India’s Daughters have been dragged through mud

In the opinion of this writer the following is an assessment of a documentary :

On Wednesday March 4,2015 the BBC released a documentary called ‘India’s Daughter’ which it had bought from a British woman (Leslie Udwin) who had made it in India on the rape and killing of Nirbhaya (which had happened in 2012). She interviewed in Tihar jail the man who had committed this heinous crime . This interview is filled with the outrageous statements made by the prisoner in justification of his act : that women should be out late at night, that she should not have resisted the rape etc.

The interview and the outrageous comments made by his defence lawyers are the centre piece of the documentary although there are other pieces of information about the way women are treated around the world. Leslie Udwin’s  apparent motive in producing this documentary was to raise consciousness and thereby contribute to women’s welfare.

At first glance, therefore, it seemed like a feminist film. However, many feminist organisations in India distanced themselves from it because they felt that the documentary had impinged upon the Indian judicial system. The case against the prisoner (he had appealed his conviction and death sentence) was still with the Supreme Court and hence the case was sub judice. In Indian law this cannot be done. The Supreme Court gave a restraining order and the Government of India has imposed a ban on it being shown both in India and abroad. Youtube complied and took it off the internet. The documenatary had flaunted the rules of the Indian judicial system : a case cannot be publicised while sub judice.

The Government of India also requested the BBC not to show the documentary. It did not comply.

Meanwhile, in India, the expected liberal voices condemned the Government for violating the freedom of speech. The British woman herself wagged her forefinger at the Government for violating her freedom of speech ! N. Ram came out with a gem of a statement. He said during a debate on NDTV that this documentary might become a masterpiece, like Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood (the novelist’s account of his interview with a cold blooded murderer).

There was a lot of shouting about women’s rights, freedom of speech  and how the ban would make India a laughing stock in the world etc. None of this motley crew thought about the central problem with this documentary : it violates the victim Nirbaya’s right to dignity and privacy. In the documentary the prisoner goes into graphic detail about the rape and how he put his hand into her and pulled out her intestines etc. He also boasts about his rape of a 5 year old who he said was only a beggar child !

This 5 year old’s rights have been violated by this documentary, so it would seem. Nirbahya is dead but the child survived and is alive. Hence, all through the rest of her life this documentary will confront her. All through her life the story of her tragedy will be before the public gaze. Let us hope that some legal action can be taken against this film maker for what looks like a a thoughtless and wilful trampling of the child’s rights. Surely the Child’s Protection Act and organisations associated with this will take up the cudgels on her behalf, since she is both a child and from an underprivileged background. Leslie Udwin, it would seem, has simply exploited the child, while ostensibly trying to promote women/children’s rights.

Both the child and Nirbhaya have been  dragged through the mud, in violation of their rights. This is an opinion that can no longer be ignored, despite the glamour surrounding this BBC enterprise.

There are honourable exceptions to the misguided comments by the motley crew. Arnab Goswami of Times Now ran two or three programs where he has informed the Indian public of the facts of the case. He has emphasised the shocking violation of the rights of Nirbhaya and the 5 year old to dignity and privacy and not being exposed in such graphic detail to the world’s gaze. It shows the insensitivity of the woman who made this documentary under the pretext that it was social activism, the empowerment of women etc.

Two eminent lawyers Indira Jaisingh (former additional Solicitor General and dedicated feminist ) said publicly : I have seen this film and it should never have been made. Jaisingh also pointed out that the claims made by the British woman that she had received prior endorsement by some members of the judiciary were false. Ms Jaisingh also pointed out the violation of Indian law in making the documentary while the judicial process was still on.

Vrinda Grover, well known lawyer and feminist, pointed out something that all thinking adults know : freedom of speech is not an unlimited right, and cannot supercede the legal process.

It is not clear why the UPA Home Ministry is alleged to have given this foreign journalist free access to the prisoner. Indian journalists have tried to interview British prisoners in the UK and have been denied permission to do so. The BBC also violated its own directive principles : that graphic descriptions and interviews with criminals should not go beyond a point where it will offend or hurt the victims (and their families) of the crimes.

There are many more aspects of the legalities of the situation. However, what all Indians should remember is that India’s daughters, far from being helped have been violated in their rights to dignity and privacy even in death (as in Nirbhaya’s case). This point has been lost by the ‘beautiful people’ in the country who will continue with their sermons against the Government of India and endorse the illegal and shameful violation of victim’s rights by this documentary.

It would seem that Leslie Udwin herself is both ambitious and materialistic. In addition to being in the limelight she has gained financially. She has sold her rights to the BBC and to US broadcasters. As the days go by, more facts will surely emerge as to the motives of one misguided woman and other greedy corporations.

Responses