Why Mukhtar Mai Matters

Re: # 64

the problem i have with every and any ill being blamed on the occupying army is precisely that every and any ill cannot be blamed solely on the occupying army.

--bigotry and the violence that ensues from that cannot be blamed solely on the occupying army.
--misogyny and the violence that ensues from that cannot be blamed solely on the occupying army.

it is all well and good for y`all to put the blame squarely in one place, i.e, either the feudals, or the army, but there are other agents here as well. has it been the army alone who has held us back in terms of our socioeconomical, sociopolitical, anything to do with our social development? or the feudals for that matter? i wonder. khair y`all can sit here and debate the ``power`` of the feudals and whatnot until kingdom come. . . the fact remains that justice has always been in the hands of the few, and has come to the few, long before the army was in control. and until we are blind to that, and do not fight to emancipate ourselves and defend the countless innumerable women (and men) like mukhtaran mai, like nazish, like christian women who are raped. . .and stand for laws that protect ALL of us rather than accept justifications not to, we are going to remain a country without honor. with or without the occupying army.

#74 by miriamk:
Temp:
#64

I’m going to have to think about this. Does the chicken come before the egg or vice versa? I mean is the army the root of all problems or did the problems necessitate army rule? It’s a question I haven’t been able to answer yet.

I suppose in some very essential way Feudalism and the Army presence are related. They are perhaps two different sides of the same dysfunction. I don’t know if that makes sense (?). I mean, is each an enabler for the other?

miriam you have in a way answered the query yourself:)

forget the chicken-egg for a moment and think of ground reality there...army tentacles are in every aspect of life...from the legit to the grey...from the fauji foundation...(somebody mentioned it is the second largest employer in the country after the GoP) to the water tankers that supply water in DHA karachi...(now this is a good one...none of the brave investigative journalists would touch this...i have asked around and this is what i have been told...it is not that the millionaires and billionaries who live in DHA schemes have out houses or they prefer the bushes to relieve;)...or have no indoor plumbing...it is juts that the city does not have water to connect to their taps...

good...

so then how do they survive? bingo...water is available for a price...you pay the water tanker driver for it...ok...where do they get their water from?...(cutting the story short)...army rangers have access to water...they sell it to truckies...who supply the water starved population of DHA schemes...the journalist do not touch the source because i suspect the profit-cuts go high and deep...and they are loathe to fight and expose the gods...

this was just one example...hence miriam forget about chicken-egg...think differently...think tough...or think small...if we hope to make a difference in our lifetimes

lve

t

ana #81:

i respect your input

and miriam ... i chould have added this ps: in # 82 also...fickle memory;)...khair...
``...in its hunger to grab a bigger share of power they would not hesitate to make a pact with the saint, the devil, the pariah or the powerful...and we have seen this in the past 57/ 58 years...they bring out mqm when it suits them, have pacts with mullahs when it is in their interest...``

now specifically to the point ana addressed...

india is not a glorified example of minorities right...not by far and not yet!...however...when we compare india to pakistan...it is far ahead of pakistan...(yes i will get a flack for saying this from the usual suspects...but this is the truth....despite gujrat, kashmir, christians being burned alive..forget that preacher`s name...sloan?...and all the provocation by their rss mullahs)...

why?

imho since the divide they (indians) have developed (and are developing) strong basic institutions...because of these khaki meddling in civilian affairs the divide and suspicion across all line...class, religion, caste...whatever...is expolited to the fullest...christians, hindus, ahmedis, barelvis, deobandis, sunnis shias...everybody falls vicitm to this divide and rule mentality ...link this with no credible institutions... the egalitaran aspects of a society are not allowed to build up...the khakhis both inculccate and exploit intolerance to the hilt...(yes, back to k(h)akisatocracy)...which is why in my humble opinion....:)

lve

t

Someone wrote, ``To drag a feudal society kicking and screaming, into the twenty-first century is not the easiest of tasks. We should know. India has been trying to do just that for the last fifty-four years``.

A minor correction- make ``India has `` into ``neighbors of India have.``

The so-called moderates of Islam have not accepted peacefulthough most Indian Muslims and even Christians - live by his philosophy, as it suits them, being the permissible one-sided violence on Hindus for one more century. The burning of women and children alive at Wei, near Satara and Mumbai, was almost identical to Godhra.

mariamk #72: `` think you and I may have found something to agree on.``

I think there might me quite a few things you and I agree on........

``Feudalism is perhaps the biggest impediment to economic development. Several years ago when I started my doctorate studies in economics I was very green, very idealistic, and very non-mainstream``

If you are researching the subject, you should do one thing, definitely. Go live in the feudal areas for an extended amount of time. There are various govt. jobs (military, civil services, large private projects like dams etc.) that will allow you to be stationed right in the middle of those area. Once you have lived there for about a year, you will forget about all other problems Pakistan has. What the maulvis do at marathons etc. will seem minor nuisances, compared to what you will see there.

Pakistani feudalism, is, unfortunately, romanticised by too many individuals. There are even individuals who try to say it is dying (when it isn`t) and that it is nothing bad. The story of Mukhtar Mai seems to have shocked everyone. It didn`t really shock me, as much as most. Because I can see how something like this can happen.

One of the sites I can never forget is when you drive through the areas, you see little girls in dirty clothes working in the fields. When the car passes by, they stare at you. When you go meet the guy who owns the lands and his children, they seem like the most educated and sophisticated people in Pakistan. As I said, it wouldn`t be uncommon to find them on this site..........

``Socio-economic development is a necessary precursor to democracy``

Yes. This is the key. For a long time, I, like many on this site, naively believed that elections are the answer to everything. They will break the back of every problem in Pakistan. I am no longer so naive. Elections can only do that in countries that have the pre-requisites of democracy in place. One of which is, no feudalism.

Temp:
#82
I do agree with you about the hegemony of the Pakistani Army, but I’m just playing the devil’s advocate here, so bear with me ;).

Have our “democratically” elected officials done a better job? (i.e Benazir, and Nawaz Sharif). Haven’t they, especially Sharif acted as despots?

You pointed out India as being better off due to more democratic institutions (and you are right there also) but I think one of the reasons India is able to do that and we aren’t is that their education system outranks ours.

You and I have discussed this previously but when a large percentage of the population is uneducated they are inevitably marginalized from the political process and whether it’s the army or someone like Sharif, they are going to take advantage of that situation.

So, I guess it goes back to your point of education and my point of socio-economic policy (without which investment in social programs can’t occur).

In our lifetime? I don’t know Temp. It certainly would be nice but there are so many vested interests in Pakistan; all tacitly supporting the other. But one thing is undeniable; without education democratic institutions are not possible.

miriam:

But one thing is undeniable; without education democratic institutions are not possible.

notice the irony?...some say we are the (chosen) people of the Book!

yes yes and yes!...without education it is impossible to dream of a tolerant society...without education we cannot dream of moving forward...without education we cannot shove the khakis back to the barracks;)

#72 by miriamk

“Now, at the tail end of my degree and much more disillusioned, I am convinced that these oppressive systems have to be uprooted all at once. If they aren’t, real economic development can never take place.”

If this is what you learned, then I am afraid your degree is wasted and may be you need to get a doctorate in something you would understand better. I am not trying to belittle your intelligence but somebody who is working for a doctorate in Economics should have been careful in writing something that would easily blow up in the face.
What is “Uprooting” in Economics terms? No sane economist would ever talk about uprooting because there is no such term in Economics. The accepted “uprooting” would be to find and shoot all feudal in Pakistan-Something even the commies did not do in 1917- , once you shoot them you will have to shoot all their daughters, wives, sister, Sons, and grand kids too because the lands would automatically go to the next of kin and they will be the next feudal.
Contrary to the dream world that “green” or naïve economists like you and Romair live in, the hard reality is that you have to follow a process to remove the vestiges of the feudal system from the society.
It would hard for me to put everything together about feudalism in one short post but something that you need to understand is that the feudal or the feudalism just wont go away with a stroke of brush or Nazi-like actions. I would strongly recommend that you study Land reforms in several Indian states starting in 1960 to really understand why in some areas it was successful and in other it is was a failure.
The feudalism in Pakistan is in more primitive state of mind that it ever was in India. Neither the Indian politics nor the Indian agriculture has been able to completely rid of feudal influences from the society despite reforms in the system beginning in the 60s. For starter, study local politics in Bihar, UP and Rajasthan, and see how adversely the remnants of the feudal culture impact those areas.
Like many economies in the third world, Pakistan economy is not in a single state. Different areas have progressed differently and gap is huge. While Balochistan is still struggling with most primitive tribal society, just a couple of hundred miles away Karachi is thriving as the biggest services and Industrial city in Pakistan. Cities in the Interior Sindh are not growing because the population sees no incentive to leave their villages and income from agriculture; the villages in Punjab are becoming centers of small home industries as people are looking to supplement their income by working in the small industries.
There is a huge disparity in economic and social structure in Pakistan that causes the system to behave erratically and different segments of the population take advantage of it.

You wanna study Pakistani politics and economy first. You need to figure out why tribal Sardars in Balochistan hate the army and the tribes in NWFP are one of the biggest recruiting grounds for the Army. Why the feudal in Sindh stay with PPP and the Industrialists from Lahore and Faisalabad are always looking to find a way to work with the army.
I apologize, if I sound harsh to you. Good luck in your doctorate thesis.


PS. I will read rest of your posts on subject too.

HP:
#88

You are taking one word out of context and using it to make a point. And that’s alright, each to his own. By “uprooting” I didn’t mean let’s kill all the Feudals. And you are quite
wrong, many “sane” economists have advocated the dismantling of “primitive systems” as they can be an impediment to development. But I’m not going to take space here to explain their ideas, misguided or not.

I am aware of the dualities, disparities, and bottlenecks that exist in developing countries. Pakistan is not the only country to have them.

If you care to discuss or debate this issue then please do so in the context of the topic without being unnecessarily rude. It is possible to debate issues without taking personal shots at people you don’t know. I`ve only been active on Chowk for the last couple of weeks but have tried my best to not become tangled in personal insults, and I am not going to begin now.

So, I guess in that spirit I accept your apology :).

#89 by miriamk

I really did not mean to be that harsh. What upset me was your invoking professional qualifications to write something you expect from a layman. Wouldn’t you be somewhat irked if an aeronautical engineer tells you that F-16 can fly w/o wings?

Dismantling the primitive system is a different thing. Dismantling can be a process that could take time. Only people who tried to uproot the system were Leninist in 1917 but within just a couple of years they were thinking about handing over lands back to peasants. The massacres in Russia of 1930s were a direct result of economic reforms and uprooting going haywire. The soviet system never recovered from that therapy.

The military-civil bureaucracy nexus in Pakistan has turned Pakistan into an adhoc state where nobody dares to apply sound economic principals to the economy.

Whatever growth we see in Pakistan is indigenous. The dismantling of the feudal system is a process that would take its own manifestation, if planned and well thought out intervention in the system is not carried out. The army brings non professional approach to the economy because its first instinct is to protect its own interests. Other interested groups in the society feed off them and attempt to preserve the army in the power.

Any abrupt change in the system would render the countryside in to a turmoil and tens of thousands of people would begin to move to the cities w/o any hope for making a worth while living. We see this phenomenon in India and Bangladesh, where millions can’t find employment anywhere and now Bangladeshis are moving to neighboring countries in droves. Big landholdings if managed properly become a source of employment for landless peasants and make them stay in the area instead of moving to other areas causing huge disruption in the civic as well as in the political structure.

Sorry to get in a bit late.

Haven’t we been here before? Oops, that was the lady doctor case! By the way, whatever happened to HER? Ooops again, about bringing that one up – I forgot that’s not the current cup of tea! Never worry, this discussion will be permanently relevant for we will always have a few more cases coming up and we can recycle the same arguments all over again! (Save your text drafts!)

The real problem of course is the mindset that this particular lady (as well as the lady doctor and the countless others that have passed through those infamous lanes of justice) was perfectly willing to live under the current setup, where women are pretty much “pair ki jootis” and VERY comfortable with it, until something happened to one PERSONALLY!

What causes that mindset? Let’s follow the leads – if we dare, and face it - be it the beards, the feudal, the khakis, the whatever – and come up with the same course of action that we paraded only a few thousand times before – nothing, for WE are very comfortable where WE are!

What’s my solution? Wait till my next post, until I get around to it. But in the meanwhile, let me jot down below a few highlights of the discussion so far and my two cents on them! Here is MY selection of the golden nuggets from this ongoing verbal calisthenics. (If you don’t like it, go make your own.)

Note:

[She ranks up among other women like Mother Theresa and Aung Sang Suu Kyi, Rosa Parks, and even Joan of Arc, women of conscience with an extreme sensibility for a type of justice that is painted in black and white, with no shades of gray. ]
Although the intentions are noble, don`t you think this is a little of a stretch, Bina?

#13 by ana
You may have a point – yes a tiny spark can cause a massive explosion, but not if the gunpowder is all wet!

#16 by Mantolives
[…we need a Pakistan that respects human rights, rule of law and where peoples` rights are protected without any discrimination of religion, gender or caste.]
And how does one go about it?

#19 by miriamk
[I believe she will triumph in spite of them. ]
And pray HOW?

#22 by Romair on June 2, 2005 9:57am PT
[This whole system needs to be dismantled.]
And pray HOW?

#32 by anil
[…Whereas in this picture at least, Mukthar Mai`s eyes are determined and can spill fire to kill all evil.]
If only pictures could kill!

[To me empowerment of girls and women is the only answer.]
And pray HOW?

#36 by Romair
[It is impossible to understand it from a distance.....]
But definitely possible to SOLVE it in THIS forum!

[The only other solution is economic progress, at a national level….. If one brother or son can get a job in the city, in a growing economy, then the family becomes somewhat independent of the feudal…]
A little hazy on details, but at least you are suggesting something. Are you saying that the khakis need to hang around – and after ALL problems are taken care of, willingly relinquish power?

#39 by Romair
[The key is to take away their lands and distribute it to the peasant tillers of the land. I belive Nehru did that with the Nawabs. That will break their back.]
You think the ARMY will do that?

#53 by Romair
This is among the few sober inputs I see on this board. However, there is too much discussion of causes but hardly a roadmap on what to do.

#59 by anil
[Mukhtar Mai was powerless, until media and support organizations stepped in. That is where victims power comes from.]
And of course, they will spotlight each and every such case in a cost-effective manner!

[South Asia has a history of changing such power equations to gain independence from the British. Gandhi did it for India. Jinnah did it for Pakistan.]
This is interesting! So there were two independence movements - run in parallel! (Keep talking, we can always relearn (and perhaps rewrite) history!)

[May be even the support of liberal mullahs might be needed as they have a hold on the belief system of these villagers.]
A liberal mullah – Anil, how do you spell “oxymoron”?

#62 by Romair
[It can simply pass laws, …Once that is done, the problem is solved. …This has actually happened in parts of Pakistan. Specifically in Punjab. ]
Isn’t Punjab where the power base of the much-maligned army lies?

#74 by miriamk
[I’m going to have to think about this. Does the chicken come before the egg or vice versa?]
Finally somebody comes up with a problem that’s sure to get solved!

I too am getting my lengthy response to these weighty issues ready....

HP:
#90

I wasn’t invoking professional qualifications to state the obvious. I was explaining to Romair the transition in my thought process. Khair…let bygones be bygones. I don’t fly off the handle that easily so I doubt If I would be irked at the engineer you gave an example of. I work with people whose theoretical underpinnings, not to mention ideologies are sometimes at polar ends, yet we all manage to put our differences aside to get the job done.

Look, I know the results of abrupt change are terrible and I mentioned that to Romair when I said “shock therapy” can be even more dehumanizing than the original systems. I think we saw this several years ago when the former Soviet Union was undergoing market reforms.

It’s just that the more involved I become in disenfranchised communities (even on a local U.S. level) the more I begin to realize how monstrous these problems are and how no one solution will ever be enough. So yes, sometimes it is tempting to want a clean slate to help people. But I know that is not possible and we all have to work through the problems we have inherited.

I too believe that grassroots/indigenous change is an important facet of development, but I think it needs to be empowered much more.

Beej:
#91
You managed to put a smile on my face in the middle of a crazy day. Thank you for that :).

jang #68: ``#68 thanks..so i understood that the feudals are kind of jolly-good country squires, but the only way they ``supress the masses`` is by no giving land to build schools and and keeping jirgas alive. is land so expensive that the govt cannot build a school?``

Good question, with any easy answer......

The govt. cannot build the schools, because the feduals ARE the govt. And there relatives are the opposition. PPP and PML. This is the sole purpose of every landowner to get into politics. What other reason is there? They want to ensure that their areas are not, ``liberated`` by the govt. To do that they have to become the govt. Much like the Army becomes the govt. to ensure that its influence in Pakistan`s industrial complex is not reduced.......And maulvis try to become the govt. so that they can keep Shariah in place, thereby increasing their powers............

Also, if I own land, I can do whatever I want there. How will the govt. build anything on my land, if I don`t allow it.

A good example is Gwadar. Gwadar is going to be a world-class harbor with a world-class city around it. The living standard of all the surrounding areas in Baluchistan will increase significantly, due to the trade and roads and sky high value of land prices. Why wouldn`t anyone want such development in their areas? I am sure the local labourers would love the new jobs............

But the major tribal leaders of Baluchistan are opposing it. Why? My guess is because it will result in progress in their surrounding areas, which will liberate the people, and reduce the influence of the tribal, since people will have the financial opportuniites to tell the landonwer to get lost. These tribal leaders, by the way, themselves live in Karachi etc.. They went to Aitchison. And their kids study in Australia and New Zealand............While the literacy rate for women in Baluchistan - the area they rule or influence - is at th lowest in the world, at 3.3% or so..............

If these same tribals were running the govt. today, they wouldn`t have to carry out explosions etc. to stop Gwadar. They would just vote against it in the Assembly, and legally stop it. And the people of Gwadar would remain poor, as always..........

``if a skill-less pashtoon can make a living in prosporous urban centers, why not the man under the feudal .. like the bhayya who harvests for the panjabi farmer in india and go home after every season with a new color TV and a gold-chain for his new-born?``

The pushtoon who makes a living in the urban center is not skill-less. He is a carpenter or a cobbler or a truck driver, or a cigarette vendor, etc. In addition, he probably has an extended family that is spread out into various jobs. Perhaps one brother is in Dubai, the other owns some land that he farms and gets market prices on the crops, etc. the third polishes shoes as an orderly in the local military station or civil servants colony near Mardan.........

Perhaps the same for the Indian Punjabi farmer. They are not an indentured labor family, over a period of generations. They are just poor. But not slaves, who have no assets of their own, at all. There is a difference........

For a person to get out of a system, where he owns nothing and is subordinate in every way to the landowner, a couple of things have to happen:

First there has to be a job available. Secondly, the person has to have the skills to do it. Thirdly, the family has to have some assets, on the basis of which, one or two family members can go out of the locality, leave their present job as farm labor, and take a, ``risk.`` If my father did not have any assets, I could not have quit my job in Pakistan and moved to the USA. I could not take that risk.

For jobs to be created, the economy has to grow. Once it grows, menial skill-less jobs will be created. These jobs can then be taken by someone with no skills, i.e a labourer on the field owned by a feudal. Not only does the labourer have no skills, he doesn`t even know his rights. He thinks the feudal can kidnap his kids anytime he wants (which he can). In some cases, the feudal is also the local pir, who has a divine right to lord over them.......

This is why I think economic growth in Pakistan, at least for ten years or more, has to be given pririoty over anything else. Including elections, if necessary. Elections will not break the back of the feudal. Economic growth will. This is why, invariably, feudals are agaisnt economic growth in their areas. And are very pro elections under the current system........

Pakistan grew at a pheonomal 8.4% this year. It grew around 6.5% last year. It is predicted to now grow consistently at 7%. The per capita income has now grown to around $770 (?). All of this is going to create the jobs. And the cycle or moving to a rural society, from a feudal one, will start.

What should happen now is for an urban progressive party to get elected into power, and for Pakistan to be a democracy. However, that requires a pre-requisite of no feudalism. If elections are held today, PPP and PML will storm into power like always.......

However, if Pakistan can grow at 7% for 10 years or more, enough economic growth may have occured where the peasants in the feudal lands will be well-connected to the urban economy. At that point, it will be impossible for the feudals to control their livelihood. They will vote independently. Pakistan will transition from a feudal society to a rural society, like India. And then there will be deomcracy..........

This will the equivalent of the 1000 villagers getting together and kicking out the feudal in the example that Anil mentioned.....

My biggest concern is that PPP and/or PML will once again get uncontrolled power, through the same electoral system. And they will ensure that the economy goes down. Since economic progress is the death sentence for feudalism. Specially PPP, since PML now does have some business influence at the top (though the core of the party is still landowners). People like Nawaz Sharif etc. are businessman. PPP is still all feudal at the top..........

The whole cycle of democracy assumes that people are free to vote as they want. If they aren`t, as is the case in feudal countries, then there cannot be any democracy, even if elections occur............

Unfortunately, the only force I can see on the horizon that is speaking up for the poor folk, and allowing them democratic representation are the maulvis. There cadre and many of their elected leaders are from the poor class. It has put farmers and poor mosque imams into the assemblies. Some of their top leaders are, at best, upper-middle class (like us Chowkies). Unlike feudal parties, whose top leders are all elites, who don`t have to work a single day in their life. MMA (specifically Jamaat-i-Islami) is the only major party in Pakistan which is internally democratic, and holds elections and is not heridatory (generally). And has a hierachy, where any party member can move up the ranks. Their leadership grew, generally, from the middle and lower middle class.........Many of them were student leaders, from lower middle class backgrounds. It is only the dirt poor who go to madrassahs, because they have no where else to go.........and these then join MMA, along with various other students from Jamiaat in non-madrassah institutions also.........

If feudalism is not removed through economic progress, the peasants will remain poor. Their only emotional outlet will be religion. Their only educational outlet will be madrassahs. Their only political outlet will be religious parties........Thus the religious parties might sweep the feudals out..........However, they will bring in new problems of their own (especially for urban women and religious minorities). I think they will actually be better for the village peasants than any other party. Becasue they will give them a voice. But they will be worse for the urban folk. And disastrous for all us upper class Chowk Pakistanis.....Because they won`t let us party.........This is why you find many of the Chowk Pakistanis very anti-maulvi parties and somewhat pro fedual parties. Because the later suppress the peasants, but allow us Chowkies to party in Lahore and Karachi. Much of the English speaking press is like that also. Very anti-maulvi, but relatively pro-feudal, since the later are liberal in the citites. While the Urdu speaking press leans more towards the religous forces.........

Then there are a few like me, who are anti-feudal parties and anti-maulvi parties, and very pro-anyone who can establish economic growth (preferably in an elected fashion, but even if that entity happens to be unelected).....

Once Pakistan advances from a feudal to a rural society, I will also join the group of ``elections at all cost.`` A group I used to naively belong to ten years ago. At that point, without feudalism, elections after elections will make a difference..............

BeeJay #91: ``You think the ARMY will do that?``

No the Army will not do that. Which is quite tragic, since the Army, at its core, is the most middle-class insitution in Pakistan. It has no feudal representation now. And hardly anyone from even the upper-middle and upper class Chowk crowd joins the Army, any longer......

However, the Army has never gone after the feudals. As mentioned earliers, Ayub Khan`s family joined them, and now sits in the center of the most powerful political nexus of Pakistan. Zia-ul-Haq`s son is a key member of PML. Musharraf is the only one, whose next generation is not getting involved in the system. Perhaps because he is a Muhajir and thus an outsider...........

I think what happens is that the middle-class Captain, once he gets power, as a General, joins the elite class. He marries into the feudals and the big businesmen. And, by default becomes part of the crowd..........

Actually, I wrote a detailed reply on this site, once, which highlighted how all the people who have influence in Pakistan, be it through the PPP, PML, ANP, beaurecracy (and upto a few years ago, the Army Generals), businessmen, NGOs, journalism etc. are all related to each other. They are each others cousins, in-laws, neices, nephews etc.........Supporting one against the other is actually fruitless..........Only the maulvis and middle-class parties (like MQM) is not related to this nexus............

Economic growth, regardless of who carries it out, is the only answer........Black Cat, White Cat, doesn`t make a difference.........Just has to catch the mice.............

#37 by Romair
Excuse me Mr. Romair you appear to be suffering from diarrhea of English. My point is simply that firstly; the sex in any form is not a crime as such. Qurane hakim says, “Women are your tilth (kheti) which may be used in any manner you like”. Secondly, it is not a gender issue. Both men and women can be raped. Incidentally the first attempt at rape reported in history was that of a man, named Yousaf, by a woman named Zulekha of Egypt. And what justice was done in that case! In fact a lot of men and women would like to be raped, more so, if it is administered judicially in the manner done to Mukhtaran. It is only the NGOs who are exploiting the rape of MM by blowing it out of proportion for their nefarious ends by projecting the Mai as a crusader against the ‘cruelty’ perpetrated by the male gender. It is not a question of justice either. The real justice aught to be ‘rape for rape’ as demanded by the principle of ‘Qasaas’ and not publicity and money for the rape victim.

The factual position is that the case is still under appeal in the Supreme Court. The High Court which heard the case last held five out of the six accused as not guilty while only one was sentenced to life imprisonment because of his own statement that he had been married to MM and did perform sexual intercourse with her in that capacity. The Mai denied this (only the marriage part of it), apparently as her admission of being married with the accused (a noble and honorable woman would have perhaps jumped at this proposition even if it was considered an afterthought by the accused) and consequently it was taken as a self-confession of rape by the accused and a ‘good’ reason for awarding him life imprisonment. My God what a rape and what a justice!