Why India Needs To SCREAM!

PHOTO CREDIT HERE 

Dear Advocate Devika Singh,

Way back in 1997, the honourable Indian Supreme Court set up Vishaka Guidelines which you have commented upon in your blog 

However, it is important to remind ourselves on this subject of What is sexual harassment?

The honourable Indian Supreme Court has clearly defined it as under:

Sexual harassment includes such unwelcome sexually determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as:

a) physical contact and advances;

b) a demand or request for sexual favors;

c) sexually colored remarks;

d) showing pornography;

e) any other unwelcome physical verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

Courtesy: Wikipedia: 

In the present case, with regard to acquitting Mohammad Farooqui in the case filed against him for rape by a complainant residing in the United States, your powerful poem moved me to write this email to you. You have touched upon the many times and the multiple ways patriarchy which propagate power of male gender homo-sapiens  commonly known as man, in our society and empowered them to use power, physical, mental, psychological, over women. Thus, over ages, society wired in by this insidious crime against women, has got away with the worst because, the system is too deeply entrenched in the minds of men, and women alike, prompting them to bring up their daughters to be victims and sons to be forever ‘right’ even as a perpetrator.

I have read and gone through the entire proceedings and the content of the email. I came across this on FaceBook via my good friend Aditi Ray.

Frankly, the email is misleading sometimes, and has thus been used by the Bench of Justices S.A. Bobde and L. Nageswara Rao (please to note, there was no woman Judge on this panel, which is unacceptable when the case is about rape), to acquit the accused director of Piplee Live, Mohammad Farooqui for the 2^nd time in January 2018, after he was acquitted in the High Court in 2015. The grounds cited are evident from her email – “She said I love you and kissed him- 

Explanation 2,. Sec 375 defined Rape in the following Link 

It clearly states:

“375. A man is said to commit "rape" who except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the five following descriptions:  

Firstly. Against her will.      

Secondly. Without her consent.   

Thirdly. With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her in fear of death, or of hurt.   

Fourthly. With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.         

Fifthly. With or without her consent, when she is under fourteen years of age.

Explanation. Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.  

Exception. Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under thirteen years of age, is not rape.”

Mohammad Farooqui is guilty on all grounds stated above. She did not give consent. In fact, she continued to say no, even as he pushed himself harder on her.

It is yet to establish, whether a thorough in depth inquiry had been made on the content of the email, for the complainant does appear to be under duress and even confused in her own head to have made statements that did not tally throughout. Yet, picking up statements like ‘I love you’ or ‘making drinks for him’, ‘they were friends’ ‘faked orgasm’ when she says earlier that this was the first time, and coming to conclusion that the complainant had given consent is drawing a conclusion too soon. Was the complainant questioned to find out her background, whether she was a victim of child sexual abuse in the past, or why she shot off an email that was confusing in content? And most importantly, why Mohammad Farooqui, guilty on two accounts – first, for cheating on his wife, in their house, right under her nose, and then secondly, committing rape when his wife was out of the house, is still acquitted, leaves much to be desired. The case seems to be hurried to conclusion, favouring the man, in an all male Bench, with no desire to open and scrutinize the case, once again, since it was brought forward after the High Court had passed its judgment in favour of Mohammad Farooqui. If the complainant appealed to the honourable Supreme Court, then was it not the duty of the SC to relook at the case from a fresh angle, without quickly dismissing it as ‘High Court’ has taken the most measured and well-thought out decision, and so the case is closed and The Supreme Court does not wish to open the case again?

If justice be done, then, the case must be reopened and scrutinized.

(a)  More inputs on the content of the email is required and deciphering its true meaning, which to me is unclear, since there is a lot written between the lines which has not been taken account of.

(b)  Mohammad Farooqui must be bought to task on clear evidence of a double deceit, one against his wife and the other against the complainant by forcing himself against her will even though she constantly said no to it; for un-natural oral sex with the victim and then penetration which makes the entire procedure tantamount to rape.

(c)  Consultation with Psychologists and persons working with Child Sexual Abuse victims for a more in-depth meaning of the email. There is a need for far more public discourse and involvement to garner strength over the case which is shoved under the carpet by the honourable Supreme Court saying they do not wish to re-look at the decision made by the Mumbai High Court, as they are quite sure that the conclusion arrived at is after profound deliberations on the said case at hand.

(d)  Bench must consist of woman as judge along with gender male judge to make the judgment acceptable.

(e)  The Supreme Court must answer why it is flaunting its own judgment and guidelines set up by Vishaka Guidelines and also Explanation 2, Sec 375

A time has come that India needs to SCREAM loudly about atrocities against women and the law-less-ness that prevails in our country over Rape which is rampant across the country and goes unreported at most times and dismissed if brought before Law of the country.

Precisely why, the complainant returned abroad to file an FIR, because, within India, the custodians of law and order, the Public Police Service are reluctant to do so.

Mohammad Farooqui may be free man, but is a perpetrator on the prowl. He is symbolic of the decadence of a society that thrives on lies and male power to dominate and subjugate woman they wish to objectify to meet the carnal desires of their oft deranged minds - their mother, sister, daughter, wife, and girlfriend.   

Case Study: Does Violence Against Women Begin At Home

Madhavi is in the last year of School. Her board exams will start in March. She is under considerable pressure of studies at this moment. But she is almost at breaking point and cannot concentrate in her studies as there are unmentionable problems at home which are driving to the point of suicide. Her neighbour, a strong and dependable girl, Nisha, who is also a good friend and studies in the same school, has found that Madhavi is behaving very peculiarly. One day, at about 10.30 am, about an hour before they are about to leave for school, she goes to Madhavi’s house. Normally at that hour, Madhavi is at home alone with her father, who works with Bombay’s Local Train services. Her mother leaves for work by 9 am.

On arriving at Madhavi’s house, Nisha is about to ring the door bell, but has stopped short. She can hear a whimpering sound inside. It is Madhavi’s voice. Nisha puts her ear to the door and is surprised to hear Madhavi plead –

“Daddy, no! Daddy, no, please no…” between tears. Nisha is curious. She tries to catch the sound of a slap, or a beating. Was Madhavi’s being beaten by her father? But no, there is no such sound at all, except the whimpering and the same haunting Daddy, no! Daddy, no, please no. Nisha decides to leave but not before she has made up her mind to confront Madhavi about this. Inside the bus, on the way to School, Nisha tells Madhavi, she has some wonderful news to tell her but she can tell her this, only after School. They must meet after they have returned. Madhavi is excited.

After school, the two girls meet for a walk. It is not uncommon for the two girls to take a walk after they return from school. But today, is different.

“What was happening inside the house this morning when I came to meet you at 10.30 this morning?” Nisha asks directly coming to the point right away.

Madhavi becomes defensive. “You came? You should have rung the bell!”

“I would have but for the fact that I could hear you crying inside and pleading - Daddy, no! Daddy, no, please no!”
Madhavi suddenly became very scared. The colour left her face and she hurried to leave. Nisha grabbed her hand insisting that she tell the truth before she flees. Madhavi breaks down in tears. It is perhaps, the first time she has cried about herself in front of someone.

“Nisha,” she blurts out as if unable to hold the fact any longer, “Daddy is forcing me to have sex with him!”

The words out, Nisha and Madhavi are dumb struck. Nisha continues to look ahead as her fingers and heart freeze while Madhavi continues to cry.

“On and on, it has been more than a year……” Madhavi adds, wiping the tears off her eyes.

Once in change of the situation, Nisha, pleads with Madhavi to disclose this to her mother as soon as possible. Madhavi is scared. What if her mother does not believe her? What if her father accuses her of lying? What if he threatens to leave them? But, Nisha is insistent. Madhavi must end this by telling her mother about it. And if Madhavi finds it so hard to say it, then she threatens to tell Madhavi’s mother herself.

Madhavi is really scared now. Under no circumstance can that happen. The next day, between sobs, she tells her mother about what has been happening in the house for the last one and a half years. Madhavi’s mother is astonished and angry. Was it not what happened earlier too with Madhavi’s elder sister, Lata as well? In fact, that is why to take Lata away from her husband, she had sent Lata to Bangalore to pursue her studies. But that was two years ago. She could hardly believe that after the fight and the apology from her husband, that he should continue his evil acts on their younger daughter as well.

She confronted her husband. He flew into a fit of anger. He screamed at his wife and taking his wallet, he left the house threatening to never return again.

The last blow had been dealt out. Had not Madhavi feared this all along? What was she going to do? What would her mother do? Would she not blame her for indirectly chasing her father out of the house?

She dashed to Nisha – “See, what you have done? Why did you force me to tell my mother? Now, my father has left the house!”

“Let him! He will return shortly. Where will he go?” Nisha was cool.
And so it was, that after the hue and cry, Madhavi’s father returned home after two hours but continued to make everyone suffer the consequences of making public his evil deed, by stopping to talk to everyone in the house, stopping to eat in the house, etc, etc. But as all abusers will, he finally gave up all his psychological blackmailing to return to normal. Another example of violence against women, springing from within the safety of what we call a home, ended.

But this time, I have a few questions to ask, the first being –

Does violence against women begin at home?

Second, are women in household an accomplice to this violence?

Okay, given the fact this is a Case Study of a magnitude that we think rarely happens in all families in India, the UNIFEM report quotes - “Violence against women and girls continues unabated in every continent, country and culture. It takes a devastating toll on women’s lives, on their families, and on society as a whole. Most societies prohibit such violence — yet the reality is that too often, it is covered up or tacitly condoned. — UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, 8 March 2007 (See http://www.unifem.org/campaigns/vaw/facts_figures.php)

My second question is more pertinent. Given the fact that violence is there, and in many cases it begins are home, is it not the woman’s responsibility to ensure the safety of their children? In the above case, what is wrong with Madhavi’s mother? Why was she so naïve? Her elder daughter had had to face the same plight vis-à-vis her husband’s pathological behaviour as well. Why did she not take precautions to see that it did not recur again? Why did she not warn Madhavi about it and cautioned her in advance? Did she want to maintain a stoic silence on this subject even knowing that she has a teenage daughter who might meet with the same plight? Or did she fear her husband and the consequences? Why did she not ask him to see a psychiatrist about his disorder? Is she finally also to blame for perpetrating violence in her house?

According to RAHI Foundation, an NGO that is working in the area of Child Sexual Abuse and Incest, speaking of mothers a few important myths and fact according to them are cited hereunder –

Myth: Men are forced to have sex with their daughters or other children because their wives won’t have sex with them or cannot satisfy them sexually.
Fact: Men who sexually abuse children do so in addition to, rather than instead of, having sex with their wives. This myth shifts responsibility from the offender to his wife or the child’s mother.

Myth: Mothers always know, either consciously or unconsciously, that sexual abuse is happening to their child.
Fact: Few men are careless enough to have a witness around when they abuse. Many mothers react with shock when they learn about the abuse. Often mothers who do know about the abuse, are in no position to prevent it because of their own powerlessness.

Myth: It is the mother’s job to protect her children. Therefore she is equally responsible for the abuse.
Fact: A mother’s failure to protect her children does not mean she is responsible for the abuser’s actions. Child protection is the responsibility of every adult and does not rest solely on the mother. **

Excuse me, I tend to disagree with the last point. If one of the adults is deranged and addicted to violence against children, all adults in a household cannot be trusted! Especially in the present case, it stands invalid. Madhavi’s mother knew of the potential damage her husband could do to her girls since he has already done it before, so why was she playing, Mrs Innocent?

I say this here and now, in most cases of violence, whether it be sexual abuse or any other form of deprivation or abuse, women are equally responsible because, they are unable to face consequences of what might happen, if they confront the male perpetrator. They exhibit weakness of character and will, fear to fight back or to take to task the perpetrator, which in fact is used as weapons against women themselves, by the male perpetrator of violence.

Hence, in cases of violence against women inside the home, women are accomplice. Is this what everybody feels and thinks as well? Or am I the only woman basher on Blogspot?




** Myths and facts by Rahi Foundation : http://www.rahifoundation.org/incestchild/incestchild/document.2004-07-15.0476800028