Prime time rape

[Guest guest]

Prime time rape

KALPANA SHARMA

Sunday, Jun 28, 2009

Unfortunately, in the media blitzkrieg that follows rape cases when prominent

public figures are involved, the real issues are forgotten…

Yet, despite the law, the convictions in rape cases are few and far in-between.

PHOTO: PTI

In the public eye: Activists protest in Mumbai.

It began as a routine crime report. An actor had been charged with raping his

domestic help and had been taken into custody. But within a day it became

front-page news. Because the actor, Shiney Ahuja, was reasonably well known and

the domestic help had registered the complaint within hours of the alleged rape.

The predictable feeding frenzy of the media led to regular updates from the

police, even as the case was being investigated, being published. At the same

time, the denials and certificates of good character for the actor were also

faithfully reported.

Trial by media

Even before the case was filed in court, the trial was on. The chairperson of

the National Commission of Women announced, after meeting the domestic help

involved, that the accused was guilty and should be punished. On the other side,

the actor's wife declared on major television channels that her husband was

innocent and that this was a frame-up. When asked how she had concluded that it

was a frame-up, she could not answer except to reiterate that she believed her

husband could never do such a thing. Friends and supporters spoke of how much of

a gentleman he was, what a good father, and that they too believed he was

innocent.

The domestic help, of course, could not speak for herself. She cannot defend the

charge made by Ahuja's wife that this was a frame-up. Rape victims generally do

not want to go public and according to the law, the media too has to ensure that

neither the name, nor any hint that could reveal the identity of a woman raped,

is published. Despite this, at least one television channel and a newspaper ran

a photograph of the young woman with her face covered. What did they gain by

doing this? Many newspapers also gave details such as the village where she

lived, what her father did and several other clues that would determine her

identity. Fortunately for her, the media did not pursue this side of the story

as the actor's story was more interesting and would grab more eyeballs.

Enough hints

In another recent incident in Mumbai, where a foreign student was allegedly gang

raped by six men, once again the media violated the requirement of protecting

the victim's identity. Although none of them published her name, they gave away

her identity by publishing the name of the institute where she was enrolled, the

course she was attending, the name of her course coordinator, the hostel number

where she lived, the name of her room-mate etc. So even though the majority of

students on the campus where she studied initially had no clue who she was, they

guessed easily once all these details were published.

Also as in the Shiney Ahuja case, the relatives of the accused were heard giving

good character certificates to the young men while defence lawyers were quoted

asking why the woman was out with six men, why did she drink alcohol etc. All

this was headline news. The victim could not defend herself publicly.

As a result of such a trial through the media, the real issue — of rape — has

receded in the background. What does it actually mean when a woman is raped? Why

are women raped — rich or poor, black or white, young or old? Do women invite

rape, as some allege, by the way they dress? Do women lure men to rape them?

Would any woman in her right senses want to be the victim of a violent sexual

assault? And if she does not resist, and show physical evidence of such

resistance in the form of injury, does it mean this was " consensual sex " ? This

last was one of the arguments put forward by those defending Shiney Ahuja, that

what happened was not rape but " consensual sex " .

Rape, or violent sexual assault, on women takes place during war and peace, in

the home and outside it. Rape has been recognised as a weapon of war, used by

warring groups to punish each other. The horrific rapes in Rwanda are just one

of many illustrations of what happens to women in situations of conflict. Date

rape, rape within marriage, incest, rape of minors (in this country done in the

belief that men who have AIDS will be cured through this), custodial rape, rape

during communal and caste riots, rape by security forces and armed insurgents,

the list is endless. Rape is not a rare occurrence; the incidence is many times

higher than the reported cases.

On the victim's side

The law in India is clear on rape. The testimony of the rape victim is the most

important. Even if due to circumstances, such as late reporting of the rape,

there is inadequate medical evidence, the court gives greater credence to the

word of the victim. The accused has to establish his innocence. The onus is on

him, and not on the victim to prove his guilt.

Yet despite this, the convictions in rape cases are few and far in-between.

Often the prosecution cannot match the tactics of the defence, particularly when

the victim is poor and the accused have money. This also happens because women

hesitate to report rape. They fear the consequences on their own lives once it

is known that they have been raped, they internalise the shame, and their

families prefer to hide the truth rather than fight it out in court.

Unfortunately now, with the kind of attention that rape cases invite through the

media, particularly when a person from the middle or upper classes is involved,

women will be even more hesitant to turn to the law.

Email the writer: sharma.kalpana@...

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2009/06/28/stories/2009062850100300.htm

[Guest guest]

Dear FORUM,

Re: /message/10428

It is interesting that Kalpana Sharma, while talking about the victim,

mentions " ..if she does not resist, and show physical evidence of such

resistance in the form of injury, does it mean this was " consensual

sex " ?.... " .

I agree that this question needs to be asked. The assumption

by the media and defenders of the rapists that lack of resistance from the

victim shows 'consent' is particularly worrisome since girls/women are told not

to resist when they do not succeed in escaping a rape situation.

The logic being lack of any reaction from the victim may deter the rapist as

passivity could rob him of the 'extra' excitement.

Rgds,

Shashi Sudhir

HIV & Development

UNDP

55 Lodi Estate

New Delhi 110 003, India

Tel: 91-11-46532307

e-mail: <shashi.sudhir@...>