Ram Jethmalani and AP Singh point to a greater malaise

 While it is the expected of a lawyer to win a favourable verdict for his/her client, one would expect that certain ethics and niceties are maintained in the process. Recent examples, however, point towards a different reality. Ram Jethmalani, the defence counsel for Asaram Bapu in the sexual assault case on a 16-year-old girl, argued on Tuesday that the girl was suffering from a chronic disease “which draws a woman to a man”. Even if one were to go by this bizarre argument, Jethmalani may have overlooked the fact that the sexual history of a victim of rape cannot be brought to defend the accused. This statement has come even after medical tests conducted on the girl concluded that she was of sound mental health. Such demeaning and below-the-belt statements are uncalled for and are aimed only at smearing the character of the victim.
Jethmalani’s comment comes a few days after AP Singh, the defense lawyer for two of the four accused in the December 16 gang rape case, said that the verdict was ‘politically motivated’ and he would burn alive his daughter if she were to roam with a man at night or have pre-marital sex. That Singh made this observation after a Saket court awarded death sentence to the four accused is important and it seems like he was suggesting that the 23-year-old paramedical student, was out of her house ‘with a man’ at the wrong hour of the day.

Lawyers are free to choose their clients and defend their case in any court. Many a times the legal acumen of an astute lawyer can win the case in favour of his/her client. However, it reflects a lack of respect towards the legal profession and poor work ethics of the lawyer if he/she resorts to any measure to see that the case is won. The statements made by both Singh and Jethmalani point to two aspects. One, to ensure that women are respected and are given their space in society, it is important to change the mindset of men. Two, there should be mechanisms within the legal system that do not lend itself to vilification of victims of sexual assault and rape. It is a welcome move by the Bar Council of Delhi to take exception of Singh’s statement and ask for a clarification. The Bar Council of India also should take note of the insensitive statement made by Jethmalani and take appropriate action. Further traumatisation of victims, be it by the investigating officers or by legal luminaries, must stop. This is an important step towards achieving justice and reducing crimes, especially against women.

Mumbai gangrape: Little hope for women in India

                                                                                                                 AP photo

The August 22 Mumbai gangrape was shocking. What were more shocking were the reactions that poured in.
If anyone thought that women were safe in India after the massive protests following the December 16 gangrape in Delhi last year, I’ll blame the prince charming who kissed back to life these Snow Whites (they were better off sleeping). For various reasons, our public spaces are not going to be any safer for women in the near future, unless there is some drastic change — and frankly, nothing is in sight.
The administration has reacted in an almost textbook fashion. Maharashtra home minister RR Patil’s suggestion to send the police with every woman journalist working alone or in isolated places betrays an agonising lethargy shown towards an application of mind. Why can’t the home minister ensure that ‘isolated places’ are not the dens for anti-social elements? Why wasn’t the mills and surrounding area, notorious for its drug pushers, etc, not better policed?
The suspects are being pursued and in all likelihood they will be caught. What after that? Jayanto’s Tooingin in the August 24 Hindustan Times very succinctly conveys at least two things: One, the arrogance of the culprits who care two hoots for the ‘tough’ laws and know that the speed limit for ‘fast-track courts’ are not-above-20kms/hr. Second, the helplessness the reader seeing the cartoon.
The media also needs to get its act right. Reactions of horror, almost presuming that until then everything was hunky-dory, is being unfair to the many women who have to face various forms of abuse, perhaps on a daily basis, but do not reach the media’s ‘horror’ scale qualifying to be ‘news’.
Unfortunately, there is no magic pill or a spell that can get things bright starting tomorrow. But there are things that can be done, small steps that can lead to a greater change. The average politician who cries that things should change should lead from the front. For starters, let them come together and pass the Women’s Reservation Bill. This might not stop rapes or make public spaces safer for women but it will sure be a big step towards reaching that goal. There are more steps that can be taken: women’s safety is appallingly low not because for want of ideas, but for want of a will to do so.
Until then, it’s not a sunny day for women in India’s cities, towns and villages. To borrow from John Lennon (and tamper with a beautiful line): ‘You may say I'm a pessimist / But I'm not the only one’.

Media's love for 'branding' victims

The media — be it the print, broadcast or Internet — has a social responsibility to the general public it serves. While great care is often taken to ensure that this responsibility is maintained, there are times when they are flaunted with no apology.

The December 16 gang rape of a paramedic in Delhi greatly shook the nation and saw unprecedented protests in many parts of the country. The rape of a five-year-old in Delhi, a few days ago, along with other reports of rape and police insensitivity, has produced similar anger and protests. Posed with a dilemma of not being able to disclose the names of rape victims (as it is a punishable offence) and the challenge to highlight the above mentioned two cases — one does not understand why these two cases — media houses lining Delhi’s Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg and other places decided to ‘name’ the victim. Thus the December 16 gang rape victim got the names: Abhaya, Nirbhaya, Amaanat, among others and the five-year-old was christened Gudiya and Masoom. While on the face of it it appears to be an innocent and ‘helpful’ move, this nom de guerre is prompted more by news desk compulsions — a name, even an assumed one, makes good copy.
Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code and the Norms of Journalistic Conduct of the Press Council of India prohibits the publishing of the name of a rape victim; publishing it is a punishable offence. This anonymity of rape victims poses a great challenge to the media. This was fine as long as the number of rape cases being reported were far from few. But of late, with a sharp spike in the number of rape cases being reported and with media presence much greater than what it used to be a few years ago, this faceless, nameless identity posed a problem for the media.
The most essential aspect before getting a product out in the market, and one which plays a crucial role in its success, is its branding. A product with a catchy name is more likely to be a hit than a product with a stale, unexceptional name. When it comes to the reportage of news relating to incidents of rape, some media houses tend to take this approach. Often this ‘branding’ of a rape victim is done with the excuse that it will help in furthering the cause of the victim, sensitising the public about the issue and serves a greater purpose of bringing tougher laws. This is as poor an excuse as it can get. Such ‘branding’ or commodification of a victim might help in giving attractive headlines, snazzy news packages and help in boosting sales/TRPs.
By using such disingenuous euphemisms the media cocks a snook at the law of the land and more importantly dehumanises a person who has already been subject of brutality. It is altogether another argument on whether the name of a victim should be made public. Minister of state for human resource development Shashi Tharoor, after the December 16 Delhi gang rape, rightly wrote on Twitter that “she was a human being w/a name, not just a symbol”. He was arguing for naming the victim (if the parents were for it) and honouring the victim as a real person.Hewlett-Packard president and CEO Margaret Cushing Whitman’s view that “When people use your brand name as a verb, that is remarkable” might be good for a product and business. But to apply the same logic to sensitive issues like rape/molestation is unfortunate. To say that such a pattern of reportage is cruelly insensitive is an understatement. The fourth estate, as much as it is touted to be a mirror of the society, should be sensible enough to know where to draw the line. The difference between responsible journalism and sensationalism is blurred in these cases.
How naïve of William Shakespeare to have written: ‘What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.’
(An edited version of this appeared in the Hindustan Times on April 25)