Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul

Expand Messages
  • Sukla Sen
    The capital punishment can be justified only in terms of retributive justice. There is nothing to show that it has greater deterrence effect than, say, life
    Message 1 of 5 , Sep 19, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      The capital punishment can be justified only in terms of retributive justice.
      There is nothing to show that it has greater deterrence effect than, say, life imprisonment. And it cannot, by definition, be reformative.

      More civilised a society is more it should move away from retribution. That way it helps to evolve into a more compassionate and humane society and less brutality. 
      By privileging retribution one cannot help to promote a move away from brutalities, like rape and murder, among its members.

      Sukla


      On 18 September 2013 19:28, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:
       

      Walter,

      We may condemn these death penalties, however there is something called “retributive justice” – this has that sense. Think of it from the point of view of the Mother and Father who – cannot bear to imagine how much their daughter suffered in the bus.

       

      I have two daughters and have tried to imagine the possibility that they undergo similar trauma in India. Every time I tried to imagine that, I simply broke down.

       

      Also, lets hope that Indian males, at least, will take fear from the fact that if they did something similar and got caught they might also be – and, I sincerely hope – will be hanged.

       

      HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO CURE Indian MALES OF THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE FUN AT THE COST OF ANY FEMALE?

       

      Tribal women and Dalit women are entirely at the mercy of local upper caste & class males. How do you propose to cure those rascals?

       

      Viswa

       

       

       

      From: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com [mailto:indianfirst@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Walter Fernandes
      Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:52 AM
      To: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada; bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions; arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti; Indian
      Subject: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul

       

       

      I agree with you. Death penalty can only quench our thirst for blood - the craving a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. The chart given yesterday only substantiates what so many other studies have shown - the death penalty is not going to reduce crime. The attitudes that lead to rape, child abuse, murders and terrorism have to be dealt with. Death penalty deals with the symptoms, not the causes.

      Walter

       

      On 17 September 2013 23:41, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@...> wrote:

       

      http://www.tehelka.com/why-the-justice-verma-commission-rejected-the-death-penalty/#.UjXm1IrIIVk.gmail

       

       

      Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty

      Death is not an appropriate punishment – even for the most brutal crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it’s impossible to even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.

      September 13, 2013

       

      Reading the reasons why the Additional Sessions Judge Yogesh Khanna awarded the death sentence to the four accused in the 16 December gangrape in Delhi makes you shake with horror all over again. The judge described why this falls under the rarest of the rare cases – the victim’s intestines were scooped out and she was dragged by her hair to the back of the bus. Then seeing that the door in the back of the bus was shut, she was dragged back to the front, hurled out naked on to the street with her friend and left to die.

      One month after the details of this brutal act were still uppermost in people’s minds, the Justice Verma Commission formed a working group on human rights. This group consulted womens’ organizations working with rape victims, police persons, lawyers, judges, previous judgements in India that awarded the death penalty and those that did not and laws around the world from countries that abolished the death penalty – even for heinous crimes – and those that did not. Finally, they recommended to the government of India that death is not an appropriate punishment – even for the most brutal crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it’s impossible to even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.

      The commission, in its final analysis, quoted from judgements in India and the US courts, but aligned its reasoning to a judgement in the US known as the Kennedy versus Louisiana case. In this case, a stepfather was found guilty of raping his 8-year-old daughter where her vagina was so badly torn that it separated from the cervix and made her rectum protrude into the vaginal area.

      A Louisiana court convicted Kennedy, the perpetrator, to death. But when the case went to the Supreme Court, the final punishment was not death penalty because the court reasoned that  “when the law punishes by death, it risks its own descent into brutality.”

      The arguments being made here, which the Verma Commission eventually owned, are complex. Justice Verma was not making out the case that what happened to Nirbhaya should not be handed the severest punishment. In fact, the commission, for the first time, suggested that seven years – which is prescribed by our current penal code – is not enough as punishment for rape and sexual crimes. Moreover, the crimes need to be graded – most heinous and those causing death and extreme brutality should get twenty years in prison at the very minimum and also in some cases, like the Nirbhaya one, the punishment should extend to the entire duration of the perpetrator’s life.

      Awarding death for any crime, the Verma commission said, is a different ball-game altogether. It is a “a regressive step in the field of sentencing and reformation.” This is a philosophical, spiritual and arguably a Gandhian position that the commission took – that an ‘eye for an eye’ only makes us rotate within the vicious cycle of retribution and violence and prevents us from getting out of it.

      If we were to look at the question differently – how can we reduce brutality in our society, then the abolition of death penalty per se begins to make sense.

      It is widely acknowledged that in the middle ages, justice was meted out by public hangings and floggings,  which assuaged public outrage against an act of extreme brutality. And in the last two hundred years, that form of punishment was discarded in favour of perhaps less cathartic and much colder, more reasoned forms of punishment. The well known French philosopher, Michel Foucault described this transition in his classic Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison as follows:

      “It is the certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of public punishment that must discourage crime.”

      Therefore, if we want to strive for a less barbaric society that produces fewer brutes, then our impulse to punish must also come from higher, less barbaric reasoning. Punish, we absolutely must. But not by descending to something that is, by all measures of modern day jurisprudence, barbaric.

      There are of course questions asked by all of us who care, who cannot bear to hear what happened that night on the bus: What about Nirbhaya’s family and what they want? What about their sense of closure?

      The difficulty with this answer is that for most of us, it is instinctively a resounding yes. Their voice matters most. And in lending our collective outrage and support to them, we are in some measure, however woefully inadequate, keeping them in good faith. We are telling them that Nirbhaya is in our collective consciousness and that we do not want her death to have been in vain.

      But in order for her death not to be in vain, the Verma Commission also argued, we must be prepared to do all that it takes to be a less brutal society. Our absolute and unflinching commitment to Nirbhaya must be to find ways of making sure that we do not encourage uncivilised and brutish ideas. Our system of punishment must, above all, reflect this commitment.

       

      --
      Peace Is Doable




      --
      Peace Is Doable
    • Sukla Sen
      Dear Viswa, Greater public awareness, higher level of gender parity, an alert and sensitised police force, strong support network for the survivors, prompt
      Message 2 of 5 , Sep 19, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Viswa,

        Greater public awareness, higher level of gender parity, an alert and sensitised police force, strong support network for the survivors, prompt justice delivery system, surety of punishment being meted out in case of a crime committed are the various elements I can think of which can ameliorate the situation.
        Not a very easy task. It calls for persistent campaigns and monitoring.

        Sukla

        P.S.: Reproduced below for reference an old statement by various women's groups and individuals in the context of the Delhi gang rape.

        http://kafila.org/2012/12/24/statement-by-womens-and-progressive-groups-and-individuals-condemning-sexual-violence-and-opposing-death-penalty/

        Statement by women’s and progressive groups and individuals condemning sexual violence and opposing death penalty

        DECEMBER 24, 2012

        On 16 December, 2012, a 23-year old woman and her friend hailed a bus at a crossing in South Delhi. In the bus, they were both brutally attacked by a group of men who claimed to be out on a ‘joy-ride’. The woman was gang raped and the man beaten up; after several hours, they were both stripped and dumped on the road. While the young woman is still in hospital, bravely battling for her life, her friend has been discharged and is helping identify the men responsible for the heinous crime.

        We, the undersigned, women’s, students’ and progressive groups and concerned citizens from around the country, are outraged at this incident and, in very strong terms, condemn her gang rape and the physical and sexual assault.

        As our protests spill over to the streets all across the country, our demands for justice are strengthened by knowing that there are countless others who share this anger. We assert that rape and other forms of sexual violence are not just a women’s issue, but a political one that should concern every citizen. We strongly demand that justice is done in this and all other cases and the perpetrators are punished. 

        This incident is not an isolated one; sexual assault occurs with frightening regularity in this country. Adivasi and dalit women and those working in the unorganised sector, women with disabilities, hijras, kothis, trans people and sex workers are especially targeted with impunity – it is well known that the complaints of sexual assault they file are simply disregarded. We urge that the wheels of justice turn not only to incidents such as the Delhi bus case, but to the epidemic of sexual violence that threatens all of us. We need to evolve punishments that act as true deterrents to the very large number of men who commit these crimes. Our stance is not anti-punishment but against the State executing the death penalty. The fact that cases of rape have a conviction rate of as low as 26% shows that perpetrators of sexual violence enjoy a high degree of impunity, including being freed of charges.

        Silent witnesses to everyday forms of sexual assault such as leering, groping, passing comments, stalking and whistling are equally responsible for rape being embedded in our culture and hence being so prevalent today. We, therefore, also condemn the culture of silence and tolerance for sexual assault and the culture of valorising this kind of violence.

        We also reject voices that are ready to imprison and control women and girls under the garb of ‘safety’, instead of ensuring their freedom as equal participants in society and their right to a life free of perpetual threats of sexual assault, both inside and outside their homes. 

        In cases (like this) which have lead to a huge public outcry all across the country, and where the perpetrators have been caught, we hope that justice will be speedily served and they will be convicted for the ghastly acts that they have committed. However, our vision of this justice does not include death penalty, which is neither a deterrent nor an effective or ethical response to these acts of sexual violence. We are opposed to it for the following reasons:

        • 1. We recognise that every human being has a right to life. Our rage cannot give way to what are, in no uncertain terms, new cycles of violence. We refuse to deem ‘legitimate’ any act of violence that would give the State the right to take life in our names. Justice meted by the State cannot bypass complex socio-political questions of violence against women by punishing rapists by death. Death penalty is often used to distract attention away from the real issue – it changes nothing but becomes a tool in the hands of the State to further exert its power over its citizens. A huge set of changes are required in the system to end the widespread and daily culture of rape.
        • 2. There is no evidence to suggest that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to rape. Available data shows that there is a low rate of conviction in rape cases and a strong possibility that the death penalty would lower this conviction rate even further as it is awarded only under the ‘rarest of rare’ circumstances. The most important factor that can act as a deterrent is the certainty of punishment, rather than the severity of its form.
        •   
          3. As seen in countries like the US, men from minority communities make up a disproportionate number of death row inmates. In the context of India, a review of crimes that warrant capital punishment reveals the discriminatory way in which such laws are selectively and arbitrarily applied to disadvantaged communities, religious and ethnic minorities. This is a real and major concern, as the possibility of differential consequences for the same crime is injustice in itself.
          4. The logic of awarding death penalty to rapists is based on the belief that rape is a fate worse than death. Patriarchal notions of ‘honour’ lead us to believe that rape is the worst thing that can happen to a woman. There is a need to strongly challenge this stereotype of the ‘destroyed’ woman who loses her honour and who has no place in society after she’s been sexually assaulted. We believe that rape is tool of patriarchy, an act of violence, and has nothing to do with morality, character or behaviour.
          5. An overwhelming number of women are sexually assaulted by people known to them, and often include near or distant family, friends and partners. Who will be able to face the psychological and social trauma of having reported against their own relatives? Would marital rape (currently not recognised by law), even conceptually, ever be looked at through the same retributive prism?
           6. The State often reserves for itself the ‘right to kill’ — through the armed forces, the paramilitary and the police. We cannot forget the torture, rape and murder of ThangjamManoramaby the Assam Rifles in Manipur in 2004 or the abduction, gang rape and murder of Neelofar and Aasiya of Shopian (Kashmir) in 2009.Giving more powers to the State, whether arming the police and giving them the right to shoot at sight or awarding capital punishment, is not a viable solution to lessen the incidence of crime.
          Furthermore, with death penalty at stake, the ‘guardians of the law’ will make sure that no complaints against them get registered and they will go to any length to make sure that justice does not see the light of day. The ordeal of Soni Sori, who had been tortured in police custody last year, still continues her fight from inside aprison in Chattisgarh, in spite of widespread publicity around her torture.
        • 7. As we know, in cases of sexual assault where the perpetrator is in a position of power (such as in cases of custodial rape or caste and communal violence), conviction is notoriously difficult. The death penalty, for reasons that have already been mentioned, would make conviction next to impossible.

         We, the undersigned, demand the following:

        • Greater dignity, equality, autonomy and rights for women and girls from a society that should stop questioning and policing their actions at every step.
        • Immediate relief in terms of legal, medical, financial and psychological assistance and long-term rehabilitation measures must be provided to survivors of sexual assault.
        • Provision of improved infrastructure to make cities safer for women, including well-lit pavements and bus stops, help lines and emergency services.
        • Effective registration, monitoring and regulation of transport services (whether public, private or contractual) to make them safe, accessible and available to all.
        • Compulsory courses within the training curriculum on gender sensitisation for all personnel employed and engaged by the State in its various institutions, including the police.
        • That the police do its duty to ensure that public spaces are free from harassment, molestation and assault. This means that they themselves have to stop sexually assaulting women who come to make complaints. They have to register all FIRs and attend to complaints. CCTV cameras should be set up in all police stations and swift action must be taken against errant police personnel.
        • Immediate setting up of fast track courts for rape and other forms of sexual violence all across the country. State governments should operationalise their creation on a priority basis. Sentencing should be done within a period of six months.
        • The National Commission for Women has time and again proved itself to be an institution that works against the interests of women. NCW’s inability to fulfil its mandate of addressing issues of violence against women, the problematic nature of the statements made by the Chairperson and its sheer inertia in many serious situations warrants that the NCW role be reviewed and auditedas soon as possible.
        • The State acknowledges the reality of custodial violence against women in many parts of the country, especially in Kashmir, North-East and Chhattisgarh. There are several pending cases and immediate action should be taken by the government to punish the guilty and to ensure that these incidents of violence are not allowed to be repeated.
        • Regarding the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2012, women’s groups have already submitted detailed recommendations to the Home Ministry. We strongly underline that the Bill must not be passed in its current form because of its many serious loopholes and lacuna. Some points:

        -      There has been no amendment to the flawed definition of consent under Sec 375 IPC and this has worked against the interest of justice for women.

        -      The formulation of the crime of sexual assault as gender neutralmakes the identity of the perpetrator/accused also gender neutral. We demand that the definition of perpetrator be gender-specific and limited to men. Sexual violence also targets transgender people and legal reform must address this.

        -      In its current form, the Bill does not recognise the structural and graded nature of sexual assault, based on concepts of hurt, harm, injury, humiliation and degradation. The Bill also does not use well-established categories of sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and sexual offences.

        -      It does not mention sexual assault by security forces as a specific category of aggravated sexual assault. We strongly recommend the inclusion of perpetration of sexual assault by security forces under Sec 376(2).

        Endorsed by the following groups and individuals:

        -      Citizens’ Collective against Sexual Assault (CCSA)

        -      Purnima, Nirantar, New Delhi

        -      Sandhya Gokhale, Forum Against Oppression of Women, Bombay

        -      Deepti, Saheli, Delhi

        -      Mary John, Centre for Women’s Development Studies (CWDS), New Delhi

        -      Jagori, Delhi

        -      Vimochana, Bangalore

        -      Stree Mukti Sanghathan, Delhi

        -      Madhya Pradesh Mahila Manch

        -      Kavita Krishnan, AIPWA, New Delhi

        -      Anuradha Kapoor ,Swayam, Calcutta

        -      Kalpana Mehta, Manasi Swasthya Sansthan, Indore

        -      Nandita Gandhi, Akshara, Bombay

        -      Indira, Women against Sexual Violence and State Repression, (WSS), New Delhi

        -      National Alliance of people’s Movements (NAPM)

        -      Mallika, Maati, Uttarakhand

        -      Meena Saraswathi Seshu, SANGRAM, Sangli

        -      GRAMEENA MAHILA Okkutta, Karnataka

        -      WinG Assam

        -      Arati Chokshi, PUCL, Bangalore.

        -      Action India, Delhi

        -      Majlis Law, Legal Services for Women, Mumbai

        -      Sahiayar (Stree Sangathan), Vadodara, Gujarat

        -      Vasanth Kannabiran (NAWO, AP) Asmita

        -      Sheba George, SAHRWARU

        -      SAMYAK, Pune

        -      Shabana Kazi, VAMP

        -      Sruti disAbility Rights Centre, Kolkata

        -      Forum to Engage Men (FEM), New Delhi

        -      MASVAW( Men Action for stopping Violence Against Women), UP

        -      Breakthrough, New Delhi

        -      V Rukmini Rao, Gramya Resource Centre for Women, Secunderabad

        -      LABIA, a queer feminist LBT collective, Mumbai

        -      Law Trust, Tamil Nadu

        -      Men’s Action to Stop Violence agaisnt Women (MASVAW), UP

        -      National Forum for Single Women’s Rights

        -      NAWO-AP, Arunachal Pradesh Women’s Welfare Society (APWWS)

        -      Indigenous Women’s Resource Centre (IWRC)

        -      New Socialist Initiative, Delhi

        -      Gabriele Dietrich, Pennurimai Iyakkam

        -      Sangat, a South Asian Feminist Network

        -      Stree Mukti Sanghatana, Mumbai

        -      SWATI, Ahmedabad

        -      Tamil Nadu Women Fish Workers Forum

        -      Subhash Mendhapurkar,SUTRA, H.P.

        -      Mario, Nigah, queer collective, New Delhi

        -      Sushma Varma, Samanatha Mahila Vedike, Bangalore

        -      Priti Darooka, PWESCR (The Programme on Women’s Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), New Delhi

        -      Pushpa Achanta (WSS, Karnataka)

        -      AWN, Kabul

        -      AZAD and Sakha Team, Delhi

        -      Ekta, Madurai

        -      Empower People

        -      Vrinda Grover

        -      Chayanika Shah, Bombay

        -      Aruna Roy

        -      Kalyani Menon-Sen, Feminist Learning Partnerships, Gurgaon

        -      Nandini Rao

        -      Pratiksha Baxi

        -      Amrita Nandy

        -      Farah Naqvi, Writer & Activist, Delhi

        -      Nivedita Menon

        -      Urvashi Butalia

        -      Kaveri R I, Bengaluru

        -      Dunu Roy

        -      Harsh Mander

        -      Anil TV

        -      Laxmi Murthy, Journalist, Bangalore

        -      Rahul Roy

        -      Rituparna Borah, queer feminist activist

        -      Ranjana Padhi, New Delhi

        -      Trupti Shah, Vadodara, Gujarat

        -      Vasanth Kannabiran

        -      Sudha Bharadwaj

        -      Veena Shatrugna,  Hyderabad

        -      Kamayani Bali Mahabal

        -      Kiran Shaheen, Journalist and activist

        -      Lesley A Esteves, journalist, New Delhi

        -      devangana kalita, assam

        -      Aruna Burte

        -      Anita Ghai

        -      Mohan Rao, New Delhi

        -      Rakhi Sehgal, New Delhi

        -      Geetha Nambisan

        -      Charan Singh, New Delhi

        -      Manjima Bhattacharjya

        -      Jinee Lokaneeta,Associate professor, Drew University, Madison, NJ

        -      Kavita Panjabi, Jadavpur University, Kolkata

        -      Albertina almeida, Goa

        -      Satyajit Rath, New Delhi

        -      Prerna Sud, New Delhi

        -      Priya Sen, New Delhi

        -      Aarthi Pai, Bangalore

        -      Kalpana Vishwanath, Gurgaon

        -      Aisha K. Gill, Reader, University of Roehampton, London

        -      Ammu Abraham, Mumbai

        -      Anagha Sarpotdar, Activist and PhD Student, Mumbai

        -      Anand Pawar

        -      Anuradha Marwah, Ajmer Adult Education Association (AAEA), Ajmer

        -      Asha Ramesh, activist/researcher/consultant

        -      Bondita

        -      Gauri Gill, New delhi

        -      Sophia Khan, Gujarat

        -      Niranjani Iyer, Chennai

        -      Dyuti Ailawadi

        -      Gandimathi Alagar

        -      Gayatri Buragohain – Feminist Approach to Technology (FAT), New Delhi

        -      Geetha Nambisan, Delhi

        -      Sadhna Arya, New Delhi

        -      Vineeta Bal, New Delhi

        -      Suneeta Dhar

        -      Geeta Ramaseshan, Advocate, Chennai

        -      Sonal Sharma, New delhi

        -      Anusha Hariharan, Delhi/Chennai

        -      Jayasree.A.K,

        -      Gautam Bhan, New Delhi

        -      Jayasree Subramanian, TISS, Hyderabad

        -      Jhuma Sen, Advocate, Supreme Court

        -      Teena Gill, New Delhi

        -      Kannamma Raman

        -      Karuna D W

        -      Kavita Panjabi

        -      Shalini Krishan, New Delhi

        -      Lalita Ramdas, Secunderabad

        -      Manasi Pingle

        -      Madhumita Dutta, Chennai, Tamil Nadu

        -      Manoj Mitta

        -      Pamela Philipose

        -      Parul Chaudhary

        -      Preethi Herman

        -      Sunil Gupta, New Delhi

        -      Radha Khan

        -      Rama Vedula

        -      Rebecca John

        -      Renu Khanna, SAHAJ

        -      Rohini Hensman (Writer and Activist, Bombay)

        -      Rohit Prajapati, Environmental activist, Gujarat

        -      Roshmi Goswami

        -      Shipra Nigam, Consultant Economist, Research and Information Systems, New Delhi

        -      Shipra Deo, Agribusiness Systems InternationalVamshakti, Pratapgarh

        -      Rukmini Datta

        -      Sridala Swami

        -      Sarba Raj Khadka, Kathmandu

        -      Satish K. Singh, CHSJ

        -      Shinkai Karokhail, from the Afghanistan Parliament

        -      Sima Samar, Kabul

        -      Smita Singh, FTII, Pune

        -      Subhalakshmi Nandi

        -      Sujata Gothoskar

        -      Swar Thounaojam

        -      Inayat Sabhikhi

        -      Jaya Vindhyala, Hyderabad




        On 19 September 2013 17:32, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:

        Sukla,

        I don’t think any of us believe that retributive justice is what we want in the LONG RUN. While we want to build an IDEAL India where everyone is safe – even a prostitute by profession should feel safe – we need some short-term deterrence to prevent these desperate males from imposing themselves on women.

         

        Given the current reality (NOT AN IDEAL Indian SOCIETY) what is YOUR solution – even if it is short-term – to create a deterrence for such gang rapes. OR any kind of public nuisance that makes ANY GIRL / WOMAN feel safe in India (Indian, foreigner, irrespective of caste and class)?

         

        Viswa

         

         

        From: Sukla Sen [mailto:sukla.sen@...]
        Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:22 PM
        To: Viswa Ghosh
        Cc: Indian; IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada; bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions; arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti
        Subject: Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul

         

        The capital punishment can be justified only in terms of retributive justice.

        There is nothing to show that it has greater deterrence effect than, say, life imprisonment. And it cannot, by definition, be reformative.

         

        More civilised a society is more it should move away from retribution. That way it helps to evolve into a more compassionate and humane society and less brutality. 

        By privileging retribution one cannot help to promote a move away from brutalities, like rape and murder, among its members.

         

        Sukla

         

        On 18 September 2013 19:28, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:

         

        Walter,

        We may condemn these death penalties, however there is something called “retributive justice” – this has that sense. Think of it from the point of view of the Mother and Father who – cannot bear to imagine how much their daughter suffered in the bus.

         

        I have two daughters and have tried to imagine the possibility that they undergo similar trauma in India. Every time I tried to imagine that, I simply broke down.

         

        Also, lets hope that Indian males, at least, will take fear from the fact that if they did something similar and got caught they might also be – and, I sincerely hope – will be hanged.

         

        HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO CURE Indian MALES OF THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE FUN AT THE COST OF ANY FEMALE?

         

        Tribal women and Dalit women are entirely at the mercy of local upper caste & class males. How do you propose to cure those rascals?

         

        Viswa

         

         

         

        From: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com [mailto:indianfirst@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Walter Fernandes
        Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:52 AM
        To: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com
        Cc: IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada; bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions; arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti; Indian
        Subject: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul

         

         

        I agree with you. Death penalty can only quench our thirst for blood - the craving a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. The chart given yesterday only substantiates what so many other studies have shown - the death penalty is not going to reduce crime. The attitudes that lead to rape, child abuse, murders and terrorism have to be dealt with. Death penalty deals with the symptoms, not the causes.

        Walter

         

        On 17 September 2013 23:41, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@...> wrote:

         

        http://www.tehelka.com/why-the-justice-verma-commission-rejected-the-death-penalty/#.UjXm1IrIIVk.gmail

         

         

        Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty

        Death is not an appropriate punishment – even for the most brutal crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it’s impossible to even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.

        September 13, 2013

         

        Reading the reasons why the Additional Sessions Judge Yogesh Khanna awarded the death sentence to the four accused in the 16 December gangrape in Delhi makes you shake with horror all over again. The judge described why this falls under the rarest of the rare cases – the victim’s intestines were scooped out and she was dragged by her hair to the back of the bus. Then seeing that the door in the back of the bus was shut, she was dragged back to the front, hurled out naked on to the street with her friend and left to die.

        One month after the details of this brutal act were still uppermost in people’s minds, the Justice Verma Commission formed a working group on human rights. This group consulted womens’ organizations working with rape victims, police persons, lawyers, judges, previous judgements in India that awarded the death penalty and those that did not and laws around the world from countries that abolished the death penalty – even for heinous crimes – and those that did not. Finally, they recommended to the government of India that death is not an appropriate punishment – even for the most brutal crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it’s impossible to even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.

        The commission, in its final analysis, quoted from judgements in India and the US courts, but aligned its reasoning to a judgement in the US known as the Kennedy versus Louisiana case. In this case, a stepfather was found guilty of raping his 8-year-old daughter where her vagina was so badly torn that it separated from the cervix and made her rectum protrude into the vaginal area.

        A Louisiana court convicted Kennedy, the perpetrator, to death. But when the case went to the Supreme Court, the final punishment was not death penalty because the court reasoned that  “when the law punishes by death, it risks its own descent into brutality.”

        The arguments being made here, which the Verma Commission eventually owned, are complex. Justice Verma was not making out the case that what happened to Nirbhaya should not be handed the severest punishment. In fact, the commission, for the first time, suggested that seven years – which is prescribed by our current penal code – is not enough as punishment for rape and sexual crimes. Moreover, the crimes need to be graded – most heinous and those causing death and extreme brutality should get twenty years in prison at the very minimum and also in some cases, like the Nirbhaya one, the punishment should extend to the entire duration of the perpetrator’s life.

        Awarding death for any crime, the Verma commission said, is a different ball-game altogether. It is a “a regressive step in the field of sentencing and reformation.” This is a philosophical, spiritual and arguably a Gandhian position that the commission took – that an ‘eye for an eye’ only makes us rotate within the vicious cycle of retribution and violence and prevents us from getting out of it.

        If we were to look at the question differently – how can we reduce brutality in our society, then the abolition of death penalty per se begins to make sense.

        It is widely acknowledged that in the middle ages, justice was meted out by public hangings and floggings,  which assuaged public outrage against an act of extreme brutality. And in the last two hundred years, that form of punishment was discarded in favour of perhaps less cathartic and much colder, more reasoned forms of punishment. The well known French philosopher, Michel Foucault described this transition in his classic Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison as follows:

        “It is the certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of public punishment that must discourage crime.”

        Therefore, if we want to strive for a less barbaric society that produces fewer brutes, then our impulse to punish must also come from higher, less barbaric reasoning. Punish, we absolutely must. But not by descending to something that is, by all measures of modern day jurisprudence, barbaric.

        There are of course questions asked by all of us who care, who cannot bear to hear what happened that night on the bus: What about Nirbhaya’s family and what they want? What about their sense of closure?

        The difficulty with this answer is that for most of us, it is instinctively a resounding yes. Their voice matters most. And in lending our collective outrage and support to them, we are in some measure, however woefully inadequate, keeping them in good faith. We are telling them that Nirbhaya is in our collective consciousness and that we do not want her death to have been in vain.

        But in order for her death not to be in vain, the Verma Commission also argued, we must be prepared to do all that it takes to be a less brutal society. Our absolute and unflinching commitment to Nirbhaya must be to find ways of making sure that we do not encourage uncivilised and brutish ideas. Our system of punishment must, above all, reflect this commitment.

         

        --
        Peace Is Doable



        --
        Peace Is Doable




        --
        Peace Is Doable
      • Sarwat Ali
        Heinous acts are out come of a sick mind. We need to look at the problem deeper rather than superficially. I would hold the state responsible for it which is
        Message 3 of 5 , Sep 19, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Heinous acts are out come of a sick mind. We need to look at the problem deeper rather than superficially. I would hold the state responsible for it which is unable to nurture its citizens and harness their potentials to groom them, so they contribute positively to the society. Lesser we spend on quality education, more we would see such instances, death penalty would not be able to stop insane minds as they have not learnt to mange their instincts.    


          On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@...> wrote:
           

          The capital punishment can be justified only in terms of retributive justice.
          There is nothing to show that it has greater deterrence effect than, say, life imprisonment. And it cannot, by definition, be reformative.

          More civilised a society is more it should move away from retribution. That way it helps to evolve into a more compassionate and humane society and less brutality. 
          By privileging retribution one cannot help to promote a move away from brutalities, like rape and murder, among its members.

          Sukla


          On 18 September 2013 19:28, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:
           

          Walter,

          We may condemn these death penalties, however there is something called “retributive justice” – this has that sense. Think of it from the point of view of the Mother and Father who – cannot bear to imagine how much their daughter suffered in the bus.

           

          I have two daughters and have tried to imagine the possibility that they undergo similar trauma in India. Every time I tried to imagine that, I simply broke down.

           

          Also, lets hope that Indian males, at least, will take fear from the fact that if they did something similar and got caught they might also be – and, I sincerely hope – will be hanged.

           

          HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO CURE Indian MALES OF THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE FUN AT THE COST OF ANY FEMALE?

           

          Tribal women and Dalit women are entirely at the mercy of local upper caste & class males. How do you propose to cure those rascals?

           

          Viswa

           

           

           

          From: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com [mailto:indianfirst@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Walter Fernandes
          Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:52 AM
          To: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada; bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions; arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti; Indian
          Subject: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul

           

           

          I agree with you. Death penalty can only quench our thirst for blood - the craving a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. The chart given yesterday only substantiates what so many other studies have shown - the death penalty is not going to reduce crime. The attitudes that lead to rape, child abuse, murders and terrorism have to be dealt with. Death penalty deals with the symptoms, not the causes.

          Walter

           

          On 17 September 2013 23:41, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@...> wrote:

           

          http://www.tehelka.com/why-the-justice-verma-commission-rejected-the-death-penalty/#.UjXm1IrIIVk.gmail

           

           

          Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty

          Death is not an appropriate punishment – even for the most brutal crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it’s impossible to even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.

          September 13, 2013


           

          Reading the reasons why the Additional Sessions Judge Yogesh Khanna awarded the death sentence to the four accused in the 16 December gangrape in Delhi makes you shake with horror all over again. The judge described why this falls under the rarest of the rare cases – the victim’s intestines were scooped out and she was dragged by her hair to the back of the bus. Then seeing that the door in the back of the bus was shut, she was dragged back to the front, hurled out naked on to the street with her friend and left to die.

          One month after the details of this brutal act were still uppermost in people’s minds, the Justice Verma Commission formed a working group on human rights. This group consulted womens’ organizations working with rape victims, police persons, lawyers, judges, previous judgements in India that awarded the death penalty and those that did not and laws around the world from countries that abolished the death penalty – even for heinous crimes – and those that did not. Finally, they recommended to the government of India that death is not an appropriate punishment – even for the most brutal crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it’s impossible to even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.

          The commission, in its final analysis, quoted from judgements in India and the US courts, but aligned its reasoning to a judgement in the US known as the Kennedy versus Louisiana case. In this case, a stepfather was found guilty of raping his 8-year-old daughter where her vagina was so badly torn that it separated from the cervix and made her rectum protrude into the vaginal area.

          A Louisiana court convicted Kennedy, the perpetrator, to death. But when the case went to the Supreme Court, the final punishment was not death penalty because the court reasoned that  “when the law punishes by death, it risks its own descent into brutality.”

          The arguments being made here, which the Verma Commission eventually owned, are complex. Justice Verma was not making out the case that what happened to Nirbhaya should not be handed the severest punishment. In fact, the commission, for the first time, suggested that seven years – which is prescribed by our current penal code – is not enough as punishment for rape and sexual crimes. Moreover, the crimes need to be graded – most heinous and those causing death and extreme brutality should get twenty years in prison at the very minimum and also in some cases, like the Nirbhaya one, the punishment should extend to the entire duration of the perpetrator’s life.

          Awarding death for any crime, the Verma commission said, is a different ball-game altogether. It is a “a regressive step in the field of sentencing and reformation.” This is a philosophical, spiritual and arguably a Gandhian position that the commission took – that an ‘eye for an eye’ only makes us rotate within the vicious cycle of retribution and violence and prevents us from getting out of it.

          If we were to look at the question differently – how can we reduce brutality in our society, then the abolition of death penalty per se begins to make sense.

          It is widely acknowledged that in the middle ages, justice was meted out by public hangings and floggings,  which assuaged public outrage against an act of extreme brutality. And in the last two hundred years, that form of punishment was discarded in favour of perhaps less cathartic and much colder, more reasoned forms of punishment. The well known French philosopher, Michel Foucault described this transition in his classic Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison as follows:

          “It is the certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of public punishment that must discourage crime.”

          Therefore, if we want to strive for a less barbaric society that produces fewer brutes, then our impulse to punish must also come from higher, less barbaric reasoning. Punish, we absolutely must. But not by descending to something that is, by all measures of modern day jurisprudence, barbaric.

          There are of course questions asked by all of us who care, who cannot bear to hear what happened that night on the bus: What about Nirbhaya’s family and what they want? What about their sense of closure?

          The difficulty with this answer is that for most of us, it is instinctively a resounding yes. Their voice matters most. And in lending our collective outrage and support to them, we are in some measure, however woefully inadequate, keeping them in good faith. We are telling them that Nirbhaya is in our collective consciousness and that we do not want her death to have been in vain.

          But in order for her death not to be in vain, the Verma Commission also argued, we must be prepared to do all that it takes to be a less brutal society. Our absolute and unflinching commitment to Nirbhaya must be to find ways of making sure that we do not encourage uncivilised and brutish ideas. Our system of punishment must, above all, reflect this commitment.

           

          --
          Peace Is Doable




          --
          Peace Is Doable




          --
          Dr (Ms) sarwat ali
          pocket A/3C sukhdev Vihar , DDA Flats, 
          New Delhi - 110025

          9810525317


        • Sukla Sen
          Not all are long term measures. Whereas gender parity may really take time to get realised, an alert and sensitised police force, strong support network for
          Message 4 of 5 , Sep 20, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Not all are long term measures. Whereas gender parity may really take
            time to get realised, "an alert and sensitised police force, strong
            support network for the survivors, prompt justice delivery system,
            surety of punishment being meted out in case of a crime committed"
            should be implementable in a rather shorter time-frame.


            In any case, capital punishment is not known to have any greater
            deterrent effect and hence is a false solution even as a short term
            measure. It'd rather be counter productive by helping to brutalise the
            social mindset. (That's precisely why every fascist would clamour for
            it.)


            Sukla


            On 20/09/2013, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:
            > Yes, Sukla. These are ALL long-term measures. Remember, you are trying to
            > turn a dinosaur of 1.2+ billion people from a patriarchal mindset to one
            > that starts to respect girls / women - instead of perceiving them as
            > objects of sensual pleasure.
            >
            >
            >
            > What are those short-term measures?
            >
            >
            >
            > YOU NEED SOME SHORT-TERM IMMEDIATE DETERRENTS TO OUR GIRLS / WOMEN TO GO
            > ABOUT DOING THE MINIMUM THINGS FOR THEIR GROOMING SPACE.
            >
            >
            >
            > Viswa
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > From: Sukla Sen [mailto:sukla.sen@...]
            > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 1:38 AM
            > To: Viswa Ghosh
            > Cc: Indian; IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
            > bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
            > arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti
            > Subject: Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma
            > Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul
            >
            >
            >
            > Dear Viswa,
            >
            >
            >
            > Greater public awareness, higher level of gender parity, an alert and
            > sensitised police force, strong support network for the survivors, prompt
            > justice delivery system, surety of punishment being meted out in case of a
            > crime committed are the various elements I can think of which can
            > ameliorate
            > the situation.
            >
            > Not a very easy task. It calls for persistent campaigns and monitoring.
            >
            >
            >
            > Sukla
            >
            >
            >
            > P.S.: Reproduced below for reference an old statement by various women's
            > groups and individuals in the context of the Delhi gang rape.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2F2012%2F12%2F24%2Fstat
            > ement-by-womens-and-progressive-groups-and-individuals-condemning-sexual-vio
            > lence-and-opposing-death-penalty%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEwAuE0-D0bBP63qL8E
            > GtwsWsVkGA>
            > http://kafila.org/2012/12/24/statement-by-womens-and-progressive-groups-and-
            > individuals-condemning-sexual-violence-and-opposing-death-penalty/
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Statement by women's and progressive groups and individuals condemning
            > sexual violence and opposing death penalty
            >
            >
            > DECEMBER 24, 2012
            >
            > tags:
            > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2Ftag%2Fdelhi-gang-rape
            > %2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEAv0mRXwNShiz_NZveebpTF_N19Q> Delhi Gang Rape,
            > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2Ftag%2Fviolence-agains
            > t-women-delhi%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFKrPWORu_Th62cYc1A9nosGKwF4A>
            > violence against women delhi
            >
            > by
            > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2Fauthor%2Fnivmen%2F&sa
            > =D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGV8vqFZSl90roY1DuZeRyPn1QM_Q> Nivedita Menon
            >
            > On 16 December, 2012, a 23-year old woman and her friend hailed a bus at a
            > crossing in South Delhi. In the bus, they were both brutally attacked by a
            > group of men who claimed to be out on a 'joy-ride'. The woman was gang
            > raped
            > and the man beaten up; after several hours, they were both stripped and
            > dumped on the road. While the young woman is still in hospital, bravely
            > battling for her life, her friend has been discharged and is helping
            > identify the men responsible for the heinous crime.
            >
            > We, the undersigned, women's, students' and progressive groups and
            > concerned
            > citizens from around the country, are outraged at this incident and, in
            > very
            > strong terms, condemn her gang rape and the physical and sexual assault.
            >
            > As our protests spill over to the streets all across the country, our
            > demands for justice are strengthened by knowing that there are countless
            > others who share this anger. We assert that rape and other forms of sexual
            > violence are not just a women's issue, but a political one that should
            > concern every citizen. We strongly demand that justice is done in this and
            > all other cases and the perpetrators are punished.
            >
            > This incident is not an isolated one; sexual assault occurs with
            > frightening
            > regularity in this country. Adivasi and dalit women and those working in
            > the
            > unorganised sector, women with disabilities, hijras, kothis, trans people
            > and sex workers are especially targeted with impunity - it is well known
            > that the complaints of sexual assault they file are simply disregarded. We
            > urge that the wheels of justice turn not only to incidents such as the
            > Delhi
            > bus case, but to the epidemic of sexual violence that threatens all of us.
            > We need to evolve punishments that act as true deterrents to the very large
            > number of men who commit these crimes. Our stance is not anti-punishment
            > but
            > against the State executing the death penalty. The fact that cases of rape
            > have a conviction rate of as low as 26% shows that perpetrators of sexual
            > violence enjoy a high degree of impunity, including being freed of charges.
            >
            > Silent witnesses to everyday forms of sexual assault such as leering,
            > groping, passing comments, stalking and whistling are equally responsible
            > for rape being embedded in our culture and hence being so prevalent today.
            > We, therefore, also condemn the culture of silence and tolerance for sexual
            > assault and the culture of valorising this kind of violence.
            >
            > We also reject voices that are ready to imprison and control women and
            > girls
            > under the garb of 'safety', instead of ensuring their freedom as equal
            > participants in society and their right to a life free of perpetual threats
            > of sexual assault, both inside and outside their homes.
            >
            > In cases (like this) which have lead to a huge public outcry all across the
            > country, and where the perpetrators have been caught, we hope that justice
            > will be speedily served and they will be convicted for the ghastly acts
            > that
            > they have committed. However, our vision of this justice does not include
            > death penalty, which is neither a deterrent nor an effective or ethical
            > response to these acts of sexual violence. We are opposed to it for the
            > following reasons:
            >
            > . 1. We recognise that every human being has a right to life. Our
            > rage cannot give way to what are, in no uncertain terms, new cycles of
            > violence. We refuse to deem 'legitimate' any act of violence that would
            > give
            > the State the right to take life in our names. Justice meted by the State
            > cannot bypass complex socio-political questions of violence against women
            > by
            > punishing rapists by death. Death penalty is often used to distract
            > attention away from the real issue - it changes nothing but becomes a tool
            > in the hands of the State to further exert its power over its citizens. A
            > huge set of changes are required in the system to end the widespread and
            > daily culture of rape.
            >
            > . 2. There is no evidence to suggest that the death penalty acts as
            > a deterrent to rape. Available data shows that there is a low rate of
            > conviction in rape cases and a strong possibility that the death penalty
            > would lower this conviction rate even further as it is awarded only under
            > the 'rarest of rare' circumstances. The most important factor that can act
            > as a deterrent is the certainty of punishment, rather than the severity of
            > its form.
            >
            >
            >
            > .
            >
            > .
            >
            > .
            >
            > 3. As seen in countries like the US, men from minority communities make up
            > a
            > disproportionate number of death row inmates. In the context of India, a
            > review of crimes that warrant capital punishment reveals the discriminatory
            > way in which such laws are selectively and arbitrarily applied to
            > disadvantaged communities, religious and ethnic minorities. This is a real
            > and major concern, as the possibility of differential consequences for the
            > same crime is injustice in itself.
            >
            > 4. The logic of awarding death penalty to rapists is based on the belief
            > that rape is a fate worse than death. Patriarchal notions of 'honour' lead
            > us to believe that rape is the worst thing that can happen to a woman.
            > There
            > is a need to strongly challenge this stereotype of the 'destroyed' woman
            > who
            > loses her honour and who has no place in society after she's been sexually
            > assaulted. We believe that rape is tool of patriarchy, an act of violence,
            > and has nothing to do with morality, character or behaviour.
            >
            > 5. An overwhelming number of women are sexually assaulted by people known
            > to
            > them, and often include near or distant family, friends and partners. Who
            > will be able to face the psychological and social trauma of having reported
            > against their own relatives? Would marital rape (currently not recognised
            > by
            > law), even conceptually, ever be looked at through the same retributive
            > prism?
            >
            > 6. The State often reserves for itself the 'right to kill' - through the
            > armed forces, the paramilitary and the police. We cannot forget the
            > torture,
            > rape and murder of ThangjamManoramaby the Assam Rifles in Manipur in 2004
            > or
            > the abduction, gang rape and murder of Neelofar and Aasiya of Shopian
            > (Kashmir) in 2009.Giving more powers to the State, whether arming the
            > police
            > and giving them the right to shoot at sight or awarding capital punishment,
            > is not a viable solution to lessen the incidence of crime.
            >
            > Furthermore, with death penalty at stake, the 'guardians of the law' will
            > make sure that no complaints against them get registered and they will go
            > to
            > any length to make sure that justice does not see the light of day. The
            > ordeal of Soni Sori, who had been tortured in police custody last year,
            > still continues her fight from inside aprison in Chattisgarh, in spite of
            > widespread publicity around her torture.
            >
            > . 7. As we know, in cases of sexual assault where the perpetrator
            > is
            > in a position of power (such as in cases of custodial rape or caste and
            > communal violence), conviction is notoriously difficult. The death penalty,
            > for reasons that have already been mentioned, would make conviction next to
            > impossible.
            >
            > We, the undersigned, demand the following:
            >
            > . Greater dignity, equality, autonomy and rights for women and
            > girls
            > from a society that should stop questioning and policing their actions at
            > every step.
            >
            > . Immediate relief in terms of legal, medical, financial and
            > psychological assistance and long-term rehabilitation measures must be
            > provided to survivors of sexual assault.
            >
            > . Provision of improved infrastructure to make cities safer for
            > women, including well-lit pavements and bus stops, help lines and emergency
            > services.
            >
            > . Effective registration, monitoring and regulation of transport
            > services (whether public, private or contractual) to make them safe,
            > accessible and available to all.
            >
            > . Compulsory courses within the training curriculum on gender
            > sensitisation for all personnel employed and engaged by the State in its
            > various institutions, including the police.
            >
            > . That the police do its duty to ensure that public spaces are free
            > from harassment, molestation and assault. This means that they themselves
            > have to stop sexually assaulting women who come to make complaints. They
            > have to register all FIRs and attend to complaints. CCTV cameras should be
            > set up in all police stations and swift action must be taken against errant
            > police personnel.
            >
            > . Immediate setting up of fast track courts for rape and other
            > forms
            > of sexual violence all across the country. State governments should
            > operationalise their creation on a priority basis. Sentencing should be
            > done
            > within a period of six months.
            >
            > . The National Commission for Women has time and again proved
            > itself
            > to be an institution that works against the interests of women. NCW's
            > inability to fulfil its mandate of addressing issues of violence against
            > women, the problematic nature of the statements made by the Chairperson and
            > its sheer inertia in many serious situations warrants that the NCW role be
            > reviewed and auditedas soon as possible.
            >
            > . The State acknowledges the reality of custodial violence against
            > women in many parts of the country, especially in Kashmir, North-East and
            > Chhattisgarh. There are several pending cases and immediate action should
            > be
            > taken by the government to punish the guilty and to ensure that these
            > incidents of violence are not allowed to be repeated.
            >
            > . Regarding the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2012, women's groups
            > have already submitted detailed recommendations to the Home Ministry. We
            > strongly underline that the Bill must not be passed in its current form
            > because of its many serious loopholes and lacuna. Some points:
            >
            > - There has been no amendment to the flawed definition of consent
            > under
            > Sec 375 IPC and this has worked against the interest of justice for women.
            >
            > - The formulation of the crime of sexual assault as gender
            > neutralmakes
            > the identity of the perpetrator/accused also gender neutral. We demand that
            > the definition of perpetrator be gender-specific and limited to men. Sexual
            > violence also targets transgender people and legal reform must address
            > this.
            >
            > - In its current form, the Bill does not recognise the structural and
            > graded nature of sexual assault, based on concepts of hurt, harm, injury,
            > humiliation and degradation. The Bill also does not use well-established
            > categories of sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and sexual
            > offences.
            >
            > - It does not mention sexual assault by security forces as a specific
            > category of aggravated sexual assault. We strongly recommend the inclusion
            > of perpetration of sexual assault by security forces under Sec 376(2).
            >
            > Endorsed by the following groups and individuals:
            >
            >
            > - Citizens' Collective against Sexual Assault (CCSA)
            >
            > - Purnima, Nirantar, New Delhi
            >
            > - Sandhya Gokhale, Forum Against Oppression of Women, Bombay
            >
            > - Deepti, Saheli, Delhi
            >
            > - Mary John, Centre for Women's Development Studies (CWDS), New Delhi
            >
            > - Jagori, Delhi
            >
            > - Vimochana, Bangalore
            >
            > - Stree Mukti Sanghathan, Delhi
            >
            > - Madhya Pradesh Mahila Manch
            >
            > - Kavita Krishnan, AIPWA, New Delhi
            >
            > - Anuradha Kapoor ,Swayam, Calcutta
            >
            > - Kalpana Mehta, Manasi Swasthya Sansthan, Indore
            >
            > - Nandita Gandhi, Akshara, Bombay
            >
            > - Indira, Women against Sexual Violence and State Repression, (WSS),
            > New Delhi
            >
            > - National Alliance of people's Movements (NAPM)
            >
            > - Mallika, Maati, Uttarakhand
            >
            > - Meena Saraswathi Seshu, SANGRAM, Sangli
            >
            > - GRAMEENA MAHILA Okkutta, Karnataka
            >
            > - WinG Assam
            >
            > - Arati Chokshi, PUCL, Bangalore.
            >
            > - Action India, Delhi
            >
            > - Majlis Law, Legal Services for Women, Mumbai
            >
            > - Sahiayar (Stree Sangathan), Vadodara, Gujarat
            >
            > - Vasanth Kannabiran (NAWO, AP) Asmita
            >
            > - Sheba George, SAHRWARU
            >
            > - SAMYAK, Pune
            >
            > - Shabana Kazi, VAMP
            >
            > - Sruti disAbility Rights Centre, Kolkata
            >
            > - Forum to Engage Men (FEM), New Delhi
            >
            > - MASVAW( Men Action for stopping Violence Against Women), UP
            >
            > - Breakthrough, New Delhi
            >
            > - V Rukmini Rao, Gramya Resource Centre for Women, Secunderabad
            >
            > - LABIA, a queer feminist LBT collective, Mumbai
            >
            > - Law Trust, Tamil Nadu
            >
            > - Men's Action to Stop Violence agaisnt Women (MASVAW), UP
            >
            > - National Forum for Single Women's Rights
            >
            > - NAWO-AP, Arunachal Pradesh Women's Welfare Society (APWWS)
            >
            > - Indigenous Women's Resource Centre (IWRC)
            >
            > - New Socialist Initiative, Delhi
            >
            > - Gabriele Dietrich, Pennurimai Iyakkam
            >
            > - Sangat, a South Asian Feminist Network
            >
            > - Stree Mukti Sanghatana, Mumbai
            >
            > - SWATI, Ahmedabad
            >
            > - Tamil Nadu Women Fish Workers Forum
            >
            > - Subhash Mendhapurkar,SUTRA, H.P.
            >
            > - Mario, Nigah, queer collective, New Delhi
            >
            > - Sushma Varma, Samanatha Mahila Vedike, Bangalore
            >
            > - Priti Darooka, PWESCR (The Programme on Women's Economic, Social and
            > Cultural Rights), New Delhi
            >
            > - Pushpa Achanta (WSS, Karnataka)
            >
            > - AWN, Kabul
            >
            > - AZAD and Sakha Team, Delhi
            >
            > - Ekta, Madurai
            >
            > - Empower People
            >
            > - Vrinda Grover
            >
            > - Chayanika Shah, Bombay
            >
            > - Aruna Roy
            >
            > - Kalyani Menon-Sen, Feminist Learning Partnerships, Gurgaon
            >
            > - Nandini Rao
            >
            > - Pratiksha Baxi
            >
            > - Amrita Nandy
            >
            > - Farah Naqvi, Writer & Activist, Delhi
            >
            > - Nivedita Menon
            >
            > - Urvashi Butalia
            >
            > - Kaveri R I, Bengaluru
            >
            > - Dunu Roy
            >
            > - Harsh Mander
            >
            > - Anil TV
            >
            > - Laxmi Murthy, Journalist, Bangalore
            >
            > - Rahul Roy
            >
            > - Rituparna Borah, queer feminist activist
            >
            > - Ranjana Padhi, New Delhi
            >
            > - Trupti Shah, Vadodara, Gujarat
            >
            > - Vasanth Kannabiran
            >
            > - Sudha Bharadwaj
            >
            > - Veena Shatrugna, Hyderabad
            >
            > - Kamayani Bali Mahabal
            >
            > - Kiran Shaheen, Journalist and activist
            >
            > - Lesley A Esteves, journalist, New Delhi
            >
            > - devangana kalita, assam
            >
            > - Aruna Burte
            >
            > - Anita Ghai
            >
            > - Mohan Rao, New Delhi
            >
            > - Rakhi Sehgal, New Delhi
            >
            > - Geetha Nambisan
            >
            > - Charan Singh, New Delhi
            >
            > - Manjima Bhattacharjya
            >
            > - Jinee Lokaneeta,Associate professor, Drew University, Madison, NJ
            >
            > - Kavita Panjabi, Jadavpur University, Kolkata
            >
            > - Albertina almeida, Goa
            >
            > - Satyajit Rath, New Delhi
            >
            > - Prerna Sud, New Delhi
            >
            > - Priya Sen, New Delhi
            >
            > - Aarthi Pai, Bangalore
            >
            > - Kalpana Vishwanath, Gurgaon
            >
            > - Aisha K. Gill, Reader, University of Roehampton, London
            >
            > - Ammu Abraham, Mumbai
            >
            > - Anagha Sarpotdar, Activist and PhD Student, Mumbai
            >
            > - Anand Pawar
            >
            > - Anuradha Marwah, Ajmer Adult Education Association (AAEA), Ajmer
            >
            > - Asha Ramesh, activist/researcher/consultant
            >
            > - Bondita
            >
            > - Gauri Gill, New delhi
            >
            > - Sophia Khan, Gujarat
            >
            > - Niranjani Iyer, Chennai
            >
            > - Dyuti Ailawadi
            >
            > - Gandimathi Alagar
            >
            > - Gayatri Buragohain - Feminist Approach to Technology (FAT), New
            > Delhi
            >
            > - Geetha Nambisan, Delhi
            >
            > - Sadhna Arya, New Delhi
            >
            > - Vineeta Bal, New Delhi
            >
            > - Suneeta Dhar
            >
            > - Geeta Ramaseshan, Advocate, Chennai
            >
            > - Sonal Sharma, New delhi
            >
            > - Anusha Hariharan, Delhi/Chennai
            >
            > - Jayasree.A.K,
            >
            > - Gautam Bhan, New Delhi
            >
            > - Jayasree Subramanian, TISS, Hyderabad
            >
            > - Jhuma Sen, Advocate, Supreme Court
            >
            > - Teena Gill, New Delhi
            >
            > - Kannamma Raman
            >
            > - Karuna D W
            >
            > - Kavita Panjabi
            >
            > - Shalini Krishan, New Delhi
            >
            > - Lalita Ramdas, Secunderabad
            >
            > - Manasi Pingle
            >
            > - Madhumita Dutta, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
            >
            > - Manoj Mitta
            >
            > - Pamela Philipose
            >
            > - Parul Chaudhary
            >
            > - Preethi Herman
            >
            > - Sunil Gupta, New Delhi
            >
            > - Radha Khan
            >
            > - Rama Vedula
            >
            > - Rebecca John
            >
            > - Renu Khanna, SAHAJ
            >
            > - Rohini Hensman (Writer and Activist, Bombay)
            >
            > - Rohit Prajapati, Environmental activist, Gujarat
            >
            > - Roshmi Goswami
            >
            > - Shipra Nigam, Consultant Economist, Research and Information
            > Systems,
            > New Delhi
            >
            > - Shipra Deo, Agribusiness Systems InternationalVamshakti, Pratapgarh
            >
            > - Rukmini Datta
            >
            > - Sridala Swami
            >
            > - Sarba Raj Khadka, Kathmandu
            >
            > - Satish K. Singh, CHSJ
            >
            > - Shinkai Karokhail, from the Afghanistan Parliament
            >
            > - Sima Samar, Kabul
            >
            > - Smita Singh, FTII, Pune
            >
            > - Subhalakshmi Nandi
            >
            > - Sujata Gothoskar
            >
            > - Swar Thounaojam
            >
            > - Inayat Sabhikhi
            >
            > - Jaya Vindhyala, Hyderabad
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > On 19 September 2013 17:32, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...>
            > wrote:
            >
            > Sukla,
            >
            > I don't think any of us believe that retributive justice is what we want in
            > the LONG RUN. While we want to build an IDEAL India where everyone is safe
            > -
            > even a prostitute by profession should feel safe - we need some short-term
            > deterrence to prevent these desperate males from imposing themselves on
            > women.
            >
            >
            >
            > Given the current reality (NOT AN IDEAL Indian SOCIETY) what is YOUR
            > solution - even if it is short-term - to create a deterrence for such gang
            > rapes. OR any kind of public nuisance that makes ANY GIRL / WOMAN feel safe
            > in India (Indian, foreigner, irrespective of caste and class)?
            >
            >
            >
            > Viswa
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > From: Sukla Sen [mailto:sukla.sen@...]
            > Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:22 PM
            > To: Viswa Ghosh
            > Cc: Indian; IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
            > bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
            > arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti
            > Subject: Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma
            > Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul
            >
            >
            >
            > The capital punishment can be justified only in terms of retributive
            > justice.
            >
            > There is nothing to show that it has greater deterrence effect than, say,
            > life imprisonment. And it cannot, by definition, be reformative.
            >
            >
            >
            > More civilised a society is more it should move away from retribution. That
            > way it helps to evolve into a more compassionate and humane society and
            > less
            > brutality.
            >
            > By privileging retribution one cannot help to promote a move away from
            > brutalities, like rape and murder, among its members.
            >
            >
            >
            > Sukla
            >
            >
            >
            > On 18 September 2013 19:28, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...>
            > wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > Walter,
            >
            > We may condemn these death penalties, however there is something called
            > "retributive justice" - this has that sense. Think of it from the point of
            > view of the Mother and Father who - cannot bear to imagine how much their
            > daughter suffered in the bus.
            >
            >
            >
            > I have two daughters and have tried to imagine the possibility that they
            > undergo similar trauma in India. Every time I tried to imagine that, I
            > simply broke down.
            >
            >
            >
            > Also, lets hope that Indian males, at least, will take fear from the fact
            > that if they did something similar and got caught they might also be - and,
            > I sincerely hope - will be hanged.
            >
            >
            >
            > HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO CURE Indian MALES OF THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE FUN AT THE
            > COST OF ANY FEMALE?
            >
            >
            >
            > Tribal women and Dalit women are entirely at the mercy of local upper caste
            > & class males. How do you propose to cure those rascals?
            >
            >
            >
            > Viswa
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > From: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com [mailto:indianfirst@yahoogroups.com] On
            > Behalf Of Walter Fernandes
            > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:52 AM
            > To: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com
            > Cc: IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
            > bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
            > arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti;
            > Indian
            > Subject: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma Commission
            > rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > I agree with you. Death penalty can only quench our thirst for blood - the
            > craving a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. The chart given
            > yesterday
            > only substantiates what so many other studies have shown - the death
            > penalty
            > is not going to reduce crime. The attitudes that lead to rape, child abuse,
            > murders and terrorism have to be dealt with. Death penalty deals with the
            > symptoms, not the causes.
            >
            > Walter
            >
            >
            >
            > On 17 September 2013 23:41, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > http://www.tehelka.com/why-the-justice-verma-commission-rejected-the-death-p
            > enalty/#.UjXm1IrIIVk.gmail
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty
            >
            >
            > Death is not an appropriate punishment - even for the most brutal crime.
            > Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it's impossible to even
            > listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December
            > gangrape.
            >
            > Revati Laul <http://tehelka.com/author/revati-laul> | @revatilaul
            > <https://twitter.com/@revatilaul>
            >
            > September 13, 2013
            >
            >
            > <http://www.printfriendly.com/print?url=http://www.tehelka.com/why-the-justi
            > ce-verma-commission-rejected-the-death-penalty/>
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> Women
            > celebrate after the Delhi gang rape case convicts were awarded death
            > sentence Photo: PTI
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> Reading the
            > reasons why the Additional Sessions Judge Yogesh Khanna awarded the death
            > sentence to the four accused in the 16 December gangrape in Delhi makes you
            > shake with horror all over again. The judge described why this falls under
            > the rarest of the rare cases - the victim's intestines were scooped out and
            > she was dragged by her hair to the back of the bus. Then seeing that the
            > door in the back of the bus was shut, she was dragged back to the front,
            > hurled out naked on to the street with her friend and left to die.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> One month
            > after the details of this brutal act were still uppermost in people's
            > minds,
            > the Justice Verma Commission formed a working group on human rights. This
            > group consulted womens' organizations working with rape victims, police
            > persons, lawyers, judges, previous judgements in India that awarded the
            > death penalty and those that did not and laws around the world from
            > countries that abolished the death penalty - even for heinous crimes - and
            > those that did not. Finally, they recommended to the government of India
            > that death is not an appropriate punishment - even for the most brutal
            > crime. Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it's impossible to
            > even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December
            > gangrape.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> The
            > commission, in its final analysis, quoted from judgements in India and the
            > US courts, but aligned its reasoning to a judgement in the US known as the
            > Kennedy versus Louisiana case. In this case, a stepfather was found guilty
            > of raping his 8-year-old daughter where her vagina was so badly torn that
            > it
            > separated from the cervix and made her rectum protrude into the vaginal
            > area.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> A Louisiana
            > court convicted Kennedy, the perpetrator, to death. But when the case went
            > to the Supreme Court, the final punishment was not death penalty because
            > the
            > court reasoned that "when the law punishes by death, it risks its own
            > descent into brutality."
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> The
            > arguments being made here, which the Verma Commission eventually owned, are
            > complex. Justice Verma was not making out the case that what happened to
            > Nirbhaya should not be handed the severest punishment. In fact, the
            > commission, for the first time, suggested that seven years - which is
            > prescribed by our current penal code - is not enough as punishment for rape
            > and sexual crimes. Moreover, the crimes need to be graded - most heinous
            > and
            > those causing death and extreme brutality should get twenty years in prison
            > at the very minimum and also in some cases, like the Nirbhaya one, the
            > punishment should extend to the entire duration of the perpetrator's life.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> Awarding
            > death for any crime, the Verma commission said, is a different ball-game
            > altogether. It is a "a regressive step in the field of sentencing and
            > reformation." This is a philosophical, spiritual and arguably a Gandhian
            > position that the commission took - that an 'eye for an eye' only makes us
            > rotate within the vicious cycle of retribution and violence and prevents us
            > from getting out of it.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> If we were
            > to look at the question differently - how can we reduce brutality in our
            > society, then the abolition of death penalty per se begins to make sense.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> It is
            > widely
            > acknowledged that in the middle ages, justice was meted out by public
            > hangings and floggings, which assuaged public outrage against an act of
            > extreme brutality. And in the last two hundred years, that form of
            > punishment was discarded in favour of perhaps less cathartic and much
            > colder, more reasoned forms of punishment. The well known French
            > philosopher, Michel Foucault described this transition in his classic
            > Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison as follows:
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> "It is the
            > certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of public
            > punishment that must discourage crime."
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> Therefore,
            > if we want to strive for a less barbaric society that produces fewer
            > brutes,
            > then our impulse to punish must also come from higher, less barbaric
            > reasoning. Punish, we absolutely must. But not by descending to something
            > that is, by all measures of modern day jurisprudence, barbaric.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> There are
            > of
            > course questions asked by all of us who care, who cannot bear to hear what
            > happened that night on the bus: What about Nirbhaya's family and what they
            > want? What about their sense of closure?
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> The
            > difficulty with this answer is that for most of us, it is instinctively a
            > resounding yes. Their voice matters most. And in lending our collective
            > outrage and support to them, we are in some measure, however woefully
            > inadequate, keeping them in good faith. We are telling them that Nirbhaya
            > is
            > in our collective consciousness and that we do not want her death to have
            > been in vain.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> But in
            > order
            > for her death not to be in vain, the Verma Commission also argued, we must
            > be prepared to do all that it takes to be a less brutal society. Our
            > absolute and unflinching commitment to Nirbhaya must be to find ways of
            > making sure that we do not encourage uncivilised and brutish ideas. Our
            > system of punishment must, above all, reflect this commitment.
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> --
            > Peace Is Doable
            >
            > <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
            >
            >
            > --
            > Dr Walter Fernandes
            > Director of Research
            > Animation and Resource Centre
            > 174 (A) Thein Phyu Street (2nd floor)
            > Botahtaung Township
            > Yangon
            > Myanmar
            > Mobile 0095-943115021; 011-221828
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY28yYWx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwN
            > zM5ODE3BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0MzQ2NARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM3OTUyNzM2O
            > Q-->
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY28yYWx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwN
            > zM5ODE3BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0MzQ2NARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM3OTUyNzM2O
            > Q-->
            >
            >
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY28yYWx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwN
            > zM5ODE3BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0MzQ2NARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM3OTUyNzM2O
            > Q--> --
            > Peace Is Doable
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --
            > Peace Is Doable
            >
            >




            --
            Peace Is Doable
          • Sukla Sen
            The sensitisation should in fact be an ongoing process. But the beginning can be made in a matter of months, if not weeks, and its impact should be felt within
            Message 5 of 5 , Sep 20, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              The sensitisation should in fact be an ongoing process.
              But the beginning can be made in a matter of months, if not weeks, and its impact should be felt within a year.

              Let me, however, repeat for the nth time that in any case capital punishment is no solution. In fact if a rape is punishable by death then there will be much higher probability that the victim will be killed as well in an attempt to erase evidence as murder will not attract any higher penalty.
              It's just no the way forward.

              Sukla

              Sukla


              On 20 September 2013 20:15, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:
              How long will it take to sensitize the police forces across states in India?

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Sukla Sen [mailto:sukla.sen@...]
              Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 7:06 PM
              To: viswa.ghosh@...
              Cc: Indian; IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
              bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
              arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti
              Subject: Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma
              Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul

              Not all are long term measures. Whereas gender parity may really take time
              to get realised, "an alert and sensitised police force, strong support
              network for the survivors, prompt justice delivery system, surety of
              punishment being meted out in case of a crime committed"
              should be implementable in a rather shorter time-frame.

              In any case, capital punishment is not known to have any greater deterrent
              effect and hence is a false solution even as a short term measure. It'd
              rather be counter productive by helping to brutalise the social mindset.
              (That's precisely why every fascist would clamour for
              it.)

              Sukla

              On 20/09/2013, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...> wrote:
              > Yes, Sukla. These are ALL long-term measures. Remember, you are trying
              > to turn a dinosaur of 1.2+ billion people from a patriarchal mindset
              > to one that  starts to respect girls / women - instead of perceiving
              > them as objects of sensual pleasure.
              >
              >
              >
              > What are those short-term measures?
              >
              >
              >
              > YOU NEED SOME SHORT-TERM IMMEDIATE DETERRENTS TO OUR GIRLS / WOMEN TO
              > GO ABOUT DOING THE MINIMUM THINGS FOR THEIR GROOMING SPACE.
              >
              >
              >
              > Viswa
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > From: Sukla Sen [mailto:sukla.sen@...]
              > Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 1:38 AM
              > To: Viswa Ghosh
              > Cc: Indian; IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
              > bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
              > arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti
              > Subject: Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma
              > Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul
              >
              >
              >
              > Dear Viswa,
              >
              >
              >
              > Greater public awareness, higher level of gender parity, an alert and
              > sensitised police force, strong support network for the survivors,
              > prompt justice delivery system, surety of punishment being meted out
              > in case of a crime committed are the various elements I can think of
              > which can ameliorate the situation.
              >
              > Not a very easy task. It calls for persistent campaigns and monitoring.
              >
              >
              >
              > Sukla
              >
              >
              >
              > P.S.: Reproduced below for reference an old statement by various
              > women's groups and individuals in the context of the Delhi gang rape.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2F2012%2F12%2F24%
              > 2Fstat
              > ement-by-womens-and-progressive-groups-and-individuals-condemning-sexu
              > al-vio
              > lence-and-opposing-death-penalty%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEwAuE0-D0bBP
              > 63qL8E
              > GtwsWsVkGA>
              > http://kafila.org/2012/12/24/statement-by-womens-and-progressive-group
              > s-and-
              > individuals-condemning-sexual-violence-and-opposing-death-penalty/
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Statement by women's and progressive groups and individuals condemning
              > sexual violence and opposing death penalty
              >
              >
              > DECEMBER 24, 2012
              >
              > tags:
              > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2Ftag%2Fdelhi-gan
              > g-rape %2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEAv0mRXwNShiz_NZveebpTF_N19Q> Delhi
              > Gang Rape,
              > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2Ftag%2Fviolence-
              > agains
              > t-women-delhi%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFKrPWORu_Th62cYc1A9nosGKwF4A>
              > violence against women delhi
              >
              > by
              > <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fkafila.org%2Fauthor%2Fnivmen
              > %2F&sa =D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGV8vqFZSl90roY1DuZeRyPn1QM_Q> Nivedita
              > Menon
              >
              > On 16 December, 2012, a 23-year old woman and her friend hailed a bus
              > at a crossing in South Delhi. In the bus, they were both brutally
              > attacked by a group of men who claimed to be out on a 'joy-ride'. The
              > woman was gang raped and the man beaten up; after several hours, they
              > were both stripped and dumped on the road. While the young woman is
              > still in hospital, bravely battling for her life, her friend has been
              > discharged and is helping identify the men responsible for the heinous
              > crime.
              >
              > We, the undersigned, women's, students' and progressive groups and
              > concerned citizens from around the country, are outraged at this
              > incident and, in very strong terms, condemn her gang rape and the
              > physical and sexual assault.
              >
              > As our protests spill over to the streets all across the country, our
              > demands for justice are strengthened by knowing that there are
              > countless others who share this anger. We assert that rape and other
              > forms of sexual violence are not just a women's issue, but a political
              > one that should concern every citizen. We strongly demand that justice
              > is done in this and all other cases and the perpetrators are punished.
              >
              > This incident is not an isolated one; sexual assault occurs with
              > frightening regularity in this country. Adivasi and dalit women and
              > those working in the unorganised sector, women with disabilities,
              > hijras, kothis, trans people and sex workers are especially targeted
              > with impunity - it is well known that the complaints of sexual assault
              > they file are simply disregarded. We urge that the wheels of justice
              > turn not only to incidents such as the Delhi bus case, but to the
              > epidemic of sexual violence that threatens all of us.
              > We need to evolve punishments that act as true deterrents to the very
              > large number of men who commit these crimes. Our stance is not
              > anti-punishment but against the State executing the death penalty. The
              > fact that cases of rape have a conviction rate of as low as 26% shows
              > that perpetrators of sexual violence enjoy a high degree of impunity,
              > including being freed of charges.
              >
              > Silent witnesses to everyday forms of sexual assault such as leering,
              > groping, passing comments, stalking and whistling are equally
              > responsible for rape being embedded in our culture and hence being so
              prevalent today.
              > We, therefore, also condemn the culture of silence and tolerance for
              > sexual assault and the culture of valorising this kind of violence.
              >
              > We also reject voices that are ready to imprison and control women and
              > girls under the garb of 'safety', instead of ensuring their freedom as
              > equal participants in society and their right to a life free of
              > perpetual threats of sexual assault, both inside and outside their
              > homes.
              >
              > In cases (like this) which have lead to a huge public outcry all
              > across the country, and where the perpetrators have been caught, we
              > hope that justice will be speedily served and they will be convicted
              > for the ghastly acts that they have committed. However, our vision of
              > this justice does not include death penalty, which is neither a
              > deterrent nor an effective or ethical response to these acts of sexual
              > violence. We are opposed to it for the following reasons:
              >
              > .         1. We recognise that every human being has a right to life. Our
              > rage cannot give way to what are, in no uncertain terms, new cycles of
              > violence. We refuse to deem 'legitimate' any act of violence that
              > would give the State the right to take life in our names. Justice
              > meted by the State cannot bypass complex socio-political questions of
              > violence against women by punishing rapists by death. Death penalty is
              > often used to distract attention away from the real issue - it changes
              > nothing but becomes a tool in the hands of the State to further exert
              > its power over its citizens. A huge set of changes are required in the
              > system to end the widespread and daily culture of rape.
              >
              > .         2. There is no evidence to suggest that the death penalty acts
              as
              > a deterrent to rape. Available data shows that there is a low rate of
              > conviction in rape cases and a strong possibility that the death
              > penalty would lower this conviction rate even further as it is awarded
              > only under the 'rarest of rare' circumstances. The most important
              > factor that can act as a deterrent is the certainty of punishment,
              > rather than the severity of its form.
              >
              >
              >
              > .
              >
              > .
              >
              > .
              >
              > 3. As seen in countries like the US, men from minority communities
              > make up a disproportionate number of death row inmates. In the context
              > of India, a review of crimes that warrant capital punishment reveals
              > the discriminatory way in which such laws are selectively and
              > arbitrarily applied to disadvantaged communities, religious and ethnic
              > minorities. This is a real and major concern, as the possibility of
              > differential consequences for the same crime is injustice in itself.
              >
              > 4. The logic of awarding death penalty to rapists is based on the
              > belief that rape is a fate worse than death. Patriarchal notions of
              > 'honour' lead us to believe that rape is the worst thing that can happen
              to a woman.
              > There
              > is a need to strongly challenge this stereotype of the 'destroyed'
              > woman who loses her honour and who has no place in society after she's
              > been sexually assaulted. We believe that rape is tool of patriarchy,
              > an act of violence, and has nothing to do with morality, character or
              > behaviour.
              >
              > 5. An overwhelming number of women are sexually assaulted by people
              > known to them, and often include near or distant family, friends and
              > partners. Who will be able to face the psychological and social trauma
              > of having reported against their own relatives? Would marital rape
              > (currently not recognised by law), even conceptually, ever be looked
              > at through the same retributive prism?
              >
              >  6. The State often reserves for itself the 'right to kill' - through
              > the armed forces, the paramilitary and the police. We cannot forget
              > the torture, rape and murder of ThangjamManoramaby the Assam Rifles in
              > Manipur in 2004 or the abduction, gang rape and murder of Neelofar and
              > Aasiya of Shopian
              > (Kashmir) in 2009.Giving more powers to the State, whether arming the
              > police and giving them the right to shoot at sight or awarding capital
              > punishment, is not a viable solution to lessen the incidence of crime.
              >
              > Furthermore, with death penalty at stake, the 'guardians of the law'
              > will make sure that no complaints against them get registered and they
              > will go to any length to make sure that justice does not see the light
              > of day. The ordeal of Soni Sori, who had been tortured in police
              > custody last year, still continues her fight from inside aprison in
              > Chattisgarh, in spite of widespread publicity around her torture.
              >
              > .         7. As we know, in cases of sexual assault where the perpetrator
              > is
              > in a position of power (such as in cases of custodial rape or caste
              > and communal violence), conviction is notoriously difficult. The death
              > penalty, for reasons that have already been mentioned, would make
              > conviction next to impossible.
              >
              >  We, the undersigned, demand the following:
              >
              > .         Greater dignity, equality, autonomy and rights for women and
              > girls
              > from a society that should stop questioning and policing their actions
              > at every step.
              >
              > .         Immediate relief in terms of legal, medical, financial and
              > psychological assistance and long-term rehabilitation measures must be
              > provided to survivors of sexual assault.
              >
              > .         Provision of improved infrastructure to make cities safer for
              > women, including well-lit pavements and bus stops, help lines and
              > emergency services.
              >
              > .         Effective registration, monitoring and regulation of transport
              > services (whether public, private or contractual) to make them safe,
              > accessible and available to all.
              >
              > .         Compulsory courses within the training curriculum on gender
              > sensitisation for all personnel employed and engaged by the State in
              > its various institutions, including the police.
              >
              > .         That the police do its duty to ensure that public spaces are
              free
              > from harassment, molestation and assault. This means that they
              > themselves have to stop sexually assaulting women who come to make
              > complaints. They have to register all FIRs and attend to complaints.
              > CCTV cameras should be set up in all police stations and swift action
              > must be taken against errant police personnel.
              >
              > .         Immediate setting up of fast track courts for rape and other
              > forms
              > of sexual violence all across the country. State governments should
              > operationalise their creation on a priority basis. Sentencing should
              > be done within a period of six months.
              >
              > .         The National Commission for Women has time and again proved
              > itself
              > to be an institution that works against the interests of women. NCW's
              > inability to fulfil its mandate of addressing issues of violence
              > against women, the problematic nature of the statements made by the
              > Chairperson and its sheer inertia in many serious situations warrants
              > that the NCW role be reviewed and auditedas soon as possible.
              >
              > .         The State acknowledges the reality of custodial violence against
              > women in many parts of the country, especially in Kashmir, North-East
              > and Chhattisgarh. There are several pending cases and immediate action
              > should be taken by the government to punish the guilty and to ensure
              > that these incidents of violence are not allowed to be repeated.
              >
              > .         Regarding the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2012, women's groups
              > have already submitted detailed recommendations to the Home Ministry.
              > We strongly underline that the Bill must not be passed in its current
              > form because of its many serious loopholes and lacuna. Some points:
              >
              > -      There has been no amendment to the flawed definition of consent
              > under
              > Sec 375 IPC and this has worked against the interest of justice for women.
              >
              > -      The formulation of the crime of sexual assault as gender
              > neutralmakes
              > the identity of the perpetrator/accused also gender neutral. We demand
              > that the definition of perpetrator be gender-specific and limited to
              > men. Sexual violence also targets transgender people and legal reform
              > must address this.
              >
              > -      In its current form, the Bill does not recognise the structural and
              > graded nature of sexual assault, based on concepts of hurt, harm,
              > injury, humiliation and degradation. The Bill also does not use
              > well-established categories of sexual assault, aggravated sexual
              > assault and sexual offences.
              >
              > -      It does not mention sexual assault by security forces as a specific
              > category of aggravated sexual assault. We strongly recommend the
              > inclusion of perpetration of sexual assault by security forces under Sec
              376(2).
              >
              > Endorsed by the following groups and individuals:
              >
              >
              > -      Citizens' Collective against Sexual Assault (CCSA)
              >
              > -      Purnima, Nirantar, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Sandhya Gokhale, Forum Against Oppression of Women, Bombay
              >
              > -      Deepti, Saheli, Delhi
              >
              > -      Mary John, Centre for Women's Development Studies (CWDS), New Delhi
              >
              > -      Jagori, Delhi
              >
              > -      Vimochana, Bangalore
              >
              > -      Stree Mukti Sanghathan, Delhi
              >
              > -      Madhya Pradesh Mahila Manch
              >
              > -      Kavita Krishnan, AIPWA, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Anuradha Kapoor ,Swayam, Calcutta
              >
              > -      Kalpana Mehta, Manasi Swasthya Sansthan, Indore
              >
              > -      Nandita Gandhi, Akshara, Bombay
              >
              > -      Indira, Women against Sexual Violence and State Repression, (WSS),
              > New Delhi
              >
              > -      National Alliance of people's Movements (NAPM)
              >
              > -      Mallika, Maati, Uttarakhand
              >
              > -      Meena Saraswathi Seshu, SANGRAM, Sangli
              >
              > -      GRAMEENA MAHILA Okkutta, Karnataka
              >
              > -      WinG Assam
              >
              > -      Arati Chokshi, PUCL, Bangalore.
              >
              > -      Action India, Delhi
              >
              > -      Majlis Law, Legal Services for Women, Mumbai
              >
              > -      Sahiayar (Stree Sangathan), Vadodara, Gujarat
              >
              > -      Vasanth Kannabiran (NAWO, AP) Asmita
              >
              > -      Sheba George, SAHRWARU
              >
              > -      SAMYAK, Pune
              >
              > -      Shabana Kazi, VAMP
              >
              > -      Sruti disAbility Rights Centre, Kolkata
              >
              > -      Forum to Engage Men (FEM), New Delhi
              >
              > -      MASVAW( Men Action for stopping Violence Against Women), UP
              >
              > -      Breakthrough, New Delhi
              >
              > -      V Rukmini Rao, Gramya Resource Centre for Women, Secunderabad
              >
              > -      LABIA, a queer feminist LBT collective, Mumbai
              >
              > -      Law Trust, Tamil Nadu
              >
              > -      Men's Action to Stop Violence agaisnt Women (MASVAW), UP
              >
              > -      National Forum for Single Women's Rights
              >
              > -      NAWO-AP, Arunachal Pradesh Women's Welfare Society (APWWS)
              >
              > -      Indigenous Women's Resource Centre (IWRC)
              >
              > -      New Socialist Initiative, Delhi
              >
              > -      Gabriele Dietrich, Pennurimai Iyakkam
              >
              > -      Sangat, a South Asian Feminist Network
              >
              > -      Stree Mukti Sanghatana, Mumbai
              >
              > -      SWATI, Ahmedabad
              >
              > -      Tamil Nadu Women Fish Workers Forum
              >
              > -      Subhash Mendhapurkar,SUTRA, H.P.
              >
              > -      Mario, Nigah, queer collective, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Sushma Varma, Samanatha Mahila Vedike, Bangalore
              >
              > -      Priti Darooka, PWESCR (The Programme on Women's Economic, Social
              and
              > Cultural Rights), New Delhi
              >
              > -      Pushpa Achanta (WSS, Karnataka)
              >
              > -      AWN, Kabul
              >
              > -      AZAD and Sakha Team, Delhi
              >
              > -      Ekta, Madurai
              >
              > -      Empower People
              >
              > -      Vrinda Grover
              >
              > -      Chayanika Shah, Bombay
              >
              > -      Aruna Roy
              >
              > -      Kalyani Menon-Sen, Feminist Learning Partnerships, Gurgaon
              >
              > -      Nandini Rao
              >
              > -      Pratiksha Baxi
              >
              > -      Amrita Nandy
              >
              > -      Farah Naqvi, Writer & Activist, Delhi
              >
              > -      Nivedita Menon
              >
              > -      Urvashi Butalia
              >
              > -      Kaveri R I, Bengaluru
              >
              > -      Dunu Roy
              >
              > -      Harsh Mander
              >
              > -      Anil TV
              >
              > -      Laxmi Murthy, Journalist, Bangalore
              >
              > -      Rahul Roy
              >
              > -      Rituparna Borah, queer feminist activist
              >
              > -      Ranjana Padhi, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Trupti Shah, Vadodara, Gujarat
              >
              > -      Vasanth Kannabiran
              >
              > -      Sudha Bharadwaj
              >
              > -      Veena Shatrugna,  Hyderabad
              >
              > -      Kamayani Bali Mahabal
              >
              > -      Kiran Shaheen, Journalist and activist
              >
              > -      Lesley A Esteves, journalist, New Delhi
              >
              > -      devangana kalita, assam
              >
              > -      Aruna Burte
              >
              > -      Anita Ghai
              >
              > -      Mohan Rao, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Rakhi Sehgal, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Geetha Nambisan
              >
              > -      Charan Singh, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Manjima Bhattacharjya
              >
              > -      Jinee Lokaneeta,Associate professor, Drew University, Madison, NJ
              >
              > -      Kavita Panjabi, Jadavpur University, Kolkata
              >
              > -      Albertina almeida, Goa
              >
              > -      Satyajit Rath, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Prerna Sud, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Priya Sen, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Aarthi Pai, Bangalore
              >
              > -      Kalpana Vishwanath, Gurgaon
              >
              > -      Aisha K. Gill, Reader, University of Roehampton, London
              >
              > -      Ammu Abraham, Mumbai
              >
              > -      Anagha Sarpotdar, Activist and PhD Student, Mumbai
              >
              > -      Anand Pawar
              >
              > -      Anuradha Marwah, Ajmer Adult Education Association (AAEA), Ajmer
              >
              > -      Asha Ramesh, activist/researcher/consultant
              >
              > -      Bondita
              >
              > -      Gauri Gill, New delhi
              >
              > -      Sophia Khan, Gujarat
              >
              > -      Niranjani Iyer, Chennai
              >
              > -      Dyuti Ailawadi
              >
              > -      Gandimathi Alagar
              >
              > -      Gayatri Buragohain - Feminist Approach to Technology (FAT), New
              > Delhi
              >
              > -      Geetha Nambisan, Delhi
              >
              > -      Sadhna Arya, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Vineeta Bal, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Suneeta Dhar
              >
              > -      Geeta Ramaseshan, Advocate, Chennai
              >
              > -      Sonal Sharma, New delhi
              >
              > -      Anusha Hariharan, Delhi/Chennai
              >
              > -      Jayasree.A.K,
              >
              > -      Gautam Bhan, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Jayasree Subramanian, TISS, Hyderabad
              >
              > -      Jhuma Sen, Advocate, Supreme Court
              >
              > -      Teena Gill, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Kannamma Raman
              >
              > -      Karuna D W
              >
              > -      Kavita Panjabi
              >
              > -      Shalini Krishan, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Lalita Ramdas, Secunderabad
              >
              > -      Manasi Pingle
              >
              > -      Madhumita Dutta, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
              >
              > -      Manoj Mitta
              >
              > -      Pamela Philipose
              >
              > -      Parul Chaudhary
              >
              > -      Preethi Herman
              >
              > -      Sunil Gupta, New Delhi
              >
              > -      Radha Khan
              >
              > -      Rama Vedula
              >
              > -      Rebecca John
              >
              > -      Renu Khanna, SAHAJ
              >
              > -      Rohini Hensman (Writer and Activist, Bombay)
              >
              > -      Rohit Prajapati, Environmental activist, Gujarat
              >
              > -      Roshmi Goswami
              >
              > -      Shipra Nigam, Consultant Economist, Research and Information
              > Systems,
              > New Delhi
              >
              > -      Shipra Deo, Agribusiness Systems InternationalVamshakti, Pratapgarh
              >
              > -      Rukmini Datta
              >
              > -      Sridala Swami
              >
              > -      Sarba Raj Khadka, Kathmandu
              >
              > -      Satish K. Singh, CHSJ
              >
              > -      Shinkai Karokhail, from the Afghanistan Parliament
              >
              > -      Sima Samar, Kabul
              >
              > -      Smita Singh, FTII, Pune
              >
              > -      Subhalakshmi Nandi
              >
              > -      Sujata Gothoskar
              >
              > -      Swar Thounaojam
              >
              > -      Inayat Sabhikhi
              >
              > -      Jaya Vindhyala, Hyderabad
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > On 19 September 2013 17:32, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...>
              > wrote:
              >
              > Sukla,
              >
              > I don't think any of us believe that retributive justice is what we
              > want in the LONG RUN. While we want to build an IDEAL India where
              > everyone is safe
              > -
              > even a prostitute by profession should feel safe - we need some
              > short-term deterrence to prevent these desperate males from imposing
              > themselves on women.
              >
              >
              >
              > Given the current reality (NOT AN IDEAL Indian SOCIETY) what is YOUR
              > solution - even if it is short-term - to create a deterrence for such
              > gang rapes. OR any kind of public nuisance that makes ANY GIRL / WOMAN
              > feel safe in India (Indian, foreigner, irrespective of caste and class)?
              >
              >
              >
              > Viswa
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > From: Sukla Sen [mailto:sukla.sen@...]
              > Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:22 PM
              > To: Viswa Ghosh
              > Cc: Indian; IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
              > bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
              > arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti
              > Subject: Re: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma
              > Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul
              >
              >
              >
              > The capital punishment can be justified only in terms of retributive
              > justice.
              >
              > There is nothing to show that it has greater deterrence effect than,
              > say, life imprisonment. And it cannot, by definition, be reformative.
              >
              >
              >
              > More civilised a society is more it should move away from retribution.
              > That way it helps to evolve into a more compassionate and humane
              > society and less brutality.
              >
              > By privileging retribution one cannot help to promote a move away from
              > brutalities, like rape and murder, among its members.
              >
              >
              >
              > Sukla
              >
              >
              >
              > On 18 September 2013 19:28, Viswa Ghosh_Gmail <viswa.ghosh@...>
              > wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > Walter,
              >
              > We may condemn these death penalties, however there is something
              > called "retributive justice" - this has that sense. Think of it from
              > the point of view of the Mother and Father who - cannot bear to
              > imagine how much their daughter suffered in the bus.
              >
              >
              >
              > I have two daughters and have tried to imagine the possibility that
              > they undergo similar trauma in India. Every time I tried to imagine
              > that, I simply broke down.
              >
              >
              >
              > Also, lets hope that Indian males, at least, will take fear from the
              > fact that if they did something similar and got caught they might also
              > be - and, I sincerely hope - will be hanged.
              >
              >
              >
              > HOW DO YOU PROPOSE TO CURE Indian MALES OF THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE FUN AT
              > THE COST OF ANY FEMALE?
              >
              >
              >
              > Tribal women and Dalit women are entirely at the mercy of local upper
              > caste & class males. How do you propose to cure those rascals?
              >
              >
              >
              > Viswa
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > From: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com [mailto:indianfirst@yahoogroups.com]
              > On Behalf Of Walter Fernandes
              > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:52 AM
              > To: indianfirst@yahoogroups.com
              > Cc: IHRO; issueonline; bahujan; mahajanapada;
              > bharat-chintan@...; indiathinkersnet; sacred-illusions;
              > arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com; invitesplus@yahoogroups.com; Janshakti;
              > Indian
              > Subject: [INDIAN FIRST] Re: [india-unity] Why the Justice Verma
              > Commission rejected the death penalty: Revati Laul
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > I agree with you. Death penalty can only quench our thirst for blood -
              > the craving a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye. The chart given
              > yesterday only substantiates what so many other studies have shown -
              > the death penalty is not going to reduce crime. The attitudes that
              > lead to rape, child abuse, murders and terrorism have to be dealt
              > with. Death penalty deals with the symptoms, not the causes.
              >
              > Walter
              >
              >
              >
              > On 17 September 2013 23:41, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > http://www.tehelka.com/why-the-justice-verma-commission-rejected-the-d
              > eath-p
              > enalty/#.UjXm1IrIIVk.gmail
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Why the Justice Verma Commission rejected the death penalty
              >
              >
              > Death is not an appropriate punishment - even for the most brutal crime.
              > Even when the crime is so painfully shocking that it's impossible to
              > even listen to what actually happened, as is the case with the 16
              > December gangrape.
              >
              > Revati Laul <http://tehelka.com/author/revati-laul>   | @revatilaul
              > <https://twitter.com/@revatilaul>
              >
              > September 13, 2013
              >
              >
              > <http://www.printfriendly.com/print?url=http://www.tehelka.com/why-the
              > -justi ce-verma-commission-rejected-the-death-penalty/>
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> Women
              > celebrate after the Delhi gang rape case convicts were awarded death
              > sentence Photo: PTI
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
              > Reading the reasons why the Additional Sessions Judge Yogesh Khanna
              > awarded the death sentence to the four accused in the 16 December
              > gangrape in Delhi makes you shake with horror all over again. The
              > judge described why this falls under the rarest of the rare cases -
              > the victim's intestines were scooped out and she was dragged by her
              > hair to the back of the bus. Then seeing that the door in the back of
              > the bus was shut, she was dragged back to the front, hurled out naked on
              to the street with her friend and left to die.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> One
              > month after the details of this brutal act were still uppermost in
              > people's minds, the Justice Verma Commission formed a working group on
              > human rights. This group consulted womens' organizations working with
              > rape victims, police persons, lawyers, judges, previous judgements in
              > India that awarded the death penalty and those that did not and laws
              > around the world from countries that abolished the death penalty -
              > even for heinous crimes - and those that did not. Finally, they
              > recommended to the government of India that death is not an
              > appropriate punishment - even for the most brutal crime. Even when the
              > crime is so painfully shocking that it's impossible to even listen to
              > what actually happened, as is the case with the 16 December gangrape.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> The
              > commission, in its final analysis, quoted from judgements in India and
              > the US courts, but aligned its reasoning to a judgement in the US
              > known as the Kennedy versus Louisiana case. In this case, a stepfather
              > was found guilty of raping his 8-year-old daughter where her vagina
              > was so badly torn that it separated from the cervix and made her
              > rectum protrude into the vaginal area.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> A
              > Louisiana court convicted Kennedy, the perpetrator, to death. But when
              > the case went to the Supreme Court, the final punishment was not death
              > penalty because the court reasoned that  "when the law punishes by
              > death, it risks its own descent into brutality."
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> The
              > arguments being made here, which the Verma Commission eventually
              > owned, are complex. Justice Verma was not making out the case that
              > what happened to Nirbhaya should not be handed the severest
              > punishment. In fact, the commission, for the first time, suggested
              > that seven years - which is prescribed by our current penal code - is
              > not enough as punishment for rape and sexual crimes. Moreover, the
              > crimes need to be graded - most heinous and those causing death and
              > extreme brutality should get twenty years in prison at the very
              > minimum and also in some cases, like the Nirbhaya one, the punishment
              > should extend to the entire duration of the perpetrator's life.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
              > Awarding death for any crime, the Verma commission said, is a
              > different ball-game altogether. It is a "a regressive step in the
              > field of sentencing and reformation." This is a philosophical,
              > spiritual and arguably a Gandhian position that the commission took -
              > that an 'eye for an eye' only makes us rotate within the vicious cycle
              > of retribution and violence and prevents us from getting out of it.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> If we
              > were to look at the question differently - how can we reduce brutality
              > in our society, then the abolition of death penalty per se begins to make
              sense.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> It is
              > widely acknowledged that in the middle ages, justice was meted out by
              > public hangings and floggings,  which assuaged public outrage against
              > an act of extreme brutality. And in the last two hundred years, that
              > form of punishment was discarded in favour of perhaps less cathartic
              > and much colder, more reasoned forms of punishment. The well known
              > French philosopher, Michel Foucault described this transition in his
              > classic Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison as follows:
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> "It is
              > the certainty of being punished and not the horrifying spectacle of
              > public punishment that must discourage crime."
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
              > Therefore, if we want to strive for a less barbaric society that
              > produces fewer brutes, then our impulse to punish must also come from
              > higher, less barbaric reasoning. Punish, we absolutely must. But not
              > by descending to something that is, by all measures of modern day
              > jurisprudence, barbaric.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> There
              > are of course questions asked by all of us who care, who cannot bear
              > to hear what happened that night on the bus: What about Nirbhaya's
              > family and what they want? What about their sense of closure?
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> The
              > difficulty with this answer is that for most of us, it is
              > instinctively a resounding yes. Their voice matters most. And in
              > lending our collective outrage and support to them, we are in some
              > measure, however woefully inadequate, keeping them in good faith. We
              > are telling them that Nirbhaya is in our collective consciousness and
              > that we do not want her death to have been in vain.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> But in
              > order for her death not to be in vain, the Verma Commission also
              > argued, we must be prepared to do all that it takes to be a less
              > brutal society. Our absolute and unflinching commitment to Nirbhaya
              > must be to find ways of making sure that we do not encourage
              > uncivilised and brutish ideas. Our system of punishment must, above
              > all, reflect this commitment.
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg> --
              > Peace Is Doable
              >
              >  <http://www.tehelka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/rapeww.jpg>
              >
              >
              > --
              > Dr Walter Fernandes
              > Director of Research
              > Animation and Resource Centre
              > 174 (A) Thein Phyu Street (2nd floor)
              > Botahtaung Township
              > Yangon
              > Myanmar
              > Mobile 0095-943115021; 011-221828
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY28yYWx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycEl
              > kAzIwN
              > zM5ODE3BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0MzQ2NARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM3OTU
              > yNzM2O
              > Q-->
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY28yYWx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycEl
              > kAzIwN
              > zM5ODE3BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0MzQ2NARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM3OTU
              > yNzM2O
              > Q-->
              >
              >
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY28yYWx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycEl
              > kAzIwN
              > zM5ODE3BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA0MzQ2NARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTM3OTU
              > yNzM2O
              > Q--> --
              > Peace Is Doable
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > --
              > Peace Is Doable
              >
              >


              --
              Peace Is Doable




              --
              Peace Is Doable
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.