Backpage

back to issue

HONOUR killings by caste panchayats or other social formations claiming traditional or religious sanction are hardly a new or unusual phenomena. Yet, even by our somewhat unmatched standards of turning a blind eye to social crimes, the killing of at least four people every week for the last six weeks marks a new low (Tehelka, 15 August 2009). The insidious and extra-legal exercise of power by various khap panchayats – assassination of couples who marry for love, particularly across caste boundaries or worse, within the same gotra; punitive gang rape of mothers whose sons have eloped with another’s daughter; even ordering that women should only give birth to sons – and all this not in distant badlands but the backyard of the national capital, should force a serious re-examination of the quality and reach of our constitutional order.

What is even more distressing is that, exceptions apart, our political class which never tires of pointing to the depredations of the Taliban in the Af-Pak region, has chosen to exercise a discrete silence. No leader of any political party, barring the Left, evidently feels that this is an issue of concern. When pushed, the standard response is that, ‘It’s a social matter and the society has a right to decide.’

Do we then conclude, assuming that our leaders do not share the ideological worldview of these ‘self-appointed custodians of various communities’, that they are beholden to the vote-delivering power of the khap leadership. Possibly they are still in awe of the massive mobilization and jail bharo andolan by the sarva khap over the distribution of 25 acres of land to dalit families in Khanjawala village in 1977. Unable to face up to the power of organized resistance, the state was forced to rescind its order. Little surprise that sixty years into our existence as a constitutional republic, few citizens, particularly in rural areas, are confident of exercising their constitutional rights.

Both colonial and independent India have a long history of fighting social evils (and promoting social reform) through legislation. Think untouchability, ban on child marriage or sati, enabling widow remarriage or temple entry – just to name a few. A combination of the legacy of the national movement for freedom and the promulgation of an egalitarian and republican Constitution raised hopes of a new, freer and more enabling environment. True, not all efforts have met similar success. Nevertheless, the current expression of helplessness in combating this ‘poisonous cocktail of crime, ignorance and bigotry’ is disturbing. As is the reluctance to draft a law on honour crimes, or even the existence of caste panchayats.

It is often claimed that regulating the operations of caste panchayats would not only result in conferring a legal status on them, but equally that intervening in matters such as marriage, upbringing and rights of children and so on would be seen as an encroachment on domains that many social groups hold as being beyond the purview of the state. Many also argue that merely categorizing the activities of caste panchayats as illegal would only result in criminalizing large sections of our population. Others prefer a combination of education, persuasion and social reform initiatives to invoking the power of the state through law.

Without minimizing the difficulties associated with crafting and enforcing social legislation, to permit the continuation of social consolidations that otherwise transgress the rule of law and claim immunity by invoking tradition is nothing but a cop-out. Equally, to over-read the power of caste panchayats in a rapidly changing society is a political miscalculation. It is important to remember that despite muscle-flexing by various Rajput mahasabhas, the Indian state was able to legislate the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987. Eventually the perpetrators of the Roop Kanwar sati (murder) were brought to book, and the glorification of sati considerably went down. Above all, the battle against sati could now be waged more confidently.

Alongside continuing the social campaigns against these ‘evils’, it is critical to strengthen the opposition to the arbitrary and chauvinistic decisions of the caste panchayats/khaps from within, in particular from the village and district level panchayat raj institutions. Unless the elected members of the local bodies are seen to be backed by the police and administration, and effective action taken against traditional leaders in the forefront of ‘illegal’ action against those seen as transgressing community social norms, the unjust decisions of the khaps are likely to continue. Above all, stringent action must be taken against state functionaries complicit in these social crimes, for it is this laxity of the state apparatus which is most responsible for the perpetuation of honour crimes.

Harsh Sethi

top