By Priyamvada Priyadarshini, Student, RMLNLU
With tears in her eyes she addressed the media and said in her delicate voice that she is yet battling for justice for her daughter and has not got justice yet.
The torment of her daughter’s gang rape and demise has still not been lessened. The entire nation witnessed outrage against the BBC’s dubious narrative India’s Daughter in view of Nirbhaya gang rape case. The whole discussion welcomed part of verbal confrontation and still left a few inquiries unanswered before it was banned. “INDIA’S DAUGHTER”, a narrative delivered and coordinated by Leslie Udwin when disclosed surprisingly on 4th March, 2015 came up with something that shook the entire nation. On one hand government blamed BBC for violating the agreement of not utilizing the record for commercial purposes and its broadcast in India that obligated for a legal action on the other hand BBC claimed that Indian Government is placing such restriction in the fear that it would lessen India’s standing in International regime.
All about the Controversy
More than two years after the awful episode of Delhi gang rape case the BBC on 4th March 2015 aired a documentary named “INDIA’S DAUGHTER” demonstrating a meeting with one of rapist Mukesh Singh who stood up his alleged patriarchal focused perspective claiming that women are more responsible than men and had the victim submitted discreetly to the rape they would not have killed her. He further said that Nirbhaya was in charge of what had transpired. At the point when a young lady wanders in discos and bars around evening time wearing wrong clothes then that is an invitation for rape, he added. His whole statement centered around the outlook that works in a patriarchal society. The Indian government bound by public pressure opted to ban the documentary. This accordingly agitated the opposition who denounced the government’s decision and requested that such screenings ought not be banned.
Whether the government was justified in banning the documentary?
The fundamental issue here is that whether the government ought to be permitted to ban the documentary that portrays truly concerning how the patriarchal mind works in today’s era where each enactment talks about gender equality. Indian Government said that they respect media’s freedom of speech however they cleared up that the documentary was banned in agreeability with the Court’s decision. The BBC offered assurance to the Indian government that the documentary would not be aired in India and still, at the end of the day freely telecasted it in UK and accordingly challenged the ban imposed by the government of India.
Then again BBC was criticized by some of the famous Indian journalist who called it to be a desperate attempt to gain TRP’s against the adversary NDTV. At the time when the documentary was debated in the Parliament then most of the Parliamentarians aside from few like Javed Akhtar and Anu Aga denounced the documentary. They called it to be an international conspiracy to lower the reputation of India. Again few US daily papers including the Washington Post featured it as “A murder and rapists view reflect those of many in India”.
Nevertheless when looking inside the judicial mind it is imperative to note here that the decisions of the judges after watching the documentary may be cognitively illusioned. Judges then may utilize predetermined number of heuristics which would decrease the judgment to easier ones. Now this is another area of concern.
Indian Reformation System : Whether a failure?
At the point when the offenders are sent to prison it is expected that there would be a change in the brain of such detainees. So what precisely we need the detainees to do when they come out from the prison? Obviously we would need them to be presently a man who might never in future submit such activity and that they must come back to the community as a totally diverse individual who might be very much aware of his wrongdoings and would never empower such exercises. Mukesh who is awaiting execution is coming up with such disgraceful articulations which makes you wonder in respect to whether our criminal justice framework is successful in transforming or reforming people successfully. Mukesh still holds the same view and forces us to scrutinize our reformation framework.
However the whole debate is not halted here. It’s not just the wrongdoers making such comments rather its additionally the attorneys and lawyers who likewise hold the same view. This is clear delineation of the male chauvinist society. The documentary not the slightest bit delineates that she was favoring the accused. The only thing which she attempted to depict was the unaltered mindset of a rapist. Indeed Nirbhaya’s parents have no issue with the telecast of the documentary. The perspectives communicated in the documentary inquiries our own criminal justice system and the arrangement of reformation. It portrays that a nation which talks about gender equality is still loaded with individuals who are guided by unjustifiable and unwarranted bias towards patriarchal norms and to them women are nothing but an object.
