From a Republic to Raped-public.- Muder and rape of a doctor in Kolkata hospital.
Pawan Kumar Bansal
From a Republic to Raped-public.- Muder and rape of a doctor in Kolkata hospital.By our enlightened reader Barun Mitra.
On the night of August 9, a postgraduate trainee doctor was allegedly raped and murdered at the RG Kar medical college in Calcutta. Over the past ten days protests have broken out in many cities across the country. The Supreme Court of India has suo moto taken up this issue in view of widespread outrage.
One of the popular memes going around on social media is of a protest where a poster reads, “We are living in a Republic, not a Rape-Public !”
The class divide in the many protests against rape, murder and violence against women may have only gotten entrenched with mass media and social media.
Compare the current protests with a few recent ones, Kathua in 2018, Hathras in 2020, Manipur in 2023. Or the parole granted to convicted rapists like Asaram, Ram-Rahim or the Bilkis bano case. Just to name a few.
To top it all, rape and violence against women may be one of the most normalised of all “crimes” despite the law. IIRC, well over 90% of sexual violence are perpetrated by people known to victims, within circles of relatives, friends and acquaintances, according to police data. In such a social context, no wonder others have estimated that 99% of incidents of violence against women go unreported.
It should come as no surprise that public protests against a particular tragedy merely goes on to whitewash the endless list of tragedies. It creates the self satisfaction of public action while continuing to nurture the climate conducive to continuing violence against women, as well as weaker sections of society.
Legalisation of society in the name of safety and security, merely institutionalises violence, and normalises it across society. But law can only be invoked after a crime has been committed. However, the focus on law enforcement undermines the significance of social awareness and mobilisation to cultivate a culture that prevents or reduces the practices of social discrimination and violence. Such instances are reflections of socio-political power of one section of society enjoys over another. No wonder, legalisation of society inevitably entrenches those wielding power over those who are the victims of that power.
Not surprisingly, the only ones who seize the opportunity in people’s outrages like the present one are the political entrepreneurs. Irrespective of political ideology, they instinctively grasp the possibility of enhancing the scope of the law, and recognise that this will only help further instrumentalise and therefore weaponise the law in the hands of those in power. This is reflected in the selective and symbolic support the political class extends to some tragedies and not to others, according to their own political calculus and convenience. The political undertones of public protests against some instances of rape, or studious silence over others, have repeatedly exposed the political calculus.
People at the protests feel empowered by their own sense of agency, and cherish the apparent strengthening of the law, or celebrate even a possible death sentence. And yet this cycle keeps repeating.
While the only ones who emerge victorious are those who control the levers of law, since every failure of law to prevent or prosecute a crime only reinforces their control over the law.
Popular outrage invariably dies out, sometimes even changing the political regime. Yet the only certainty through all the tumult is that politics of power will emerge even stronger at the cost of the people. The state will exercise even greater dominance over society, as people voluntarily surrender their sovereignty to the law of the state.
Not to forget the pretence of outrage in Supreme Court while it repeatedly watched so many miscarriages of justice in rape cases playing out in its own courtroom.
Tailpiece:
Politics of power, irrespective of ideology, is seeking to relegitimise itself by expanding the scope of law riding on popular outrage.
A Republic where the public surrenders its own responsibility to organise its own affairs and stops renewing the shared values, and prefers to submit itself to the law of the state, cannot remain a Republic for long. Gandhi’s criticism of modernity powered by the state of law made over a century ago in the context of colonialism remains as valid today’s Republics around the world. The colour of those entrusted with the law may have changed, but not the nature of the law, and the way law is invoked and violence is legitimised.