"Indian" <delhi...@yahoo.com> writes: SINCE YOU ARE ANGRY (AND RIGHTLY SO) YOU ARE TAKING A CONTRADICTORY POSITION BY REPOSING FAITH IN A SYSTEM THAT YOU DO NOT WANT OR CANNOT TRUST IN THE FIRST PLACE. PLEASE SEE YOUR FOLLOWING LINE: "ALSO, CAN WE SUE THE JUDICIARY SINCE THEY TOLD A LIE WHILE SAYING THAT THE PETITION DID NOT HAVE A LOCUS STANDI?" WHO WOULD BE THE JUDGE TO PROSECUTE WHOM??
IN A DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM IT IS A MATTER OF NEGOTIATION AND BARGAINING. THE SMARTNESS LIES IN BEING PATIENT AND ALWAYS KEEPING THE BIGGER PICTURE IN MIND WHILE CELEBRATING SMALL SUCCESSES ON THE WAY. FINALLY, THE ENEMY, WHETHER PERCEIVED OR REAL, IS PRETTY FACELESS, AND HENCE SHAMELESS. SO THERE IS NO POINT IN BEING ANGRY! THE MANTRA IS 'KEEP GOING'. Reply: I agree with you. They are shameless since they are faceless which has given them impunity from punishment no matter what crime they commit. In spite of this, if somehow we could have found a way to show their true face to them, it would have helped us. Otherwise they are sure to repeat their dirty tricks and harm us in our further work. Presently, reverse is going on. Rather than condemning them, we are praising them. Aditya Bandopadhyay has taken a very simplistic view of the situation. It will not help. A higher court can always reverse the verdict of a lower court. There is nothing wrong in it. Even the same court can change its earlier verdict, when a review petition is filed. We cannot prove any impropriety involved. However, things are not as simple. The previous judges didn't dismiss our petition since they were not competent enough or they did not know the law. They dismissed it since they were biased against us; since they became afraid when they received our petition. They very well knew that the petition had all the merits, but they were scared of the possible reaction of Indian mainstream population who was not even ready to hear the word 'homosexuality' at that time. However, this is something on which a court case should not be dismissed. I am also not blaming the judges who dismissed it; I am blaming the whole system, the complete judiciary. I know it was not only the decision of the judges who signed the order; it was a collective decision of the government of India and the complete judiciary including the Supreme Court, working in the background. Of course, the judges who did this were also not fully innocent. True, the whole system violated the constitution, but the judges who signed the order also did not do justice with their own profession. They had a very simple remedy. They could have resigned, instead of signing that verdict. The question which you are asking, i.e., who will judge the judiciary, is not very difficult to answer. In the case which the Supreme Court is fighting with a person who has asked to reveal the assets of the SC judges under the RTI Act, judiciary is judging itself. First, it was judged by the Chief Information Commissioner and then twice by the Delhi High Court; first by a single judge bench, and then by a full bench. The Supreme Court lost all the three times. Now, the Supreme Court is preparing to file an appeal to itself. Quite interesting. Isn’t it? More difficult to answer is the question - Against whom should we make a complaint and what complaint should we make. This is very complicated question. However, it is not necessary to go to judiciary all the time. It could have been a media trial also. When Supreme Court Justice Markandeya Katju said - “We don’t want to have Talibans in our country” while dismissing the petition of Mohammad Salim, a student at Nirmala Convent School in Madhya Pradesh who wanted to sport a beard, the newspapers opposed and justice Katju had to apologize for his remarks. When Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Rajendra Kumar Shastri of Karkardooma District Court in Delhi immensely praised R. K. Sharma, the murderer of Shivani Bhatnagar, and designated him as an ‘Asset to the Nation’ who committed only 'one mistake’, the newspapers highlighted the issue and the people protested angrily asking for Shastri's remarks to be deleted from the verdict. Our case is much more serious than the above. But surprisingly, media is praising the judiciary rather than condemning it. If we could do something so that the matter is highlighted within Indian circles, our future fight for our rights will be much easier. If nothing can be done about it, we shouldn’t at least praise them. Recently A. P. Shah retired and gay community thanked him profusely. Why? And why him only? A. P. Shah only signed the verdict. It was the collective decision of the Govt. of India and the Supreme Court. Of course, Justice A. P. Shah might also have been a party to it. The main lead was taken by the Supreme Court who in 2005 ordered DHC to pass the petition after taking due care that law and order problem doesn't arise which DHC took care of by making a further delay of four years. "Samir Wartak" <samir_...@yahoo.co.in> writes: I THINK OUR ACTIVISTS HAVE FOR NOW .. SUFFICIENT LEGAL AND SOCIAL COMPREHENSION ABOUT THE ISSUES. THEY HAVE SHOWED SUFFICIENT COMPETENCY IN CONVINCING THE DHC ... Reply: They do not. They have not understood why the petition was dropped initially and under what conditions, they same petition was approved afterwards. Understanding this will help us in future. Ashok Row Kavi "arowk...@vsnl.in" writes: PRASHANTS AND ASSORTED ARM CHAIR ACTIVISTS IS THAT THEIR RANTS ARE READ BY PEOPLE FROM THE ENEMY CAMP MONITORING OUR E-LISTS. DO YOU KNOW THAT THE JACK LEGAL "EXPERTS" QUOTED ME AS HAVING PERMITTED AND BACKING SEX WORK? FOR MEN? SIMILARLY, I FEEL THAT PRASHANT IS BEING FANNING FALSE FIRES BY KEEPING ON ASKING FOR MARRIAGE CIVIL RIGHTS... Reply: I cannot understand how my writings can be abused by our enemies. What I wrote in my article is only that our petition was dropped when Indian heterosexuals were opposing homosexuality. And it was passed when they approved it. The theme of my article was to highlight that the constitution did never come into picture. I just cannot understand how this can be used against us. Please be more explicit. If you think that the SC may overturn DHC verdict since I raised the issue of SSML also; then consider this - Who does not know that one day we will definitely be demanding it and who does not know that one day it will have to be given to us and the wait is only for the approval of the Indian majority class? I do not hope that on this basis DHC verdict will be overturned by SC. As I wrote previously, I have already circulated my article to all government and judicial circles not only by e-mail but also by postal letters. I never expect that it may harm us in any way. Of course, it has fallen on deaf ears, as was expected. "shishir thadani" <shishirthad...@att.net> writes: MAY I SUGGEST THAT IF YOU FEEL AS STRONGLY AS YOU DO - PLEASE TAKE YOUR BATTLE TO SOME INFLUENTIAL STRAIGHT DECISION-MAKERS. IF YOU ARE GENUINE AND SINCERE, I AM SURE OTHERS WILL FOLLOW. IF YOU CAN'T DO THAT - JUST TRY TO BE OPENLY GAY… Reply: Presently, no answer. Presently, fate does not allow me to come out. Most unfortunately. I also understand that very little work can be done by remaining hidden. But I still want to contribute whatever I can. You may think that I am contributing negatively, but I am positive. I am myself pure gay and I want welfare of my community and remove its pain. I desire that nobody undergoes what I had to undergo or what I am undergoing. I have no hidden agenda. I only wish and desire (and have a little hope also) that one day I will be able to break the chains of my slavery and declare my independence. Then I will be able to do more work. I was born as a slave but I want to die as a free man. Please send me good wishes. Prashant ------------------------------------------------------------------ Matrimonials for Same-sex Marriages (http://users1.jabry.com/pg211/index.asp) Matrimonials for Bisexuals (http://users1.jabry.com/pg211/bi/index.asp) The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage. http://in.yahoo.com/
