|
Magazine
The right to live with dignity
INDIRA JAISINGH
|
Even laws will not help unless entrenched attitudes change.
|
The Act redefines the content of domestic violence, from the point of view of the abused, not the abuser.
We have often been asked: what was the need for a new law on domestic violence? Did we not have enough laws on the subject?
To understand the issue, one needs to have a clear idea of the role of law in society. First and foremost, it is a declaration of official policy of the state, translated into legal entitlements. It sets norms for behaviour; in that respect it has a normative role to play. The State, in a manner of speaking, is indicating the behaviour expected from citizens in their domestic relationships.
Protecting women
This new law, The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, protects, as the title says, women facing violence in domestic relationships. This is not limited to matrimony alone, but also includes relations in the nature of marriage, between brothers and sisters and mother and some who live in a common shared household.
Most importantly, the law contains a declaration that it has been made to protect the rights of women under Article 14 and Article 15 of the Constitution of India, to equality and non-discrimination and under Article 21, to life and liberty. This brings us to the question, what is the content of these rights? If anything, they must mean the right to live with dignity and free from violence.
The critical definition that the Act provides for the first time is the definition of domestic violence. It is here that the violence of silence becomes relevant. Domestic violence is described as an act of “omission or commission”. Omissions cause as much heartburn as acts of commission. Since the mandate of the Act is to protect the dignity of the woman, it must cover acts of violence beyond physical violence, and this is the critical breakthrough made by the Act.
The act of omission or commission may be physical, mental, sexual or verbal and emotional abuse. A known form of emotional abuse is social boycott or withdrawing from the society of the person with whom you are in a relationship, with the intention of causing emotional pain, normally, a form of blackmail, intended to get your own way or make the other person succumb to an unreasonable or unlawful demand. .
Another form of violence may be withdrawal from sex. Women after all are not supposed to demand sex, only consent to sex, particularly in marriage. All these are not considered forms of violence. However, the law has its limits and no law on earth can make a person talk to another or compel sex. In such situations, the Act provides for the relief of compensation.
The Act redefines the content of domestic violence, from the point of view of the abused, not the abuser. Defining solves half the problem, if done rightly. For a country that used non-violence as a form of protest and fight for justice, it is surprising that we have lived for so long with very limited concepts of violence, mainly physical violence. Women have not been taken seriously unless they break an arm or a leg, or committed suicide.
Implementation
The implementation of the law is, however, in the hands of the judiciary. No definition can guarantee relief, no matter how explicit it is. The judge can always find a way around it. The true guarantee against domestic violence is the internalisation of the norm of respect or dignity of the other of a progressive judiciary which lives in the 21st century literally and metaphorically and does not throw back to the stereotype of the ‘Indian woman” the ever suffering devoted sati savitri, to be worshiped. After all, who communicates with a sati savitri, except in a temple?
The writer is a well known Supreme Court lawyer and women’s activist.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
|
