Condoning Rape by marriage is bad idea

Recent news of chief justice of India Mr Balakrishnan supporting choice of rape victim to marry the accused has shocked several among public.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3687586

"Due regard must be given to their personal autonomy since in some cases the victim may choose to marry the perpetrator or choose to give birth to a child conceived through forced intercourse," Balakrishnan said.

It seems the CJI has in mind those cases where a rape is alleged after the woman was promised marriage but the man turned on his word.  The choice of someone to allege the crime of rape and then be able to change their mind should not be allowed.  Any rape allegation should proceed to its end with either acquittal or conviction of accused, or prosecution of alleged victim in case accusation was found to be patently false.

The freedom to accuse someone of crime and then do some kind of settlement with the accused is not allowed on most criminal justice systems.  If that was allowed, following absurd and perverse situations could arise:

1. Rob or defraud a person or company of property and money, and then invite them to a joint partnership with the allegedly stolen/fraud money.
2. Murder someone, and then allow family members of murdered person to accept compensation in turn for withdrawing murder allegations.  Needless to say, law does not allow condoning such offences as murder.

The problem seems to be that judiciary and reportedly some NGOs are trying to fix what arises from a social issue of consensual sex before marriage using legal and judicial means.  To avoid the issues arising from rehabilitating the rape victim, they are proposing a quick formula which has no guarantee to work.  From news below:

http://newsblaze.com/story/20090624083208iwfs.nb/topstory.html

However, in a recent case in Cuttack district, the Orissa High Court asked a rape accused to either languish in jail without bail or marry the victim. The accused had sexually abused the girl on the pretext of marrying her and later deserted her after she became pregnant. The victim subsequently lodged a complaint against him. "Permanent bail would be allowed only if the accused tied the knot with the victim within this two-month period and allow his name to be the baby's father," the Bench specified.

"The practice of rapists marrying their victims may be condoned in some instances. But it should also be remembered that several such cases are based on the false promise of marriage and result in desertion," says Sneha Mishra, Orissa State Coordinator of the "We Can" Campaign to end violence against women. She also observes that many of these cases involve couples who are already in a relationship and the man usually deserts the women or refuses to marry her upon discovering that she is pregnant. This, she believes, is also a serious offence.

So in this case, the HC judge took it upon himself to ensure welfare of the pregnant woman.   The only problem is what will happen if the accused got the bail, and later still deserted the woman, say after 2 years.  What offence will be be charged with then?  Who will take care of rehabilitating the woman and child at the time?

The most important thing is for judiciary to function effectively and in time bound manner, so people have some faith in approaching the judiciary.  All the other suggestions are like putting fresh paint on a building which is crumbling down.

Ex-law minister suggests women property laws are ineffective

Here is interesing news on alimony and discussion on women rights. It was organized in participation with a premier law school of India and a premier agency which tries to safeguard interests of women.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Legal-eagles-discuss-alimony/articleshow/5113510.cms

Excerpt from news below followed by Comments:

Stressing on the need for a comprehensive law to safeguard women, governor H R Bhardwaj, who wielded the law baton in the UPA government's 2004-09 run, said: "The moment a woman marries, she's entitled to 50% share in her husband's property. There may be some issues with the minorities, but it should still be applicable to many.''

Comments: Shri Bhardwaj ji, Given that you were a previous law minister and having an all encompassing knowledge of law and justice system, can we know your proposals on the following cases about your 'comprehensive' law:

1. What if a woman marries a man, gets 50% entitlement to his property, and next day (or next month) files case against him under PWDVA, or worse say under IPC 498A? According to this 'comprehensive' law, she will get 50% property for a marriage that lasts anywhere from 1 day to 1 month or 1 year, and then she can go ahead and do the same on next husband (lamb to be slaughtered).

2. There is already laws to protect daughters' share in parents' property. Are you trying to suggest by your statement that that law is totally ineffective in protecting women rights to property? If sons' rights are protected by that, then won't that law be enough to protect daughters' rights also?

3. Are you saying that a daughter is now entitled not only to equal share in parents' property, but also entitled to share in husband's property? Have you discussed or thought of all the repercussions of this in a society which still does not have the mindset to give equal share to daughters?

4. Is this not a sinister way to introduce laws which instead of protecting daughters' interest by giving share in parents' property, make a daughter a burden to be removed and dumped on shoulders of husband and in-laws.

5. Have you discussed and found statistics on what has been the benefit of other women protection laws like Dowry Act, IPC 498A, PWDVA 2005 etc. How many women have benefited from them. And please don't tell us the number of cases filed as one of the benefits! Just as a hospital cannot claim to have done good job merely because it received so many emergency cases in an year, you cannot claim to have done justice if you simply claim that so many cases were filed under IPC 498A, PWDVA, Dowry Act etc!

Are women beggars? 50% reservation in panchayats is not enough

The Union Cabinet today approved a proposal to increase reservation for women to 50 per cent in Panchayats.

http://www.ptinews.com/news/250760_50-pc-reservation-for-women-in-Panchayats-approved

She had said since women suffer multiple deprivations of class, caste and gender, enhancing reservation in panchayats and urban local bodies would lead to more women entering the public sphere.

Well and good. But what powers do these panchayats really have? Can they allocate their own budgets? Can they collect funds or earmark funds for development? OR do they have to look upwards to some mai-baap to be able for their functioning.

By giving these 'doles', the real issue of empowerment of common people is kept at the sidelines. The mantra of governance in India today seems to the following:

1. Let rich and business class hobnob and get their ways around with policy making and regulation. Don't we remember the disastrous SEZ related experiments not so long ago?

2. Let middle classes be happy and smug based on some urban/metro centric propganda thrown by politicians and media centering around common themes like "India, the largest democracy", "India - a growth story", "India - Mera Bharat Mahan" and so on. Let Indian middle classes live under the illusion that they have civil liberties when all they have is some freedom of expression to voice opinions. Not anyone in middle class dares to go to police or courts when they face injustice either from state or in private matters. 95% the middle class is actually too busy to struggle with daily living issues like water, power, getting work done through government.

3. Placate poor classes by forever giving promises of development, empowerment, education, healthcare, abolition of child labour etc. Most poor have no access to state education or healthcare. Child labour is rampant inspite of laws against it. Once in a while give some high-sounding but inherently meaningless 'privilege' like 50% reservation for women in panchayats. Isn't that only means to an end? It is really not an outcome of development or empowerment by itself. That would be female literacy, healthcare, lesser rate of infant deaths etc, education for all girls etc. But by doing such acts of reservations, a kind of false hope is given that things are going to be fine very soon.