#dnaEdit: End the hypocrisy

The restraint placed on telecasting the BBC documentary India’s Daughter by a Delhi court at the instance of the Delhi Police and the advisory issued by information and broadcasting ministry on similar lines is unjustifiable.

Snatches of the documentary, based on the December 16 gang-rape case, already aired on TV channels, have generated outrage over the views expressed by one of the convicts, Mukesh, and the two lawyers, ML Sharma and AP Singh, who represented the convicts in court. The three men squarely blamed the courageous victim, known only to us as Nirbhaya — for being in public space at night with her boyfriend. Further, the rapist blames the victim for fighting her rapists. These deplorable assertions can only provoke a sense of deep revulsion and shame. Condoning these statements or regarding them as defending the crime, is akin to creating deliberate mischief. In such a context banning the documentary in order to blackout such misogynistic views is obfuscating the real issues thrown up by the documentary. Rather, the articulation of such reprehensible views should be regarded as a trigger to take a deeper look at the disorder in our society and take forward the discourse on gender violence. No doubt, that much-needed gender discourse has somewhat receded two years after the December 16 street protests. Besides, is it possible to dispute that the gender biases exhibited by parliamentarians and police officers, in public and private conversations are any different from the spirit of the statements made by the rapist and the two lawyers?

In this context, home minister Rajnath Singh’s vow to fix responsibility on officials whose alleged “negligence” allowed the filmmaker Leslee Udwin to record the sensational conversation with Mukesh is plainly hypocritical.

Moreover, Udwin claims she had all the necessary clearances. The Delhi Police FIR accusing “unnamed persons” of words, acts intending to “insult the modesty of any woman” is clearly an attempt to put Udwin on the defensive. The Centre has directed its anger at the messenger and her medium rather than the source of such patriarchal and violent mindsets. Its misgivings that the documentary buttresses uncharitable international perceptions about India are yet another indication of pushing the societal malaise under the carpet. Banning a documentary or prosecuting its director is hardly the way to salvage national pride. Perhaps, a more genuine concern has been raised by activist Kavita Krishnan who worried whether the documentary would do justice to the struggle against gender violence in India, or would end up as yet another simplistic film on India, from a Western point of view. Take for example, the title India’s Daughter, virtually a red rag before women’s rights activists who have persistently argued for women to be seen as human beings rather than mothers, daughters, sisters or wives. But even to make such nuanced critique, one would surely have to see the documentary.

India’s Daughter throws up several issues but the Centre has skirted them all in its trivial pursuit of scapegoats. Following the December 16 incident, the Supreme Court (SC) set up fast track courts to expedite sexual offences trials, after criticism over judicial delays and low conviction rates. However, the convicts’ appeals against their death penalties are pending for nearly a year in the SC. While due processes must be followed assiduously, the inordinate delay in the appellate process necessitates judicial reforms and lightening the SC’s burden. The Nirbhaya Fund to be devoted for women’s security has been doubled this year but both central and state governments remain clueless on evolving apt schemes. Though gender sensitisation programmes have been proposed for the general populace, and not just in schools, the discourse has not moved beyond academic circles. By preventing the airing of the documentary in India on International Women’s Day, a self-righteous establishment has only ensured the perpetuation of societal hypocrisy.