The modern thinking Indian

Over a period of history, the concept of rights of a woman in marriage have been evolving; from earlier times where many cultures considered the woman to be a property of the husband in the marriage, most societies now legally consider the rights of both men and women in a marriage to be the same (of course, in realistic terms, this may not be always true, with many cultures believing men to be the superior, and having more rights). However, it is also true that many Islamic countries have a conflict between the rights of men and women in a marriage - there are a number of clerics who believe that woman do not have the same rights (with the Taliban-run Afghanistan being a society where the rights of woman were definitely much lower than that of men).
Inter-linked in all this is the concept of sexual relations in marriage, and what are the duties / obligations of each partner in a marriage. Policies have slowly evolved that the concept of force has been recognized as not valid; if a partner forces the other partner to submit to a sexual relationship by force, then it is now recognized as rape. However, recent events in Afghanistan changed this entire understanding.
Recently, a law was passed in Afghanistan for the minority Shia population that legalized rape within the marriage, allowing the husband to force the demand for sexual relationship within the marriage. The passage of this law outraged people all over, with women's rights groups in Afghanistan protesting the passage of the law; more significantly, western backers of the Karzai Government were outraged and gave public statements demanding withdrawal of the law. All this pressure has finally resulted in a statement by the Afghan President that the law will be revised and brought into conformance with the Afghan constitution and with the Sharia (link to article):

# Afghan law appears to let a man to have sex with his wife even when she says "no"
# Karzai tells CNN he, others unaware of the provision due to the amount of legislation
Karzai told CNN's Fareed Zakaria that he and others were unaware of the provision in the legislation, which he said "has so many articles." Karzai signed the measure into law last month. "Now I have instructed, in consultation with clergy of the country, that the law be revised and any article that is not in keeping with the Afghan constitution and Islamic Sharia must be removed from this law," Karzai said.
The bill languished in the country's parliament for a year-and-a-half before it was recently pushed through in what one legislator called a "chaotic" vote. Women from various parts of Afghanistan marched in the capital Wednesday to protest the law, which has also been criticized by human-rights groups and Western leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama.

For now, the measure has been beaten back, but measures to lift women's rights will take time, and many reverses before they can take root, especially in a backward society such as in Afghanistan.

Labels: Afghanistan, Law, Review, Rights, Women

The prevalence of dowry in today's society is an open fact; most people see it in operation either in their own marriage, or in the marriage of their family members; or you see it on operation in the case of acquaintances. So as an example, I have seen dowry in operation in the case of a family friend where her in-laws insisted on a car as a part of the marriage (and even specified the type of car that was requested). They had accepted that this was a price to be paid for getting their daughter married (and one should fault them equally for being so desperate to get their daughter married). Of course, in all cases of dowry, the boy's side is always evaluating the value they can get for their boy and have no qualms in demanding the same.
A lot of this dowry expectation is now baked into society, and there do no seem to be any easy solutions (people giving dowry expect that this is the price they need to pay to get their daughter married, and those demanding dowry do not care that such expectations are illegal in law). To make the scale more even, the Government of India has introduced a number of laws that seek to even the scales, and empower women. However, in trying to even the scale, the laws give a lot of power to women, and in some cases, there has been misuse. There have been many reported cases where the threat of usage of such laws (and consequent police action) is used as a level to force settlements; it has been pointed out in court cases and by many pro-male organizations. And when the Chief Justice of India points this out, you can be sure that this is a deep matter of concern:

Dealing a blow to women's rights activists who have been stringently defending the Section 498A provision of the Indian Penal Code, Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan on Saturday said that in some cases this section — that deals with matrimonial cruelty — was being `grossly misused'. Elaborating on false cases being filed in recent times, the CJI said that relatives not involved with a matrimonial dispute were unfairly implicated. "In some cases, 498A is grossly misused,'' he said. Balakrishnan was speaking at a seminar, `Marriage laws -- issues and challenges', organised by the National Commission for Women.
The IPC section allows for immediate arrest of the husband and in-laws by the police on the basis of a woman's complaint and has been controversial.

The various laws that were supposed to empower women, even though trying to balance the scales, do not maintain the old adage of all people being equal before the law, and that everyone is presumed innocent until proved guilty. Unless the law allows for a better investigation and penalties for misuse, misuse will continue.

Labels: Discrimination, Dowry, Investigation, Judicial, Law, Police, Reform, Responsibility, Review, Welfare, Women

RTI, for all its slowness, and huge backlog, is still proving to be beneficial to common citizens. I had mentioned in a previous post, a phrase that I like to use to for the effects of an RTI application - a lightning torch that exposes sloth and shines the beacon of openness on the red tape present in our Government. This feeling gets reinforced when you read about cases such as this one where a rape victim was running from pillar to post to get her case filed and investigated, and the police was not exactly the picture of cooperation:

Now, Right to Information (RTI) Act has brought justice to a rape victim in Umarpada taluka in south Gujarat. Following a notice by Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) in May, an FIR was finally lodged and action taken against the accused. In its notice, GIC slapped a penalty of Rs 25,000 jointly on two police officers for violating provisions of the Act. This followed an RTI application filed by a 15-year-old rape victim demanding to know why action had not been taken on her complaint.
The girl was raped in February last year but the accused was roaming free and police was refusing to register an FIR. GIC has penalised police sub-inspector and public information officer (PIO) DN Patel and assistant police sub-inspector Chandubhai Chaudhary, the deemed assistant public information officer (APIO) of Mangrol police station in Surat district, Rs 12,500 each.

RTI, in this legal form is a very effective tool. It allows citizens to get information about matters that concern them either personally or affects society, and enables this information not to be hidden unless it can be proved that the information being sought is either for commercial purposes, or affects national security.
There is an ongoing debate about whether the Central Information Commission (CIC), the nodal body appointed to hear RTI cases is actually not working as well as it should; on the other hand, there are numerous cases where RTI ensures that people get beneficial effects. In addition, RTI cells and mobile units that seek to empower people by making them aware of their rights are also on the job.
The writer of this piece still believes that to get rid of corruption, all other instruments that have been tried, whether they be strict laws, exposure, penalties for people caught, etc, all have failed to work; the RTI Act however, by its very nature is meant to get information. This availability of information to the common man is a welcome first step to reduce corruption and inaction in our society.

Labels: Law, Police, Punishment, RTI, Women

The Section 498(A) of the IPC is meant for prevention of crimes against women, something that this country has struggled with for quite some time now. If you read the actual Section, it talks about: "Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine". This was meant to ensure that a woman subjected to harassment in her matrimonial home can take legal measure to protect herself. However, as with any law that favors one side of the dispute, it is subjected to misuse (and there are numerous complaints about the law being misused - refer to this link).
The main complaints against this law (from whatever I have read so far in various articles, web sites, and email) is that:
- the law has allowed the daughter-in-law to subject the entire family of her husband to its provisions
- the police do not investigate the case, but based on the complaint, have been known to drag all the accused (including elderly people and children)
So here is an update from a directive sent out by Bihar police:

There have been talks about misuse of laws relating to crime against women for quite some time now. Bihar police’s CID also admitted this when it directed all the SPs in the state to ensure proper investigation into FIRs lodged under Section 498(A) of the IPC before going in for arrest of the accused. “Sometimes such cases are framed against in-laws or others just to harass or settle old scores. Hence, the precaution against arrests,” ADG (CID) Yashwant Malhotra told TOI recently.
In his letter to district SPs, government railway police, range DIGs and zonal ADGs/IGs, Malhotra said it has been observed that in cases relating to crime against women, particularly those registered under Section 498(A) of the IPC, all the in-laws of the alleged victim are named as accused. And they are arrested without proper investigation into the case, thus marring the interests of justice.

This is actually a mixed step (in reality). One would like to think that, as per judicial and legal standards, the practice of doing an enquiry and then only proceeding against the named people is the right step. If one considers the law to be a just tool, then this is the right step.
However, there needs to be careful attention paid to the actual implementation of the law, since now proceeding on the basis of a complaint would be subject to the individual police officer of the region, and rural and semi-urban regions are known for police officers bucking under pressure, especially when the families and people involved are known / powerful.
What do people think ? Making sure that the provision is subject checks and balances is a good thing, but do people think that this could lead to a much watered down enforcement of the provisions meant to protect women ?

Labels: Court, Dowry, Family, Investigation, Judicial, Law, Morality, Police, Punishment, Security, Welfare, Women

In the mix of the many dowry related laws and court clarifications / edicts, add another one. This one is something that strikes to make sure that family settlements are all equitable, and also rectifying one part of the provisions of the the dowry law. The current dowry laws are harsh, and put a lot of the onus of proving innocence on the husbands in case of dowry related deaths within 7 years of marriage. As with many laws, this one is subject to misuse. If the husband is not on good terms with his in-laws, and his wife dies within 7 years of marriage (and it becomes alleged that he was demanding dowry), then the law essentially puts the onus of proving innocence on the husband. This is not a very comforting feeling, given the basic provisions of fairness which all laws must meet (and let us be clear, such laws were made harsh because of the large number of dowry related deaths and harassment cases in today's society). So this judgment of the court is a welcome clarification:

Supreme Court on Monday ruled that asking for the wife's share in ancestral property from in-laws would not come under the definition of "dowry". This judgment could become a small but significant breather for husbands, on whom the courts virtually impose the onus of coming clean on dowry death charges if their wives die an unnatural death within seven years of marriage and there had been past allegations of harassment.
"Demanding her share in the ancestral property will not amount to a dowry demand," said a bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and Harjit Singh Bedi while dismissing a man’s appeal seeking acquittal in a dowry death case.

We still need to go a long way towards getting rid of the evils of dowry from today's world, but making harsh laws (that open themselves up to misuse at the hands of people out to subvert law) is not a recommended course of action. All such cases should need proper investigation, including the guidance of experts as well as NGO's.

Labels: Court, Dowry, Judicial, Law, Property, Women

The incidence of dowry in the country is a fairly high chance. Over a period of time, it has evolved from something that was supposed to be a gift given to the bride (and maybe the only thing given to the daughter of the house from the family property) to something that is seen as the right of the groom's family. The belief is that if the son is skilled or from a good family, or of the right caste, then it is the right of the girl's family to open their wallets and give umpteen amounts for the marriage. There are people who dispute the amount of dowry prevalent in today's society, but open the newspapers or see TV, and you will society temporarily idolizing the girl who stood up to the dowry seekers, or you will read more grisly tales of brides being subjected to torture or being killed due to problems with the dowry being paid. In many cases, it is not cash, but the demand is for a vehicle, or even more subtly, a loan (never to be returned), to help the boy do better in a business or some other need. I know a case where a boy's grandparents demanded a car at the last moment (within 10 days of the marriage), and the poor parents felt that they had no option other than to give in and mobilize the funds to buy and give the car.
So, there are a set of laws to even the scale; these laws would not actually pass the test of being totally lawful since they do weigh more in favor of the girl. Many would argue that this is right, since society is totally in favor of the demands by the groom. However, as always happens when there are a set of laws that are more in favor of one section, the misuse of these laws happen. So, for all the times when the dowry laws help a tortured or suppressed girl, there are numerous other cases where the same law is used to threaten the family of a groom where there has been no incidence of dowry. For a case where there has been marital discord, the threatened use of dowry can turn the tables, since the groom's family have learned to fear the use of dowry laws. The allegation of dowry can bring about unwanted media attention including vilification, closer attention by cops (maybe some days in jail as well), and a significant pressure level to settle the case.
Hence, over a period of time, there has been a lot of focus by many self-help groups to plead against the misuse of these laws and bring it to the notice of the government (not only the anti-dowry laws, but the recent domestic violence act that also has some harsh measures). Even many courts have pointed out the misuse of these laws in some cases and called for greater oversight to prevent misuse of these laws:

Following complaints about the misuse of dowry laws by women, the Centre has decided to look into the issue and will hold a consultation programme to get views and suggestions from NGOs and activists working for men. Acting on complaints about the misuse of dowry laws, the Union Ministry for Women and Child Development would organise a consultation programme where men from different walks of life would be invited to express themselves on June 25.
"The ministry has received complaints from men about the urgent need to amend Section 498(A) of the dowry law claiming that many women misuse the law to their benefit. After the consultation, the Ministry will examine how far this claim is right before deciding on any thing," Union Minister for Women and Child Development Renuka Chowdhary said.

Nobody doubts the need for laws to act against dowry misuse as well as warn people against the potential problems they face if they demand dowry and ill-treat women because of that; however, at the same time, a harsh law has a strong potential for misuse and there is an urgent need for reform. The main question right now is about whether there will be a proper review and necessary changes be brought in ?

Labels: Discrimination, Dowry, Law, Morality, Policy, Punishment, Reform, Welfare, Women

Rape is a heinous crime, something that can cast a horrible injury on a women (both on the physical body and the psyche); it can take a long time to get over this assault. Hence, there are some harsh laws on this crime in human society, with a world wide convention that such crimes will be handled to the maximum possible allowed under the law. In India, the Supreme Court has been sensitive to the nature of this crime, in many cases relying on the sole testimony of the victim. However, such measures are subject to misuse, and one comes across such cames occasionally that introduce a feeling that one cannot take a statement for granted. Read about ladies who extort money from innocent bystanders by threatening rape:

The women used to entice passersby and then extort money from them by putting them under fear of rape allegations. The three, Heena(25), Noorjahan(26) and Rukshana(26) (names changed) were active in Delhi and NCR for the past few years, the police said.
The police carried out the arrests after their suspicions were roused by a woman's complaint in which she alleged she was raped by a person who offered her her a lift while she was returning home.
The officer added that the women used to charge anything between Rs 5,000 to Rs 10,000 for not framing the victim. If he refused to pay, the person would be taken to the police station. The women had few male accomplices who would track their movements and come to their rescue if anything went wrong.

It is the fear of getting caught in such cases that makes most people unwilling to offer help. Colleagues whom I talked to confirm that most of them will hesitate to help a single lady standing alone (even though such cases happen in low numbers, but the fear of scandal and getting caught in such major issues hampers most people). In addition, quoting of such cases when the circumstances of the rape charge is not crystal clear may allow even guilty rapists from getting away.

Labels: Community, Investigation, Law, Morality, Police, Security, Women

In a move that indicates that the Government has apparently not done its homework on getting its allies on board on the move to introduce the Women's Reservation Bill, the Rashtriya Janta Dal (RJD) (whose head Laloo Prasad Yadav and other leaders are part of the Government) has opposed the move by the Government and accused it of taking the action without consulting its allies. The Mandal parties want the women's quota to have sub-quotas for OBC's and Muslims, something that the other parties and many sections of the Congress support base will oppose:

The Rashtriya Janata Dal on Wednesday upped its opposition to the women's reservation Bill threatening to withdraw support to the UPA government if the legislation was not amended to provide sub-quotas for OBCs and Muslims within the generic gender quota in legislatures.
In a development which undercut the PM's effort to dispel the perception of a split in the UPA over the women's quota, the RJD accused the Congress leadership of rushing through the Bill without hammering out a consensus. RJD's aggressive posture was yet another instance of how OBC resentment over the "present form" of women's quota had strained ties between allies. Early on, RJD leadership fielded party MP Devendra Yadav to warn the Congress leadership not to mistake its protest to be just pyrotechnics. Yadav said his party would go to any extent to thwart the passage of the already-delayed legislation.

This reaction was somewhat expected, but there are unexpected movements also happening. First, the RJD is a part of the ruling coalition and is part of the Government, so the fact that it is complaining about the introduction of the legislation means that discussions about this long-delayed bill really did not move to a conclusion.
In addition, there seems to be a sudden amount of tension between the natural allies of SP and the CPM, given that they are on opposite sides of the Bill. Reservation in legislature on the basis of caste and religion are very touchy subjects and will be the first thing to be opposed in court as being unconstitutional.

Labels: Caste, Congress, Election, Law, Left, Parliament, Politics, Reservations, Women

The Women's Reservation Bill is something that has been debated on and off for over a decade now, and no Government has been able to bring in this law due to the immense controversy over this issue. The BJP was unable to do so, and this Congress / UPA Government has not been able to do so. Each time, this is because of the blocking by the various OBC groups who are suspicious of the motivations behind bringing such a bill. They believe that the splintering of the electorate along caste lines is going to be moved back by such a law if it does not also have relevant reservations for OBC's and Muslims. In addition, the belief is that upper caste women will capture a large chunk of the seats under such a Bill.
I am ambivalent of most reservations since I believe that the proper strategy of bringing about change is to make more facilities, education, etc. available rather than reserve some of them for somebody who does not have the skill set needed for the seat / job for which the reservations is sought. The only exception that I can think of is the case of politics where I have not been able to understand the type of talent required (if any is required); and hence maybe reserving electoral seats for women may be permissible - anyhow, in a lot of cases, winning or losing depends on the party rather than the individual.
But the issue in this case is that the leading lights of this coalition, Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi, the left parties (including Brinda Karat), as well as the main opposition, the BJP, all support such a Bill in public. Together, they are far more than the numbers required to pass such a bill, but no one is willing to take on the caste based political parties - they can be very strident in their opposition, and can easily threaten when necessary. So, the Government played a gambit by bringing the Bill in the Rajya Sabha when the Lok Sabha had already been progued, and when it was assured that the Bill would not get anywhere closer to becoming a law, but even that has brought out the opposition:

The women's reservation bill has triggered an OBC consolidation across party lines, threatening to strain political tie-ups and raising the prospect of realignment. The protests against the introduction of the bill in the Rajya Sabha, which saw RJD members joining hands with arch-rivals JD(U) and SP, extended outside Parliament with members of the OBC dominated outfits holding a meeting to scale up the resistance.
While the legislation has provided an impetus to normalization of ties between Yadav satraps Mulayam Singh and Lalu Prasad, it is proving to be the catalyst for the coming together of the Mandal forces more than a decade after they splintered, moving in separate ways. The resentment against the bill has the potential to introduce tension among allies such as Congress and RJD on the one hand and BJP and JD(U) on the other, besides becoming a point of discord between SP and Left.

One can be sure that neither the Left nor the Congress will move ahead with this Bill, given the vehement opposition - further, the Congress is no longer the leading party in many states, and it needs to maintain good relations with many of these parties, and it may be easier to let the Bill die a death rather than risk rupturing ties.

Labels: BJP, Congress, Empowerment, Law, Politics, Protest, Support, Women