[Goanet] A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of India
JC, you are correct. I misspelt statute. I hear what you say and agree that the reading of news particularly involves looking things up, as finding the paper delivered by the CJ, etc. The translation of specific information, and its presentation into a news item often leaves much to be desired. I have nothing to add, and I was not referring to abortions. Also, as an aside---my response on this topic does not mean I validate the word "repugnant" in the subject headline. The same is true when I respond to other Subject topics. venantius
Re: [Goanet] A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of India
re: "the statement made by the Hon. Chief Justice of India, Justice K G Balakrishnan, that "due regard must be given to the wishes of a rape victim, if she wants to marry the rapist or give birth to a child conceived following the crime". [1] Freddy Fernandes wrote: "as a concerned citizen of India, I am much perturbed by this statement." I am sure Venantius J Pinto was referring to the 'statute of limitation' - though I am not so sure such a thing exists in many common law countries wrt rape, however, I had difficulty comprehending what Venantius specifically meant by [2] the term 'nonchalance IN one of our Executive branches. [3] the rest of the post. I do ask: (a): Did we really read what the good Chief Justice said (at a seminar)? (b) Do we have a view on the paradigm shift which is presently taking place from the (previous) diktats of paternalism to the (modern) principle of autonomy? (c) What would Venantius and Freddy suggest - the CJ have said i.e. differently? (d) Would they have (say) forcibly aborted / recommended the aborting of the fetus against the mother's wishes? (e) Would they have (say) forcibly prevented the marriage of the two? (f) Are we all not autonomous enough to make our own mistakes ...and learn/not learn from them? (g) Who is the CJ (or we) to tell anybody what they can or cannot do .IF what they do is legal? jc
[Goanet] A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of India
This is exactly the kind of stuff that happens, and perhaps a plaintive strategy is being suggested towards what is Violent Seizure. Why plaintive? Because it suggests a helplessness, as well as a nonchalance in one of our Executive branches. We want change but finding it hard to spread understanding. I know someone whose fathers drivers daughter was abducted while attending her Std XII exams if I am not mistaken and raped. It was impressed upon her by the rapists family---older relatives as other "do-gooders", that she marry her rapist. She eventually did. She was also told by the rapist that he would kill her father. Please do not ask me details, nor write me aggrieved letters about statue of limitations, etc. This is also why I do not place much store by education. The Hon. Chief Justice of India, Justice K G Balakrishna did not study Underwater welding, or Milling, or even OBGyn. He studied Law which stems from Moral Systems. It means very little eventually, but we need education to get somewhere and during that time based on ones acculturation and sense of morals---the ability to hurt is either subsumed or eradicated. When one has seen and heard so much of cruelty and brutality as I have (and others I presume)---life starts to look very different. It is people like me who end up as some of the most arch haters of Politics as usual, the State, and the entire governing apparatus---IF ONE does not QUICKLY learn how to stop the mind going off. We see shit-eating grins, miles off, and the body has no option but to become all eyes. Instead of taking arms (which many of us would be EMINENTLY qualified to DO) one attempts smaller humane changes. But they too get spurned and despised, even at smaller levels. But one has to proceed with a sincere smile, since one makes a choice to do so. Others develop their own ways of dealing with such issues living in the west. Most of them suffocate under the weigh of the civilization they wish to remain attached to as per their interpretations in changing scenarios (including the changes manifesting in their own parents, spouses and children; and more); yet slowly asphyxiate while attempting to maintain unfathomed cross-cultural balances of their making. This applies in India too, venantius j pinto > From: "Freddy Fernandes" > To: > Subject: [Goanet] A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of >India > > A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of India > > As I was browsing through the news papers on the net, on Women's day, one > of the > articles on TOI did attract my attention in particular, the statement made > by > the Hon. Chief Justice of India, Justice K G Balakrishnan, that "due regard > must > be given to the wishes of a rape victim, if she wants to marry the rapist > or > give birth to a child conceived following the crime". I am in no way as > qualified as the CJI, nor do I understand anything major about the law > process, > but as a concerned citizen of India, I am much perturbed by this statement. > > >
[Goanet] A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of India
A Repugnant Suggestion By The Chief Justice Of India As I was browsing through the news papers on the net, on Women's day, one of the articles on TOI did attract my attention in particular, the statement made by the Hon. Chief Justice of India, Justice K G Balakrishnan, that "due regard must be given to the wishes of a rape victim, if she wants to marry the rapist or give birth to a child conceived following the crime". I am in no way as qualified as the CJI, nor do I understand anything major about the law process, but as a concerned citizen of India, I am much perturbed by this statement. As far as I am concerned a rape is a rape, no matter what terms or adjectives are used, it is the basic violation of one's human right, be it man or woman and should not go unpunished, no matter what follows in the aftermath and the punishment must be very severe and precise because, rape is not just physical degradation, it's a mental torture, the scars or the imprint of which, seldom heal or disappear, during the life term of a person. The entire life of a person can be devastated by this savage act of lust, which in no way reduces the intensity of the crime, even if forgiving by the victim. The decision of the victim, to marry the perpetrator, may be entirely personal or because of the circumstances created by the perpetrator, and should not have any influence on the process of justice. In the case of the victim wanting to marry the perpetrator, the wheels of justice should not deviate, but hold on to the path of righteousness and the perpetrator punished, if found guilty, or else we'll have women being singled out and randomly raped and then married as per convenience. This will only encourage rape and accordingly the situation will not be ameliorated in any way but rather exacerbated in more ways than one. I do not know in what other context the CJI, could have made that statement but as a layman, I know that even in a marriage, forced sex is a rape, so the perpetrator marrying his victim, is surely no alternative for consideration. Given the history of rapes to the rate of convictions, which is very much abysmal in India, our authorities should be working towards giving justice to the brave women, who despite the taboo of being raped, on their lives, have made efforts to fight for justice, so that the perpetrators may be punished and other women may live in dignity. It is indeed very much disconcerting to note, that just a minuscule percent of the rapes cases in India are reported, out of which, the conviction rate is even more pathetic, if this is the apathy towards the rape victims, what are the rape victims suppose to do ? Fight the perpetrators against all odds by themselves or follow the repugnant suggestion of the CJI and forgive the perpetrator and marry him and live happily ever after ? Will that be possible ? In India we are a very conservative society, and most often than not, rapes are not reported, some are even made to marry the perpetrators, to get rid of the social stigma of being raped. Is that the way, the Indian women of the 21st century should be humiliated ? I am shocked that, not a single woman of substance, of the present era, nor the human right groups in India, have raised a voice of concern regarding this statement made by the CJI. We do have every right to ask "what due regard" was the CJI talking about ? As far as the crime is concerned, punishment should be nothing less than castration or a life sentence. If this punishment is horrifying, so is the crime. With the present attitude towards rape victims I wonder, if the victims of rape will ever see justice served or "Justice for all" the very foundation of our constitution, will remain, just a slogan. On women's day, our Indian women surely deserved, a lot better than what was offered by the CJI. Freddy Agnelo Fernandes The content of this electronic communication is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and any others who are specifically authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or otherwise placing reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful in certain legal jurisdictions. If you have received this communication in error please notify the sender immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your system. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
