|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << November30, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]Safronization,Hinduization Or Brahminization? |
December01, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]Unravelling the Self-image of the Indian Bomb Lobby >> |
|
From: Regi P George <george_regi@yahoo.com> Date: Tue Nov 30, 2004 0:24pm Subject: A Doll's House A Doll's House In two recent incidents that involved panchayats making extra-legal decisions about women's lives, the interpretation of customs and laws went against the wishes of the concerned women. In one case, Islam was quoted for the legitimacy of the decision taken and, in the other, caste traditions under Hinduism were cited. That these panchayats should resort to the customs and rules of practised religion, which are in any case disdainful of women's rights, to deliver decisions is unacceptable. The panchayats have to be brought in line with the laws of the land and the values of the Indian Constitution. Ram Puniyani http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2004&leaf=11&filename=7913&filetype=html Two incidents in the months of September to October 2004 had a lot in common with each other. Both incidents involved the lives of women, both the women concerned were pregnant, and were told by the village panchayats, exclusively male bodies, to leave their current husbands. Needless to say, both women were shattered by these extra judicial judgments. In the first case, Gudiya was married to Taufiq after the disappearance of her first husband Arif in the Kargil war. Arif had been missing since September 1999, he was presumed dead and Gudiya was subsequently married to Taufiq. With the return of Arif, the panchayat decided that since Gudiya??™s husband Arif was alive, her marriage to Taufiq and the child she was carrying were both illegal. They agreed that Gudiya should go back to her first husband and give the child, once it was born, to Taufiq, the ???illegal??™ husband. Gudiya, however, spoke her mind saying that she wanted to stay with her present husband and that she could not live without her baby. Media glare notwithstanding, the decision of the panchayat was against her wishes and she was to return to Arif once she delivered the baby that Taufiq would keep in his care. In the second such case, Sonia and Rampal married in a Haryana civil court. They had been living together and she was pregnant. It came to be known that they both belonged to the same gotra (family lineage) and so the panchayat decided they could not be husband and wife, instead Sonia had to regard Rampal as her brother and her child had to be abandoned (as it was illegal and a product of incest!). In this instance, thanks to the intervention of National Commission for Women and the court, the panchayat revised its decision by citing that they had made a mistake about the gotra, and that the girl and boy were indeed from different gotras so they could stay married. What is striking is the similarity of Gudiya and Sonia??™s situation. In both cases the panchayat was deciding in an extra-legal, one may say even illegal, manner the lives of both girls. Be it Hindu or Muslim, the interpretation of customs and laws is done in a manner that is against the wishes of the women and sometimes, even the men involved. Many times this is done in the name of the customs and rules of the community involved and religion is also invoked. Panchayats that deliver these decisions are exclusively male-dominated and are relics of medieval times, when gender and caste hierarchy held sway in Indian society. It is assumed that these bodies have the sanction of religion and that panchas are equivalent to gods. It also reflects the primacy of the community over the individual. This characterises pre-modern modes of living, where the community identity preceded the individual identities. The process of the individual becoming the primary unit begins with the process of secularisation. This complex phenomenon involves multiple changes in society when prevalent social relations start changing. The changes relate to introduction of modern education and industrialisation at one level and to the relationships of caste and gender at the social level. These changes are not automatic, concerned subjugated groups have to struggle to get justice. With secularisation many western countries could march towards the concept of liberty, equality and fraternity (community). The serf or peasant no more remained a slave to the landlord, social justice was sought in the direction of equality. Women started coming into their own, rather than being regarded as the mere property of their husbands, and so the march towards gender equality began. In India this process began in the mid-19th century. But these changes could not go far due to colonial policies and prevailing opposition within society. It must be pointed out that British policies were not mere black and white, at places they pressed for reforms but at a deeper level, the social relationships of caste and gender did change but very slowly. This resulted in the persistence of older social relations in different pockets. Initially, it could broadly be said that this process did run as a social parallel to the economic process of land reforms, but then the latter itself did not proceed beyond a point. Even after independence, the process of land reforms did not go far. The social phenomenon of modern education and industrialisation started changing social relations to some extent. North India has however lagged behind in this process and pre-modern community bondages continue to persist in a powerful way. Caste panchayats, by and large, are repositories of hypostatised and frozen social relations. These must be distinguished from village panchayats, bodies elected by the whole village. The latter hold potential for social change if villagers are better educated and empowered through acts of legislation like the right to information, right to social facilities, etc. In villages where the mobility of people is low due to poor social development, the dependence on caste as community is very strong. The value system, which these caste panchayats perpetrate is based on the varna and jati subdivisions. Caste panchayats are not only male-dominated but also male-oriented. One is not sure about their status during the first three decades after independence and whether they showed signs of weakening due to the social development process. One gross observation, however, is that after the 1980s, there seems to have been a resurgence of rigid hierarchical notions. This runs parallel to the rise of communal politics. There is no need to emphasise here that in most cases caste panchayats decisions are contrary to the values of the Indian Constitution. In a way, in practice, the laws of Manu or the diktats of the ???mullahs??™ in some or other form continue to rule in parts of the country. It is little wonder that large parts of northern India, in particular, have been the hotbed of the rise of communalism and also of these rigidities. While community can be a good backup for absorbing existential anxieties, in its pre-modern forms it was or could be an oppressive bond. Both Sonia??™s and Gudiya??™s cases show brutal apathy to the aspirations of the people involved, and especially to women, who remain the bigger victims of the ruthless and rigid decisions of the panchayats. Can one imagine a pregnant woman being asked to abandon her child, to sever relations with her husband just because she belongs to the same gotra? Can a woman be asked to abandon her husband just because she was previously married to someone presumed dead for the last five years? There may be some discrepancy in the two cases as they are being compared. In the case of Gudiya, Islam, as practised, was quoted for the legitimacy of the decision taken. In case of Sonia, caste traditions as sanctified by practised Hinduism acted as the reference point. Here one has to distinguish between religion as practised and the interpretation of holy books as religion; we are merely referring to religion as practised. That these bodies resorted to customary rules is unacceptable on any ground. Religion, as practised, does sanction such rigidities, irrespective of the prevalent laws of the country. While in both cases Taufiq and Rampal are also victims in as large a measure as Gudiya and Sonia, it is the women who will suffer a deeper and long-term adverse impact on their lives. What traditional communities and religion, as practised, share with each other is the disdain for women??™s rights. Here one is not talking of scriptures, some of which do talk of giving justice to women, one is talking of community practices in the name of religion. It is on this basis that these inhumane decisions are taken. It is time to wake up and ensure that the injustice that Roop Kanwar, Gudiya, Sonia and many others suffered does not take place again. Another interesting angle comes from the post-modernists who defend traditional community practices on the grounds that they create equilibrium and harmony in the life of the village or town. This is a sophist??™s defence for caste and gender hierarchies of pre-modern times. Modernity, essentially, has to be an ensemble of concepts where equality amongst citizens, irrespective of caste, gender and religious identity, is a non-negotiable concept. Social groups need to take up these issues and exercise strong legal and social pressure on these panchayats. They have to be brought in line with laws of the land and the values of the Indian Constitution. While respecting collectivity we cannot let the Constitution and human rights be mauled. We cannot simply be witness to the illegalities of the panchayats, more so if they take it upon themselves to crush the lives of women such as in the cases above. Also, the correlation between the rise of religion-based politics and the assertions of such panchayats needs to be drawn out. The correlation among the absence of land reforms, hypostatised social relations and the dictates of panchayats needs to be understood. Suo motu the courts must intervene to stop the injustices being imposed by such bodies. http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2004&leaf=11&filename=7913&filetype=html |
|
| << November30, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]Safronization,Hinduization Or Brahminization? |
December01, 2004 - [India Thinkers Net]Unravelling the Self-image of the Indian Bomb Lobby >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |