Yes, I did Watch It (India's Daughter-Nirbhaya, the fearless)
I am
probably as guiltier as hundreds of thousands of my fellow Indians of
committing an offence by watching a controversial and banned (in India) documentary
film in which an unrepentant criminal heart, convict Mukesh Singh (awaiting decision
on his appeal to stay execution) and his defenders bares all.
For Leslee
Udwin, the director of “India’s Daughter” documentary took nearly 2 years. It
was produced for one of UK TV channel, BBC Four. It was to have its worldwide premiere
on the International Women's Day i.e. on Sunday March 8, 2015. However, after
the Indian governments ban, which was also held up by Delhi’s high court (on
air as well as on the internet), BBC decided to air the film 3 days prior i.e. on
night of Wednesday, March 5, 2015 in the UK.
If one is brutally honest and self-critical with own self,
one has to admit that despite the dreary pace and bland storytelling, the
film based on
the December 16, 2012 Delhi gang-rape, did manage to highlight some of the
societal ugliness in its own mirror through the interviews of the convict, his
defending counsels, victims parents and few others. It was also successful in
making us think up on the hard hitting realities about how the minds of young
generation is getting shaped in the new surging but deprived of basic
education, amenities and opportunities India. To me, it was extremely
successful in managing to kick up a countrywide
storm of controversies (helped enormously by governments ban) and in wetting
eyes if not pouring out waters through the eyes of most viewers.
One major controversy was about the
Indian bureaucracy’s role in granting permission for allowing to film in prison
by a foreigner and the BBC. It’s known that Ms. Udwin’s application to Tihar
prison officials was submitted on July 22, 2013 seeking permission to "interview
convicts of cases related to atrocities against women". Home ministry
officials granted the permission on their own in some kind of haste without taking officials from I&B and foreign ministries in the
loop as per the protocol. This haste element is apparent the home ministry
officials ignored its own
2012 circular mandating background security checks on foreigners (media persons
as well as researchers, criminologists, researchers, NGO officials engaged in
prison welfare activities, prisoner’s country embassy staffs, and those wishing
to celebrate Christmas and other festivals) visiting Indian prisons. This all
was done prior to the installation of Modi-led NDA government came into being.
The real saga
began after HM Mr. Rajnath Singh banned the telecast of the film in India and
requested BBC for a worldwide and internet ban on its telecast. Having failed
to achieve cooperation hours before the telecast of the film in the UK, the
governments standing counsel served a notice to the BBC on behalf of DG Tihar prison,
claiming 1. That filmmaker Udwin had consented to the condition that the
documentary would not be used for commercial purposes accusing her for selling
films commercial rights to the channel BBC Four, and thus breached her
contract, and 2. That the final print shall be
sent to the prison authorities before screening. Tihar officials also claim to
have sent a request to her for vetting of the documentary on November 2014.
Ms. Udwin however, contest this and claims that she got
permission for the interview, from home ministry, Tihar prison authorities and
the convict Mukesh Singh and followed all the instructions, and even shown the raw
footage to the prison authorities. Prison officials wanted
to question Ms. Udwin but she left the country late on Wednesday March 3, 2015
without joining the probe on her contest and official claim of why only one
convict interview was in the documentary whereas to interviewed half-a-dozen
other convicts of gender violence. Another noteworthy fact that the
convict Mukesh in film was not wearing regular jail uniform but normal cloths
also needs an investigation. In any case, whatever may be
truth behind the India’s government position or Ms. Udwin’s claim would eventually come out but would hardly serve any
purpose because by then brass-earners would have made enough out of the razing likely
long-term controversy.
After I began watching through a web link sent to me by a
friend on Whatsapp messenger. I was literally shaken and shell-shocked to know,
as to what goes on in the mind of a death convict awaiting decision for stay on
execution. Then a surge of question filled my mind raising serious
doubts on the effectiveness of justice and centuries old reprimand systems of
term-confinement in jails or even death penalty, has any lasting reparative
effect on the mind of a convict. I felt that it’s time that we seriously put
our heads together to redefine our age old definition of human-rights to allow
us to incorporate new and freshly conceptualised, developed and employ,
techno-savvy psycho-social tools to treat these sick-social psychopaths
endangering the lives of many innocent? We must come to terms with the reality
that some of these social-psychopaths, who are found to be incurably sick at the
time of their trials or identified during the course of their confinement are
given the mercy of relieving their suffering souls from the world that they
have not chosen to come but have been (mis)placed and (mal)developed to suffer.
My second shock came when I watched legal but evil misogynists and
offensive defenders; ML Sharma and AP Singh the defending
counsels who seemed to be sermonising on the Indian value system and culture.
The icing on the cake in the documentary was with typical
British subtlety that worked around the subject of extreme gender violence as
an eye opener to a self-critical and analytical viewer and at the same time
kicked up in the most soft spot of a so called contemporary nationalists with
oxymoron statement by counsel M L Sharma; "We have the best culture. In
our culture, there is no place for a woman.”
I’m certain that BBC team is well aware of typical emotional sensitivities
and arrogantly unthinking political outfits (within or outside the Indian
government) and thus chose Dr. Maria Misra, probably the only face to provide
the British perspective, albeit with subtle mildness. Unlike most, BBC
documentaries, this one puts more facts without much personal or British
interpretation but rather leaving it to the viewers, probably intentionally.
Fact that is noteworthy about the documentary that
it has vividly exemplified the contradictions between India’s new women
asserting against the gender discrimination and her long suppresed quest of societal
independence and deeply entrenched views of law keepers, who are unquestionably
narrow minded patriarchal men self proclaimed law keepers of the indian value
system. However, it never attempts to touch up on providing or pointing towards
a solution.
After I finished watching my mind had several questions
lurking; if the defence lawyer solemn duty is to defend the accused by shining
light on evidences that may have been overlooked or intentionally twisted by
the victim’s lawyers, or is it that they must also be convinced of the
explanations for which the crime was committed by the accused/convict. If latter
is the case, than I can’t help but shiver with the prospect of frightfully
harrowing beginning in some of the legal eagles minds. I am so far shocked to
see the abject silence (except Delhi bar council meeting late last night) of
“our so called judicial honchos, law-makers and even enlightened socialites against
these defenders of the law on various platforms and mediums. This one
documentary should be
watched by everyone to learn how the minds of serious offenders and their
defenders work. Imagine if these men can speak like that to an international
audience what they might be thinking and doing in their social spaces.
I am totally
at a loss with what I saw and heard from parents of Nirbhaya in the documentary
what is reported in the media reports. But I express my most sincere solidarity
with one of Nirbhaya’s mother comment on the raging debate in media and even in
the parliament. She said; Talking in Parliament does not help. Why are the
convicts not been hanged yet? How will the campaign 'Beti Padao, Beti Bachao'
(educate, save our daughters) work, if the daughters are not safe enough to be
alive?" It was sad to note that she had only expressed her helplessness at
those outrageous comments of the defence lawyers and that says it all of her
faith in the government, judiciary and society at large.
My harshest criticism of Udwin’s documentary is that four other men, who
violated Nirbhaya didn’t get to face the camera and her questioning leaving a
lot in her editing studio for us to know about the mind actors in don't get a word in even though they were
reportedly interviewed.) Yet, by the end of the film, all we have is a
superficial understanding of these men. Ms. Udwin in her documentary ignores to
highlight and explore the reasons and its effect of custodial death of convict Ram
Singh which could have been revealing.
It also doesn’t touches up on effects of torture of social
isolation and shame, which is perhaps more painful to the victim and her family
then even the death penalty to the accused and his family in this country.
