People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol. XXXVII
No. 48 December 01, 2013 |
Conscience
Keepers
(sic!) A
Sant,
a Judge and an Editor G
Mamatha THIS
is about three
stories – of a sant, a judge and an editor. The Sant is
a jnani who
attains moksha and shows the path to God; the
Judge, who, according to
George Mikes, has a 'God complex' and the third and the
most important one is
about an editor who considers himself as 'one who can
make or break a God'.
Though all three seem to be related with God, God is not
our concern here. They
are. Story
One:
The Sant According
to
scriptures, a Sadhu or Sant or Baba in popular parlance
is one who follows the
path of Sadhana Chatushtaya – viveka (discrimination),
'vairagya'
(dis-passion, detachment), Shad-sampat (the six
virtues, which are: sama
– tranquillity or control of mind, calmness; dama
– control of the
senses; uparati – renunciation of activities
which are not duties; titiksha
– endurance; shraddha – faith and the last one samadhana
–
perfect concentration) and mumukshutva (intense
longing for liberation).
We now have a Sant, who according to his website, is
'revered' even by many
other sants. In his presence, it seems everyone would
experience 'bliss',
including the other sants. So he is no ordinary man,
though he is born to
ordinary parents and led an ordinary life till he was
shown the path of moksha,
obviously by another sant. He is none other than
Asaram Bapu. Today,
there are
more than 400 ashrams run by the trust and many homes to
train children and
women. Many people swayed by the propaganda machine of
the Bapu trusted him and
became ardent devotees. Unfortunately for them, this
Baba does not have any of
the qualities of a sadhu that the scriptures had
prescribed, least of all vairagya.
Reports of rape, sexual abuse, atrocities and death of
children found space in
media, despite all efforts to scuttle them from reaching
public consciousness.
Those who had complained were attacked not only by the
'devotees-under-trance',
but also by the government that swore on a secular
constitution. Due to
the adamant
persistence of some of the women who were physically
abused by the sant, cases
were registered. To arrest him was another big drama.
Ultimately, he was
arrested. Till today, his son, an accomplice to all the
crimes is at large,
evading the hands of law. This Baba is known for his
closeness to the
'Hindutva' ideology and thus to the governments in Story
Two:
The Judge According to some
of the famous jurists who had
commented on the ethics of judges, “a judge cannot
afford to be accused of acts
of moral turpitude. He cannot indulge, in or outside his
court, in such
behaviour as can create doubts about the credibility of
his character. His
behaviour has to be a model one. Only then he would be
able to command respect.
Like it has been said: 'Caesar’s wife has also to be
above suspicion'...A scandalous
behaviour on the part of a Judge, even in his private
affairs, is bound to
affect his image and prestige in the office of the
Judge”. But as George
Mikes wrote in his article on Professional
Deformities: “(Judges) sooner
or later most of them develop a 'God complex'...when, in
other words you are
treated like God, then it is difficult not to believe in
your own divinity. You
are addressed as 'My Lord', almost like Him, so
naturally you are inclined to
believe. He is your colleague”. Some of our judges aptly
fit this description.
Of course, as Mikes himself points out there are
exceptions: “this rule, like
all rules, lacks universal validity. I have known
cunning geese. I have met
naďve foxes. And I have known modest and almost human
judges”. The Jurist in our
story is not a naďve fox or a modest
and human judge. He had an intern working with him and
had used his position to
sexually abuse her. It took more than a year for that
woman to gather courage
and bring the matter to light, that too through a blog.
Fortunately, the
Supreme Court constituted an internal committee to
enquire into the matter.
Except this saving grace, the entire episode reeks of
abuse of position, power
and societal prejudices. Let us read the
interview this girl had given to Wall
Street Journal: “All that I wanted to do was to
erase the memory from my
conscience. This was a man I had admired, I looked up to
him...Indeed, I
pondered over the idea of legal recourse, but feared it
would do more harm than
good. First, my case would have dragged on for years.
Second, defence lawyers
would make me relive every violating moment in court –
something I wanted to
bury at the time. Third, in cases of assaults, where
there is no physical
evidence, it's one's word against another's, really.
There's no reason why a
law graduate would have won over a judge with a spotless
record. Even now, for
instance, when I appear before the panel, I feel I'm
being looked at with
suspicious eye. I have to constantly justify that I'm
not lying, I'm not making
up this story. I feel humiliated”. This was her
experience of facing the panel
constituted by the Supreme Court and that too she
herself is a lawyer. Imagine
the plight of ordinary women, without legal background
or backing and facing a
panel constituted by some lower level courts! Let us read the
reaction of her family members, when
she had mentioned the issue before them: “When I told my
grandmother I was
assaulted, she couldn't understand why I was making a
big deal out of it. In
fact, she didn't even think it was wrong. 'We have all
been harassed at some
point or the other,' she (grandmother) would say...My
mother, meanwhile, said
what had happened was indeed wrong, but that I had to
accept it and move on.
'You don't have any other option,' she (mother) would
say”. These are just some
of the reflections of the prejudices existing in our
society. This story too is
not complete. It too is evolving,
waiting for the names to roll out. Before moving to
the last story, an interesting fact
needs to be mentioned here. The Supreme Court, which had
delivered the famous,
path-breaking Visakha Judgement on sexual
harassment and directed for
the constitution of committees to prevent and probe such
incidents, did not
have such an institutional mechanism till few days back.
It took 16 years for
the Supreme Court to implement its own ruling. It is an
open question, how long
will it take to set-up such mechanisms throughout the
country? Story Three: The
Editor Before
going into
the story, let us first read about what constitutes a
democratic press, ethics
and responsibilities of a journalist: “By its most
rudimentary definition, a
democratic press is meant to inform educate and
entertain the citizenry in a
fair, objective factual and proportionate way. It is
meant also to be opinionated,
irreverent and inviolably committed to the idea of
individual; and civil
liberties. At its purest, however it is meant to have
the appetite to
investigate and question both money and power and hold
them to the idea of the
greater common good. It is meant not only to reflect the
popular mood, but also
to stand against it, if the popular ever consolidates
into something
detrimental to a core constitutional or democratic
value”. About
the responses
of Indian media and whether it is living up to the
ethics and challenges of
journalistic profession: “How is the Indian media
responding to these spikes?
How is it reading the symptoms? And is the media's
response sufficient to
inspire confidence in the public?....given the great
freedoms and duties it
bears as a profession, the media's response to
challenges within, do not just
concern the fraternity, they concern the country”. And
now comes the
advice: “Perhaps, it is time now for the Indian media to
recall the old parable
of the frog as well. If you don't recognise the slow
heating of the waters you
swim in, a day comes uncomfortably soon when you find
yourself fried. For a
variety of reasons, it is indisputable that the Indian
media is coasting in
several danger zones now, but are we, as fraternity,
sufficiently willing to
acknowledge that? Are we putting in the correctives? Do
we even agree the water
is hot? And if so, why”? All these are not taken from
some textbook teaching
aspiring journalists about the profession they are
entering and the challenges
they have to face. It is Tehelka,
holding aloft its banner of 'Free and Frank Journalism',
speaking through its
managing-editor Shoma Chaudhury (Issue no 50, 2012). If a
year past is a
long time for morals and advices to change. Hold on. In
the just concluded infamous
Thinkfest organised by Tehelka, Shoma
spoke so eloquently about rape and the rights of women.
Ironically, the Thinkfest,
hosted some of the rape victims too, to sensitise the
guests invited not only
about the rampant prevalence of sexual harassment in the
country, but also
about the plight of the women and the societal
prejudices. None could even
foresee that amidst them is sitting a predator. The
predator, who
claims of espousing progressive values, was “forced to
apologise” and after
being “angrily confronted” by the learned
managing-editor. And the
'progressive' editor “voluntarily” stepped down for six
months, which is “over
and above what the alleged victim had asked for”. What a
display of benevolence
and concern indeed! And with this, they sought to put
the lid on the matter and
when questions were asked, straight flew the answer
exposing the skin that lies
under the mask of 'feminism; and 'progressivism' “I
don’t know how this
concerns you…I don’t think you can ask me these
questions”. With
the law hot on
heels, Tejpal stands further exposed. From regretting
the “shameful lapse of
judgement that led me to attempt a sexual liaison with
you on two occasions...
despite your clear reluctance that you did not want such
attention from me”, he
now shows his true nature in his bail application: “the
first incident, that
occurred on the night of 7 November, was light-hearted
banter”. From there, he
proceeds further and stands alongside all his
patriarchal brothers in
assassination of the character of the victim. Shameless
to say the least, he
said, “the victim was at every party and social event in
the conference and
also stayed out late into the night”. Shedding
all his
pretences of “This is easily the worst moment of my life
– something ostensibly
playful gone so horribly wrong, damaging of all that I
hold dear in life, from
people to principles...My punishment has already been
upon me, and will
probably last till my last day”, Tejpal stands true as
who he is – the abuser.
As Asaram Bapu had accused the Congress of political
vendetta, he is accusing
the BJP of political vendetta. Birds of the same
feather! Moral: The sants pose as
conscience builders, the judges as
upholders and the journalists as perpetually on watch to
ensure that social
consciousness stays on its moral course. Ironically, all
the three stand
exposed today. Of course, this is not to paint
everything and everybody in
black. There are still spots of oasis. Unless we all
come together to fight
against social prejudices, superstitious beliefs and
regressive mindsets, we
will be witnessing more of such incidents unfolding. Do
we know that the
government, which had enacted the Nirbhaya Act, post the
December 16 rape in
the capital, is yet to notify the laws of the Act? This
is not just a reflection
of lethargy, but of a social mindset. This is what we
need to fight against.
And it is not a day's event, but a lifelong struggle.
Join it. PS: And
the story of doctor and his wife, who too is a doctor,
is not mentioned.