The last few days, a few of my friends from India and overseas have been openly expressing their views, both for and against the BBC documentary on Nirbhaya. I was also a participant in one thread posted by a friend on the subject. The other topic that popped up recently was about Shreya Singhal.
The nation was horror struck when Nirbhaya incident happened, and the nation again reacted when a documentary on her was made by a person and then aired by BBC.
To start with, let me say that I watched the documentary. It is a moving film, absolutely sticking to the facts, and I could not find a single statement denigrating Indians and Indian society as a whole in the documentary.
A constant theme from those who objected to it was that BBC had a “mischievous” motive. I also felt that way for some time initially before I saw the documentary. However, after I saw it, I knew that to allude to such was ridiculous. Another constant theme from those who objected to the documentary was that even Britain has such horrific crimes, and why did the lady not make a documentary about rapists there and interview them etc.
Now, when an independent film producer from Britain came along years ago and made a fine picture on Mahatma Gandhi, we all applauded and watched the movie – it showed historical facts, there was no bias against India. The movie went on to win Oscars. The movie was all about the positives of a man, an Indian, and his greatness. I think many of our parliamentarians and state legislators actually became aware of a man called Mahatma only after that movie. We never asked why the British chap who made the movie, did not first make one about great historical figures in his own country before getting on to Mahatma.
Now, another independent person comes from the UK, makes a documentary sticking to facts on a horrific crime in India that shook the nation for some time. This time around, our Home Minister rejects it. Why? When we, as a nation lapped up with unbridled glee, good stuff that was shown about Mahatma, why are we displaying complete immaturity when a negative incident is also shown truthfully? As for folks who argue that the lady should have made a documentary on rapists in Britain first, I pose a simple question - " would you say that Sir Richard Attenborough should have made a couple of films about legends in his home country, UK, before turning his eyes on Mahatma ?"
Many folks who have seen the documentary, also truly believe that it will bring about a sense of shame in the nation, when it comes to appalling lack of gender equality in India. I am a bit hesitant to accept such simple conclusions quickly.
My view point is that India, as an aspiring modern nation, does not have any sense of shame at all. It suffers from a complete absence of it. This view of mine may appear controversial, and some may not accept it. To such folks, I would say : “kindly pause and consider these” :
- India never showed any sense of shame when 4000 were slaughtered on the streets of Delhi in 1984, when 1000 people were killed in Gujarat in 2002, when 5000 were killed in Nellie in 1983, and when such thousands of numbers included women and children, and in some cases, reportedly even unborn babies.
- A zillion documentaries have been made on such incidents. India shows no sense of shame that barely a handful have been arrested in such crimes, fewer still have been convicted and actually none has been hanged for collectively over 10,000 innocent lives snuffed out in these 3 riots in the recent past. The killers, probably hundreds of them, still roam free. Leaders who “led” the killers have been able to dodge the system for over 30 years now.
How can I ever get convinced that a nation which has shown no sense of shame in such horrific crimes, will suddenly undergo a dramatic turnaround and develop a sense of shame, just because a solitary woman code named “Nirbhaya” was brutally raped and murdered ?
In any case, I believe that a country need not demonstrate a sense of shame – a country should demonstrate a sense of purpose, and that is better than a sense of shame, to progress.
There is a perception, to a large degree rooted in individual experiences that India is a country that is completely unsafe for women. The country is so vast and complex at many levels, that it is very difficult to discuss with a Western mind, that usually sees a country in a black or white shade. India needs to manage both reality and perception. Reality is within our control - changing laws, imposing strict law and order, exemplary punishment for folks indulging in crimes against women etc. Perception management should start right away.
Now, let me move on to another Delhi girl - Shreya Singhal. She is hardly 21 years old. Coincidentally, she is also a Delhi girl, and a law school student, and a bright one at that, if I may add. This girl, all of 24, took it upon herself, when she was barely 21, to file a "public interest litigation" in the highest court of India, when 2 innocent girls in Mumbai were harassed there by local partymen for some innocuous comments in facebook. The girls were prosecuted under section 66-A of Information technology act, which in many people's view was a draconian act that curbed people's freedom of expression in social media.
This 24 year old law student possessed the courage of conviction, and had the support of her family members to take the case in Supreme Court. To cut a story short, 2 days ago, India's highest court, threw section 66A out, clearly stating that it was against freedom of speech and expression.
This is great news. Rape happens all over the world, and extremely violent rapes happen everywhere. It is a crime, banned by law. There are unfortunate victims of rape everywhere. India treats rape as a crime, and its legal procedure needs to be tightened. It justice system is lethargic and needs to move its wheels much faster. That is for sure.
At the same time, India poses no restriction even to 21 year old girls to fight in the highest court of the land against a law, when it comes into conflict with fundamental rights to both men and women. To my knowledge, there would be very few cases in the world of an apex court of a country treating a public interest litigation filed by a 21 year old girl seriously and rendering a verdict scrapping a law. Probably the first such in the world.
I believe that India need not hang its head in shame over Nirbhaya, but, instead tell the world through words and deeds that it is bringing in radical change in its law and order & judicial mechanism to deal with such cases. Hanging its head in shame will have few takers.
On the other hand, I would say that India can rightfully hold its head high with pride on the way its justice system dealt with a plea by Shreya Singhal. Indian government should hire the same lady who made BBC documentary on Nirbhaya and ask her to produce a documentary on the case won by Shreya and show to the world. I am sure BBC will oblige.
The nation was horror struck when Nirbhaya incident happened, and the nation again reacted when a documentary on her was made by a person and then aired by BBC.
To start with, let me say that I watched the documentary. It is a moving film, absolutely sticking to the facts, and I could not find a single statement denigrating Indians and Indian society as a whole in the documentary.
A constant theme from those who objected to it was that BBC had a “mischievous” motive. I also felt that way for some time initially before I saw the documentary. However, after I saw it, I knew that to allude to such was ridiculous. Another constant theme from those who objected to the documentary was that even Britain has such horrific crimes, and why did the lady not make a documentary about rapists there and interview them etc.
Now, when an independent film producer from Britain came along years ago and made a fine picture on Mahatma Gandhi, we all applauded and watched the movie – it showed historical facts, there was no bias against India. The movie went on to win Oscars. The movie was all about the positives of a man, an Indian, and his greatness. I think many of our parliamentarians and state legislators actually became aware of a man called Mahatma only after that movie. We never asked why the British chap who made the movie, did not first make one about great historical figures in his own country before getting on to Mahatma.
Now, another independent person comes from the UK, makes a documentary sticking to facts on a horrific crime in India that shook the nation for some time. This time around, our Home Minister rejects it. Why? When we, as a nation lapped up with unbridled glee, good stuff that was shown about Mahatma, why are we displaying complete immaturity when a negative incident is also shown truthfully? As for folks who argue that the lady should have made a documentary on rapists in Britain first, I pose a simple question - " would you say that Sir Richard Attenborough should have made a couple of films about legends in his home country, UK, before turning his eyes on Mahatma ?"
Many folks who have seen the documentary, also truly believe that it will bring about a sense of shame in the nation, when it comes to appalling lack of gender equality in India. I am a bit hesitant to accept such simple conclusions quickly.
My view point is that India, as an aspiring modern nation, does not have any sense of shame at all. It suffers from a complete absence of it. This view of mine may appear controversial, and some may not accept it. To such folks, I would say : “kindly pause and consider these” :
- India never showed any sense of shame when 4000 were slaughtered on the streets of Delhi in 1984, when 1000 people were killed in Gujarat in 2002, when 5000 were killed in Nellie in 1983, and when such thousands of numbers included women and children, and in some cases, reportedly even unborn babies.
- A zillion documentaries have been made on such incidents. India shows no sense of shame that barely a handful have been arrested in such crimes, fewer still have been convicted and actually none has been hanged for collectively over 10,000 innocent lives snuffed out in these 3 riots in the recent past. The killers, probably hundreds of them, still roam free. Leaders who “led” the killers have been able to dodge the system for over 30 years now.
How can I ever get convinced that a nation which has shown no sense of shame in such horrific crimes, will suddenly undergo a dramatic turnaround and develop a sense of shame, just because a solitary woman code named “Nirbhaya” was brutally raped and murdered ?
In any case, I believe that a country need not demonstrate a sense of shame – a country should demonstrate a sense of purpose, and that is better than a sense of shame, to progress.
There is a perception, to a large degree rooted in individual experiences that India is a country that is completely unsafe for women. The country is so vast and complex at many levels, that it is very difficult to discuss with a Western mind, that usually sees a country in a black or white shade. India needs to manage both reality and perception. Reality is within our control - changing laws, imposing strict law and order, exemplary punishment for folks indulging in crimes against women etc. Perception management should start right away.
Now, let me move on to another Delhi girl - Shreya Singhal. She is hardly 21 years old. Coincidentally, she is also a Delhi girl, and a law school student, and a bright one at that, if I may add. This girl, all of 24, took it upon herself, when she was barely 21, to file a "public interest litigation" in the highest court of India, when 2 innocent girls in Mumbai were harassed there by local partymen for some innocuous comments in facebook. The girls were prosecuted under section 66-A of Information technology act, which in many people's view was a draconian act that curbed people's freedom of expression in social media.
This 24 year old law student possessed the courage of conviction, and had the support of her family members to take the case in Supreme Court. To cut a story short, 2 days ago, India's highest court, threw section 66A out, clearly stating that it was against freedom of speech and expression.
This is great news. Rape happens all over the world, and extremely violent rapes happen everywhere. It is a crime, banned by law. There are unfortunate victims of rape everywhere. India treats rape as a crime, and its legal procedure needs to be tightened. It justice system is lethargic and needs to move its wheels much faster. That is for sure.
At the same time, India poses no restriction even to 21 year old girls to fight in the highest court of the land against a law, when it comes into conflict with fundamental rights to both men and women. To my knowledge, there would be very few cases in the world of an apex court of a country treating a public interest litigation filed by a 21 year old girl seriously and rendering a verdict scrapping a law. Probably the first such in the world.
I believe that India need not hang its head in shame over Nirbhaya, but, instead tell the world through words and deeds that it is bringing in radical change in its law and order & judicial mechanism to deal with such cases. Hanging its head in shame will have few takers.
On the other hand, I would say that India can rightfully hold its head high with pride on the way its justice system dealt with a plea by Shreya Singhal. Indian government should hire the same lady who made BBC documentary on Nirbhaya and ask her to produce a documentary on the case won by Shreya and show to the world. I am sure BBC will oblige.
No comments:
Post a Comment