The issue of death sentence for rapists is once again being seriously advocated by the Central Home Minister L.K. Advani. Even earlier in the life of the current BJP Govt., he had mooted his convictions on the issue. This time he has spoken concretely about bringing a bill, saying that MPs are asking why rape, a crime ‘graver than homicide’ should be punished by a lesser sentence. Unfortunately a section of women MPs belonging to reactionary parties were asking such questions publicly and hysterically advocating such a sentence. Flag bearer of the fascist brigade, George Fernandes, is a step ahead – ‘Shoot them down’ is his position on rapists (as reported by Hindustan Times in November 2002). According to him this is how the Chinese deal with corruption.

A large cross-section of women commentators, organizations and activists, as well as newspaper editorials have responded with dismay, disdain and dismissal to this populist and fascist advocacy. The same day as George Fernandes espoused the gun, a gang rape victim of Bhuwaneshwar went public, condemning the ‘publicity stunts’. She has echoed the words of all those who have spent time and energy seriously examining violence against women, especially rape – inevitability of punishment, not severity of punishment, is the need.

The immediate provocation for the current discourse was the rape of a medical student in broad daylight, at the centre of a busy road a stone’s throw away from the office of the Police Commissioner in Delhi. A city with a 2% conviction in rape cases, witness to daily incidents of violent sexual assaults on women, this was the fourth high profile case over as many months in its daily record of a case or two. Around four months earlier, a student of Law Centre of Delhi University was forcibly pulled into a car with stained windows, within the campus around 7 p.m., again a stone’s throw away from a police vehicle. She was gang raped and thrown out of the car, whereupon she went to the police. Awfully, it turned out that a similar incident involving the same boys had befallen her earlier in the campus, but she had not dared to speak out. Police emphasized this aspect of the story; the girl, an outsider, fled the city after a few days. Students agitated and demonstrated for effecting arrests – the police sat pretty; the victim had ‘gone’, how was arrest possible? The students too sat silent after mandatory protests. Within days of pouring police into the campus for ‘security’ (but not for catching the culprits) another campus resident student caught her own molester – an off-duty policeman. The local police refused to register a case until she and other students shook up senior officers. Few weeks down, a young girl who performs in a dance troupe which amuses the city’s rich and powerful at parties and weddings, was chased by six boys in a car at night. She was with a friend in another car. Her car was forced to stop, she was abducted and gang raped. She complained to the police. Newspapers recorded evidence of a local guard who saw the abduction. On her complaint, an ex-ABVP leader was arrested. The police state that in her high profile ‘identification parade’ when brought face to face with the politically powerful rapists, she refused to identify the boy, and the ‘reality’ is that she chickened out of a fixed ‘deal’ seeing the number of boys. Then the police kindly found her cellular phone which ‘proved’ she was not where she says she was.

Is there then any wonder that in the case of the medical student, she refused to give a statement to the police, she refused to take part in the identification parade? Though the police had an informal statement and a totally tell tale mark of identification, it took a rally of over 1000 students to ensure arrest of the rapist. Can campus law students forget Priyadarshini Mahtoo – a law student, harassed by an ACP’s son, murdered by him despite publicly known complaints and a personal police security, but whose case fell through in court due to faulty police investigation?

The running thread through the cases in Delhi, which also fuels the fury of the noose advocates among middle classes, is the faulty police investigations and lack of arrests, leading to lack of conviction. The partially successful and biggest struggle in Delhi against sexual harassment was of a nurse by the Director of LRS TB Hospital, fought by the hospital employees of Delhi. Another successfully fought and won case was of sexual harassment of postgraduate women students of the LNJP medical college by a senior doctor – but not before doctors’ militant protests, with several criminal cases being registered against the victims and those who fought for them. The English media, the elite and of course the police do not like these cases, which upset their notions of the ‘status quo!

In fact the current case fanned and brought out all sorts of elitist prejudices, which cannot help the struggle against violence on women. The aspects were rather ‘picture perfect’. The rapist was a young jhuggi resident – a section of students, the authorities of the hospital and police officers gave full play to their class prejudices. Safety lay in a ‘closed campus’ (while the rape occurred outside!), students should be separated by a wall from the employees’ quarters complex; violence on women was perpetrated by employees, their guests and the dwellers of neighbouring jhuggis. Not a word of concern about growing joblessness, about the vast section of youth with no jobs, little access to education, but easy access to drugs, liquor, local Mafia, petty crimes, gambling – all of which the police is to stop. The whole city is alive with hoardings, pictures, commercials blasting out a crash commercialization of women’s bodies; with such bodies popping out of advertisements of cars, tablespoons, pens and computers and even media – the “Aajtak” has several neon advertisements of a semi-clad woman sailing down a ramp to prove that it has the ‘first eyes’ on news.

A Delhi police survey published by a leading newspaper in the middle of all the hysterical outbursts against jhuggi dwellers’ morals, soured the situation. It showed that 52% of eve teasers were businessmen, and that less than 2% of them were illiterates. A good majority was educated and moneyed. Interestingly, all the heightened police presence caught another eve teaser outside the same medical college – an engineer.

Within days of the case mentioned, a small report crept into some newspapers of a nine year old rape victim lying unattended in GTB Hospital of Delhi for a few hours, unconscious and bleeding. Her father was a poor worker, a jhuggi dweller. There were no parliamentary questions, no newspaper editorials and only few women’s organizations condemned this situation. The point is clear enough.

The debate has, however, highlighted many serious questions that women’s organizations have long striven to highlight. One is the very definition of ‘rape’, which excludes several aspects of sexual violence. The second is of the sieve – like, insensitive, class biased, gender biased police investigations which result only in acquittals.

Speedy trials, defense of victim’s identify, speed in recording of FIR, not taking the victim through several verbal rapes – all these are issues needing urgent redressal. L.K. Advani advocates ‘hanging’ – these are cases where the victim is often the only witness, and if conviction depends on her, what chance has she to escape murder? Secondly, convictions are even less likely than now, when the question of capital punishment is involved. Thirdly, who constitutes the rapist? Would LK Advani extend his anger to the bestial brutes of his Hindutva force in Gujarat who have not only gang rapes, mass rapes but several bestial sexual crimes adorning their anti-Muslim campaign?

The Supreme Court absolved four gang rapists – all policemen – over twenty years ago in the Mathura case – she was ‘accustomed to intercourse’. On 12th Nov. 2002, the cabinet has taken a decision to make a long awaited amendment to the Indian Evidence Act 1872, “so that the previous character of a rape victim in her cross examination is no longer relevant.” Rather than showing genuine concern by ensuring swift passage of this long overdue step, time is being wasted on populist, fascist posturing.

Why are they being termed ‘posturing’? When large-scale bestial rape is allowed for politicians in the name of ‘religious backlash’ – can that society, system or party get away with any convincing position on women’s rights? When power rape is the rule of villages all over India except where militant peasant movements defend women, can hanging a perverted jobless youth send the message of “no to violence against women”?

Women’s organizations need to use every opportunity to carry the debates on rape and violence not only among women but also amongst the students and youth. Without exposing both prejudices and posturing of the ruling classes even reforms are not possible, leave alone actually fighting the forces of violence on women.