The government’s information and broadcasting ministry has issued a ban, while the police has filed an FIR and secured a court stay on the broadcast of a controversial BBC documentary about 2012 Delhi gang rape.
The FIR was filed under “IPC sections 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) 505(1)(b) (With intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public), 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) and section 66A of the IT Act (Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service) at the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police”, according to the ET.
Legally India postcard writer Court Witness, who tweets at @courtwitness1, slams the government’s decision (via Twitter):
A few thoughts on the undeniably idiotic decision to “ban” the upcoming #IndiasDaughter documentary.
There is no evidence to suggest illegality in interviews, what is said has been said before and now it is “defamation of the nation”?
Appeal will not be affected materially by the statements of accused, trial is long over & it’s not contempt to merely write about a case.
Not seen the order or FIR allegedly filed by Delhi police but cannot fathom how the IPC can be twisted to make it an offence in this case.
The worst part of the ban, in my humble opinion, is that we are now focusing on government stupidity instead of the merits of the documentary, good or bad [and that] the government’s so afraid of conversation about shocking views that it’d rather let such views thrive in quiet than be countered publicly.
On a somewhat larger point: Ad hoc panic bans show India up again and again as a country with no concept of rule of law.
Yes, citizens demand it too often, governments cave in too often and no one’s any better off at the end of the day.
And if you’re worried about the “image of the nation” please realize that
a. countries are putting out travel advisories to travellers.b. This ban shows that we’re more worried about fixing the country’s image than actually doing anything about women’s safety.
Distribute tonnes of pepper spray, CCTV every square inch of India & have 10 times more police. Nothing changes until people’s minds change.
People’s minds only change when we can talk about the ideas that inform our world views and behaviour. Otherwise nothing will change.
On the flipside, lawyer Amba Salelkar, who works at the Inclusive Planet Centre for Disability and Policy, has argued in DNA that the government could have been justified for seeking a ban of the documentary under contempt of court laws, for potentially prejudicing the appeals process available to the convict.
There were significant due process considerations in allowing a convict, however guilty he appears to be, to give public interviews, she argued, although the ministry’s ban and government’s position sidestepped that question completely.
Comments
But seriously, this is Court Witness: http://www.legallyindia.com/tag/court-witness
On NDTV's 'world premiere', etc, I assume they must have paid some money for the rights to screen it (and the documentary filmmaker, having spent 2 years shooting this, will want to recover some of her expenses (or preferably make some profit) by selling it)?
Not sure about whether they paid though - I believe it was intended to be a simultaneous world premiere in lots of countries to coincide with world women's day (here a backup of the NDTV press release of the premiere, which has since been pulled offline: http://pastebin.com/vewNvrPv )
That said, not sure whether it's fair to criticise the messenger here. Without some money, marketing and promotion going around, these kinds of films only rarely get made (though most documentary filmmakers (similar to most journalists) do it for the love of making documentaries or the fame and glory, rather than for the money).
hear me out, before downvoting.
Last year, everyone (i.e. the common man) literally (and metophorically) thrashed the powers that be.
It spooked the political establishment. Anything it would do, would go against it. : the wave of crime against women, laden with general corruption was too much for many to bear. The public outburst was for all to see.
obviously the present party is much more savvy, in handling media than congress was, it still has its limits. its electoral loss (thrashing ?) in delhi should be evidence enough.
From a government point of view any thing that would bring back the rebel, similar to what happened after the rape would spook the government in nipping it in the bud.
The ban when seen from this angle makes a lot of sense.
The present political leadership unfortunately, is as cut off from the realities as its predecessor and even when the elections are quite far away, would not make the "same mistake" as it predecessors, hence the ban.
the unfortunate part is "mistake" of the previous regime was not that it allowed the protests. but that it acquiesced the rape.
Better is expected of a mature government than its awesome strategic plan to keep their image intact and not the future of the country.
Ted Bundy’s credentials as a Criminal are far more shocking than that of Mukesh Singh. While Bundy was on death row, one Stephen Michaud and one Hugh Aynesworth received the requisite permission to interview him – the transcripts of which were later published in the book, “Ted Bundy: Conversations with a Killer”. I do not imagine the Congress Party to know who Ted Bundy is. I do not credit the Congress Party with the foresight that someone 10 years later, or even earlier, will surely “research” on what the rapists of Nirbhaya have had to say. But explain it to me like I am a 5 year old, “What Stephen and Hugh did…was it Journalism or Voyeurism”?
Nirbhaya's father wants every Indian to view the documentary. Think why, then you will see the light.
Who 'Court Witness' is, doesn't matter. Ideas matter, not who said it. All this reveals the big deficiencies of "Indian values".
I saw the documentary, there is nothing derogatory towards the Country or the women of this Country. As a matter it only reflects the underlying problem of this patriarchal society, where men of a particular class of the society feels that women are their birth right!!!
Having said that, there is social problem with how supposedly "grown up" Indian men view women. This will take may be 50 years to change. Or it will never change.
I greatly believe in the power of getting a fair trial. The comments have nothing to do with a judicial argument!!!! I am the biggest supporter of a fair trial! however in the present case the lawyer cannot go outside in the society spreading messages (we have enough idiots in this country who will happily believe such comments also!!!) that it is OK to burn your sister and daughters if they have pre-martial sex!!! or that a woman is a flower and a dog will snatch a flower!! haven't we seen enough in Haryana where the entire state seems to believe that honor killing is justified. The same law should apply here where the freedom of speech is to be limited in the interest of public interest!
As an educated woman, I firmly believe that atleast the educated men like your should get offended by such statements and this has nothing to do whether you have a sister or a daughter. You ALWAYS HAVE A MOTHER!
They can decline top comment unless they really really want to make the point they believe in or want publicity in any name. I would say it's the latter but I am not am ostrich.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Tfaurfg7EQ[/youtube]
Though some are reporting that some ISPs have started blocking that link already...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIbC1zida-8
https://vimeo.com/121333595
Who thinks the government will be playing whackamole for the next few days with streaming sites and presumably give up soon?
And there are always torrents too.
There are still quite a few copies floating around on YouTube. Try a Google search:
https://www.google.co.in/search?q=india%27s+daughter&num=20&safe=off&biw=1600&bih=814&tbm=vid&source=lnt&tbs=dur:l&sa=X&ei=isr4VNLdAZWiuQSizYGgDg&ved=0CBQQpwU&dpr=1.2
Can we start a forum here for strict action against the concerned lawyers? In a country where beef can be banned for no rhyme or reason, there has to be a limitation as to where an individual can degrade a whole section of society! how can a lawyer not pass comments on the basis of caste (which is punishable) but pass such derogatory statements against the women of this Country!
BTW you being a mature writer should refrain from using words such as "stupid" no matter how angry you are. The country is in fumes too!
The nanny state argument is interesting, but by banning him he'll just become more of an idol to said pricks, no?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nymphomaniac
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nymphomaniac
Rape rate (number of incidents per unit population) in western countries like the UK and US is far far higher than that in India.
People say there is under-reporting in India. Surely, there is under-reporting but does it explain the rape rate being more than 15 times (1500%) than that of India's?
The fact is that Indian society is outraged enough for its media to focus on rape cases as much as they do. As a result, the International media and western society (read the international message boards) brands India as being far worse for women's safety than most other countries. But, in light of the above facts, is this justified?
The said documentary is just another example of the sensationalisation of the kind referred to above and, that too, prepared by violating rules.
And no, the West doesn't think we have a problem because our media over-reports and their's is blasé. Rome has a reputation for having pickpockets because it has them.
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/outrage-over-defence-lawyers-comments-in-nirbhaya-documentary-744572?pfrom=home-lateststories
India is a deeply misogynist society where social acceptability of violence including sexual violence against women is deeply ingrained. So in my view Indian society needs to be exposed for what it is, if we are to change it. So the defamation of the nation argument is nonsense. Its time we were defamed for the way the country treats women.
Neither can the ban be justified because of the specious argument that this documentary will encourage other men. There's a lot more to encourage other men including easy access to internet porn now which coupled with how Indian men are raised to view women as subservient and lesser humans is enough encouragement.
Plus in the Indian context the social approach to sex outside marriage creating a demand supply problem is also relevant though of course rape is always defined as an expression of power. But Indian culture especially 80s films have a particularly problematic expression of male-female sexual relationships and of lust and sex which is often depicted as something the man takes from a reluctant woman who gives in.
The only justification would be the appeals pending as the interview of the accused will condemn him before the Supreme Court and probably lead to the death penalty. A
My concern has been the way this case has been handled from the beginning. Once accused died in police custody, trial was held in camera without justification as the victim was already dead, and now the appeals process has been affected to the prejudice of the accused.
First on the documentary controversy: The majority of Indian men think in terms of the slut versus goddess/ ghar ki laxmi argument, which is still a very common way of thinking, probably many Indian women subscribe to this view as well.
So what M L Sharma etc have said is not surprising. Neither are they the first or last men to say this, just read the news and periodically you'll have some public figure making similar statements.
But how the government has responded is wrong. Once again we want to brush the truth under the carpet and pretend that India is not like this. In fact India is very much like this, the Legallyindia and English MSM audience with more enlightened/ progressive views is a minority.
We need to expose and confront these ugly aspects of our social fabric if we are to change them. Pretending the problem does not exist is stupid.
There is no business for the government to call this documentary defamatory. Is the government saying that such views are not common in Indian society? Then the government is lying.
Once again you see the nationalistic discourse bubble being burst by confrontation with an ugly truth and a ham-handed attempt to suppress the truth.
Coming to the actual case, the handling of this particular rape case raises cause for concern.
Just imagine a scenario where the police picked up the wrong men. Have these men gotten a fair trial? No. One accused died in police custody, relatives claim he was murdered and had been professing his innocence.
The other accused ended up with bad lawyers, as their earlier lawyers recused or were threatened. Confessions are routinely obtained by coercion.
The victim herself died in suspicious circumstances, her injuries were not life threatening yet she died. Her brain dead body was taken to Singapore by the government in some kind of cover-up. Look at news reports, if the victim was so ill, then how was she seeing counselors. There is a lot very fishy here.
The trial was in camera, with bad lawyers for the accused. So no one really knows what the defence evidence or case was. Was there any defence at all?
I am not saying that the rape did not happen, but what if the police framed these particular accused due to public outrage and the need to solve the case quickly. What if someone more powerful was protected?
Apparently there was some video evidence showing that one of the accused was attending a wedding at the time of the rape. Do we know how the court dealt with this evidence?
Police frame ups do happen. The remedy is a fair and public trial. We the public have no way of knowing the truth of this trial as it was secret, and unnecessarily so, and in violation of public policy and law.
Now the convicts have appealed the death penalty and suddenly these interviews surface. What if the interviews do not tell the whole truth about the mindset of these convicts or as M L Sharma has stated, the convicts were pressured or misled by the police into making these statements. These convicts are uneducated. What if they were told that describing rape as a social phenomenon will help them evade the death penalty.
In fact though, these interviews have already tightened the noose around these men's necks.
The Supreme Court may take these interviews as evidence of the depravity of these men and confirm the death penalty.
Then all the other accused including his brother confessed. Well, we all know about such confessions. Families in the docu itself state they were threatened with destruction unless they handed over the accused.
The first set of defence lawyers were replaced by jokers like M L Sharma. Do you really think he gave proper defence representation to these men?
And then the trial was declared secret for no valid reason. No journalists were allowed, Why? the woman was already dead.
Now in the film, the brother of the accused who died in police custody points the finger at everyone else but himself. Right before the Supreme Court appeals.
In the docu film, Mukesh Singh appears to have been coached. That is why he displays no emotion.
I am not saying one or more of these men are not guilty but if one or more of these men were framed by the police to save more powerful perpetrators I would not be surprised.
The trial should have been public. That is what a fair criminal justice dispensation process requires.
I know from personal experience how the police can lie.
What about the testimony of the friend? He was also threatened and coached perhaps. So much so that he couldn't care about justice being meted out to the girl he'd seen brutalised.
Sure, there are frame-ups. Rich people give up their drivers etc.
But many people have pointed fingers at their co-accused and said they did it all, not me. Everywhere. What is new about that?
He is pointing fingers at everyone but himself right before the appeal. How is that going to help. The evidence is there (police planted it probably you might say). The statements are there and withstood the test of lower courts. He can't become a witness now either. Even if he didn't do this admittedly stilted interview, what would have changed.
And now, I ask sincerely, if you have a concrete point apart from general conspiracy theories, please make it.
In this case, initial news reports stated that the bus was recovered from a school compound in Noida. in Incidentally, even the name of this school was never disclosed in the media.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/delhi-gangrape-police-identify-4-suspects-bus-found-in-a-noida-school-campus/310928-3-244.html
In the film and I presume at the trial, the version changed and now the bus was stated to have been recovered from right outside the slum these men lived in at R K Puram.
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-delhi-gang-rape-owners-of-the-bus-in-which-the-convicts-gang-raped-the-girl-want-it-back-on-road-1895592
An early report quoted DCP Chaya Sharma as stating that the victim had said there were 4 rapists including the driver.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/delhi-gangrape-police-seizes-bus-hunt-on-for-accused/1/238204.html
Now there are six rapists including the dead man.
Ram Singh's death in police custody was suspicious. See
"Jail authorities claim the 35-year-old committed suicide by using his shirt and threads from his sleeping mat to construct a rope, which he hung from a grille on the 10-foot-high ceiling by using a plastic bucket. But they are unable to explain how three cell-mates slept through the hanging in a tiny room."
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/ram-singh-found-hanging-suicide-says-jail-murder-says-his-lawyer-515848
This is how the video clip alibi of two of the accused (now convicted) was dealt with.
http://www.ndtv.com/delhi-news/delhi-gang-rape-video-clip-to-show-that-two-accused-were-not-in-bus-529672
Was the video clip and the device it was captured on forensically analysed to ascertain when it was made and if it was authentic? Does not appear this was done.
The trial judge passed a strange order: "The court has kept the application pending saying it would decide it after defence witnesses' statement is closed."
What was the final ruling on this?
As I said, the investigation and trial raise concerns here.
http://www.harjindersingh.in/delhi-gang-rape-case
from the judgement:
"As various teams were working in the case, PW80 SI Pratibha Sharma, the Investigating Officer received a secret information that a bus of similar description was seen in the area of Ravi Dass Camp, R.K Puram, New Delhi."
It does appear that the bus was found in a Noida school compound and the story was changed later that it was found in R K Puram. What was the source for the "secret info" that the IO claims she received that the bus was in R K Puram?
Also, if Ram Singh washed the bus, why did he leave blood stained iron rods, blood stained seat covers and blood stained curtains in it which the police found conveniently.
Note that the authenticity or otherwise of the video clip alibi of two men was never forensically established.
Also, it strikes me that the boyfriend was beaten with iron rods but his injuries as recorded in the judgement are not very severe. He claims to have saved the victim and himself from being run over later after they were dumped from the bus. He claims in a recorded interview that he physically lifted the victim into the police jeep for transport to the hospital. I think he has stated that he had sustained fractures. How badly injured was this man?
Also note that a month after Ram Singh died in police custody, another accused was "assaulted" in police custody and sustained injuries including a fracture.
http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/delhi-gang-rape-accused-vinay-sharma-beaten-in-jail-hand-fractured-lawyer-518163
The above report states that a third accused was also assaulted and injured in police custody.
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/XQb6Cb5tudzs5isXjdtnNO/Delhi-gangrape-accused-critical-after-jail-attack-lawyer.html
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/delhi-gangrape-accused-being-poisoned-lawyer-tells-court/391936-3-244.html
He couldn't attend his own trial hearings as a result.
Fair trial anyone?
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/rape_verdict.pdf
records only minor injuries to the boyfriend who was stated to have been hit brutally with iron rods.
His medical examination at Safdarung hospital within 24 hours of the incident did not record any leg fracture.
Yet the boyfriend later was described in 2013 January news reports as having a fractured leg sustained during the incident and was in a wheelchair for one of the media interviews.
http://www.thenewstribe.com/2013/01/04/delhi-gang-rape-daminis-boyfriend-speaks-out/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/04/delhi-gang-rape-victim-boyfriend_n_2410207.html?ir=India
http://jezebel.com/5973248/the-india-gang-rape-victims-boyfriend-speaks-out
The boyfriend spent 5 or more days in police stations/ custody after the incident. Was he also tortured, threatened and forced to conform his story to the version the police decided to adopt? He could even have been threatened with being one of the rapists himself.
How to explain the fracture anomaly?
There is more to this case than the official police and judicial versions.
I obviously don't know what the truth is but this whole case raises valid suspicion of a frame-up.