a low profile), a high-profile lawyer, Harish Salve, who didn't charge a fee for arguing in the Supreme Court that her case be transferred out of Gujarat, and the CBI which made an exception in reinvestigating her case (the only Gujarat riot case where this happened). There was also the support of her husband, Yaqub Rasool Patel.
On March 3, 2002, the day her family was killed and she was left for dead, Bilkis hid in a cave. After 48 hours, she approached a tribal village in Dahod district and pretended to be a Hindu woman, raped by Muslims. They gave her water, food and clothes. She then went to a police station. The policemen wrote a complaint but refused to write the names of the accused (one of these policemen got two years' imprisonment in the verdict delivered last week). Bilkis, like several thousand other Muslims, then landed up in the Godhra relief camp. Twenty days later, she was lucky to find her husband Yaqub at the same camp (he was not at home when the family began their flight from their village in Dahod district).
Today, Bilkis and Yaqub are sitting in a Delhi home. Their children are playing. Hajra, the child Bilkis gave birth to a few months after the massacre, is smiling coyly—she is used to being treated as special. Bilkis and Yaqub laugh when they talk about people trying to attach their names to her struggle and give the impression that they were behind the verdict. Says Bilkis: "Those who helped me were quietly present at the Delhi press conference. They don't want publicity. But an impression is being created by better-known activists that they have helped me. I want you to tell everyone that I don't know these people who are talking about me on TV."
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080204&fname=Bilkis+%28F%29&sid=1&pn=1
PS:
It is not easy to fight against the system, I agree. One needs lots of patience and support. However, it is incumbent upon concerned and caring individuals to do whatever they could to stem the rot.Private Reply to RVIyengar | | Feb 07, 2008 7:16 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Make your comments on Rape | # |
charuhasan | | From: Anuradha Sarup
Dear Sir,
I feel if you believe in something you should have the courage to say it out loud. Since you are the one who started this debate on a public network it is incorrect of you to
1. now start blaming other people for expressing their views as openly as you did and
2. For going into private mail communication instead of keeping the debate open in public view.
For the record I would like to say I am in almost 100% agreement with Mr. Venkatesa Iyegar as I have also mentioned on the debate forum itself.
:-) No harsh feelings at all but I would respect you more if you were to put your mail and my reply to it on the public discussion instead of me doing so....
Regards
Anuradha
writes:
> Applying your logic, you can think of asking Kushboo to stop appearing in public, ask Sania Mirza to stop playing tennis and disappear behind a veil, and ask Taslima Nasreen to stop writing and get out of India – for what, in your words, should matter to women are their teeth and bones and nothing else!
>
>
> Dear Madam,
> I have not been a male chavunist for quite some time while I admit I was born in a society that regouraosly practiced it. The above statement of Mr. Venkatesa Iyegar shows the attitude of average men against such women who do not practice the Hindu and Muslim code of conduct that women are brainwashed into. You might by now have ubderstood why wrote you a private mail instead of posting it public. I assure you that I am not sared of few Iyengars or the muslim fundamentalists who assaulted Taslima. If I do not use harsh language against inhuman conduct it is because I hate to indulge in mental vilolence even against social criminals. I leave it to your good sense to make public or not even this mail. No harsh feelings
>Regards
>charu
My final opinion is 99 out of 100 men are male chauvinists but 100 out of 100 women qre also male chavunists.
Private Reply to charuhasan | | |
| |
| |
