Tag

decolonisation

Browsing

Colonisation in its essence is violent. With the erasure of their colonial histories, the post colonial countries play right into the hands of the imperialist West and advance their ideology. The ongoing decolonial struggle led by the Axis of Resistance challenges Western narratives and highlights the hypocrisy of global responses to oppression.

Colonialism is easily brushed off as a historical event, a relic of the past. But the world, as we see it today, is shaped by the violent systems and processes that once governed empires and still govern the lives of many today. The global West perpetuates the exploitation of the indigenous people for political and economic gains. After a year of witnessing the moral degradation of the West and its impudence in aiding and abetting a settler-colonial force in committing genocide, the expectations of non-violent retaliation from the victims of oppression are just a means to preserve the interests of the colonialist state. Turning the Indigenous lands into graveyards while the international community continues to turn a blind eye showcases the sheer hypocrisy of the world we live in and the rules that govern it.

The “axis of resistance” is a coalition of Iranian-backed groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and the Houthis that has been holding up the decolonial struggle in the Middle East. However, the axis is called an “axis of evil” because it threatens the settler-colonialism of Israel and the presence of America in the Middle East. The Western liberals denounce this resistance as a terrorist entity that dared to use violence against the aggressive colonial forces.

After the killing of Hassan Nasrallah, the general secretary of Hezbollah, on September 27 in an Israeli airstrike in a southern suburb of Beirut, a series of protests erupted all around the world, mourning his death. Considered the flagbearer of resistance in the Middle East, Nasrallah was a dominant political and military figure for more than three decades who led the war against Israel and brought an end to the 18-year-long Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. This has led to the escalation in the conflict in the Middle East and the narrative of ‘World War 3’ is being propagated, which, as exaggerated as it is, is also seemingly harmful to the Palestinian resistance. 

The war between Israel, its Western allies, and the Axis of Resistance is a decolonial struggle, not an inter-imperialist conflict. While imperialist wars, i.e., world wars, involve rival capitalist powers fighting for dominance, this war is about dismantling the settler-colonial entity itself. It’s about ending the occupation of Palestine and resisting Western imperialism. The Axis of Resistance, in spite of what the Western world says, fights for liberation and self-determination. Conflating the two shields the reality of colonial oppression and ignores the just cause of decolonisation that the Palestinian Resistance and their allies are fighting for.

“All the western nations are caught in a lie, the lie of their pretended humanism; this means that their history has no moral justification and that the West has no moral authority.” says James Baldwin, an African American writer and a civil rights activist.

The Western liberals for a year have been championing a ceasefire and sympathising with the Palestinian people. Their peaceful solutions to the ongoing genocide are embedded in the international structure, which has its roots in white supremacy. 

“Get this into your head: if violence were only a thing of the future, if exploitation and oppression never existed on earth, perhaps displays of nonviolence might relieve the conflict. But if the entire regime, even your nonviolent thoughts, is governed by a thousand-year-old oppression, your passiveness serves no other purpose but to put you on the side of the oppressors.”

says Frantz Fanon in his seminal work The Wretched of the Earth.

“Colonialism is not a machine capable of thinking, a body endowed with reason. It is naked violence and only gives in when confronted with greater violence.” he adds

Decolonisation is not an abstract concept. It is a means of survival for people crushed under colonial and imperial forces. Non-violent resistance, used as rhetoric that decolonisation is possible without any form of violence, actually acts as a preservation of the capitalist colonial structure and empowers the elites of the state. 

India and other post-colonial countries, even with their histories, have tried to maintain a cordial relationship with Israel. It’s a stark example of how being postcolonial does not mean becoming decolonial altogether. The erasure of the colonial memory and the evil that imperialism is shows the failure to decolonise the country from the imperialist ideology. The collective stigma against the Axis of resistance as an aggressor plays into the hands of the Western imperialists to justify their ongoing support for Israel under the guise of the “right to defend itself,”  which the colonised people don’t have. Presenting themselves as “defenders of peace,” the West obscures the reality that it is Western interventionism and not the actions of the decolonising forces that perpetuate violence in the region. The failure to acknowledge the Axis as a resisting force against settler colonialism and Western imperialism also stems from the deep-rooted Islamophobia that refuses to see the Islamic Resistance in the Middle East as anything other than a force of terror.

 Since 7th October 2023, the death toll in Lebanon has reached 2,000, and 9,384 are injured, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry. In Gaza, the genocide continues as the death toll nears 41,900 people. Israel is yet to be condemned for any of its actions by the international community. Perhaps the oppressed need to be moderate in their anger—maybe they’re expected to wait until the Western world finally recognises its own atrocities. 

 But here’s the thing: no amount of non-violence on the part of the native people changes the violence embedded in the colonial system itself. The machinery of oppression doesn’t stop because those being oppressed choose peace. Colonial structures thrive on domination, and they don’t crumble simply because the oppressed resist passively.

Read Also: All Lenses on Gaza: Digital Activism and the Palestinian Resistance

Image Credits: Andreas Arnold via Getty Images

Reeba Khan

[email protected]









The Parliament passed the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita on July 1, replacing the long-standing colonial criminal laws. While they bring an array of much needed changes to the criminal justice system, they have been rightfully criticised for retaining Victorian ideals of gender justice. So where do these laws find themselves in “Naya Bharat”?

 

These laws are made by Indians, for Indians and by an Indian Parliament and marks the end of colonial criminal justice laws,

said Union Minister Amit Shah. Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, the official Criminal Code, replaced the dated Indian Penal Code (1860). The new criminal laws boast of prioritising justice dispension, as opposed to penal action, according to him. 

 

Many overlapping sections have been merged and simplified, with 358 in BNS against 511 in IPC, along with each section being defined expansively to make the laws accessible and improve law enforcement. Furthermore, under the new laws, an individual can now report incidents through electronic communication, without needing to enter a police station. This allows for efficient reporting, facilitating prompt action by the police. With the introduction of Zero FIR, a person can file a First Information Report (FIR) at any police station, regardless of jurisdiction. This eliminates delays in initiating legal proceedings. An interesting addition to the law is that in the event of an arrest, the individual has the right to inform a person of his choice about their situation. This will ensure immediate assistance to the arrested.

 

Besides, arrest details will now be prominently displayed within police stations and district headquarters, allowing families and friends of the incarcerated, easy access to important information. To strengthen cases and investigations, it has become mandatory for forensic experts to visit crime scenes of serious offences and collect evidence. Furthermore, judgement in criminal cases has to come within 45 days of completion of trial and charges must be framed within 60 days of the first hearing.

 

While these are needed and plausible provisions, will India’s judicial system which is already reeling from a backlog of cases and inadequate dispensation of justice, be able to efficiently implement them? 

 

The case for sedition: The biggest grey area

 

In an attempt to decolonise the legal justice system, BNS comes forth as just a rendition of the very idea it wished to replace. By expanding powers of the state and the police, BNS retains offences grounded in archaic morality, similar to that of the colonial set up.  It widens the penal network through broad but stringent and vaguely-defined offences, thus strengthening the state’s resolve of power over the citizen. 

 

Section 124A of the IPC titled, “Offences Against the State”, includes the offence of sedition. Section 152 of BNS,  mimics the IPC section with a few changes, only the offence of sedition has been replaced with, ‘‘an act endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.”

 

While the former focuses on activities that incite hatred, contempt or disaffection towards the government, the latter penalises activities that excite “subversive activities” or encourage “feelings of separatist activities” or endanger the “sovereignty or unity and integrity of India”. But BNS does not explicitly state what constitutes either of these. 

 

In the case of Kedar Nath Singh vs State Of Bihar (1962), the court limited the extent of the IPC section to only “speech that poses an imminent threat to public order”, to safeguard citizens’ freedom of speech guaranteed under the Constitution. Since the implementation of BNS, the court’s decision on the IPC sections are no longer applicable. Hence, the scope of section 152 of BNS remains  unclear. 

 

The Union Government has clarified that BNS no longer criminalises sedition, but criminalises treason, and criticising the Government is no longer an offence. But broadly defined provisions of the BNS empower law enforcement agencies to detain individuals based on an ambiguous law.

 

Similarly, section 197 of BNS, which includes provisions on fake news, states that whoever makes or publishes false or misleading information, jeopardising the sovereignty, unity and integrity or security of India – shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, is another vaguely-defined provision. 

 

A man in Uttar Pradesh’s Bhadohi was arrested and booked for imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration under section 197 – his offence, waving a Palestinian flag during a Muharram procession.  According to the police, in a report by The Indian Express, the incident could create feelings of hatred and animosity among the public.

 

Punishment of Sexual Offences: What about marital rape?

 

According to colonial notions of morality, husbands are exempt from the crime of rape, which was reflected under section 375, which stated, “sexual acts or sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife…is not rape.” Despite widespread criticism, the BNS has retained these regressive and patriarchal values in Section 63. Although, the age of consent of a married woman has been raised to 18 from 15. 

 

While the MRE (Marital Rape Exception) was overturned in England through a judgment in 1991, it has been retained in BNS.  However, there have been several attempts to overturn the MRE in the past. In 2013, the Justice Verma Committee had recommended its repeal, but the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs rejected the recommendation – on the grounds  that “the entire family system will be under great stress.” Similarly in May 2022, Delhi High Court delivered a split judgement, with one Justice striking down the MRE as unconstitutional due to its denial of bodily autonomy and agency of married women, while the other conceded that often, consent is given for sexual intercourse though will may not exist. “The state should not interfere with privacy within a marital relationship”, he had stated.

 

The constitutional validity of the MRE is currently pending before the Supreme Court through a batch of petitions. But BNS, a supposedly decolonised legislation, continues to uphold the unfortunate colonial mentality of attacking a woman’s bodily autonomy through stringent social union that is marriage, apparently even above a country’s laws, making the husband as the sole owner of his wife’s body. 

 

Furthermore, BNS’s assumption that a man can’t be raped, reinforces the colonial ideas, particularly excluding queer men, who often face sexual abuse. 

What about protection of queer people against sexual offences?

 

Sections 63 to 71 of BNS pertain to types of rape, but there is no reference to transgender people. BNS omits section 377, which criminalised same sex relationships, with that provision being repealed in 2018 in the landmark Navtej Singh Johar case (2018). But the section also criminalised non-consensual sex between adults of all genders and orientations, as well as sexual offences against animals. Despite a Parliamentary Committee’s recommendation to retain these provisions, the new Bill omits them, making the rape of men, transgender individuals, and animals non-offences.

 

National Crimes Record Bureau (NCRB) of India recorded 826 cases under IPC Section 377 in 2020 and 955 cases in 2021. Despite this, these crimes often go under-reported due to social stigma or mishandling by police officials. However, there is a scope to register an FIR under section 75 of the the BNS which covers sexual harassment but is gender neutral.

 

According to a report by The Hindu, there is a possibility that BNS may be amended to incorporate a section about sexual violence against men and transgender people. Tansgender people in particular after often more vulnerable to sexual abuse in domestice settings or prisons. Till the time that amendment is brought about, charges of wrongful confinement or physical hurt might be applied to such cases. However, at present, there is no appropriate provision to deal with cases of sexual violence and offers survivors no recourse to seek justice, leaving their protection hanging by a thread. 

 

Sexual minorities in India are a particularly vulnerable group, with the Supreme Court recognising in the judgement on marriage equality petitions that they require legal, social and systemic protections. But does modern India’s supposed decolonised extension of a colonial law offer this recourse to the queer community? Unfortunately it does not, leaving an already vulnerable section of the Indian society, with no legal redressal. 

 

Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, in its quest to decolonise and modernise the Indian legal system, has left many in the shadows of justice. Focusing more on the nature of the criminal act, there seems to be no scope for the people. Vaguely defined criminal laws, non-recognition of marital rape, no redressal for the queer community, and many more grey areas and missed opportunities. This decolonised law essentially establishes itself as an Indianised version of its Victorian past. 

 

Read Also: https://dubeat.com/2020/03/15/crushing-dissent-aaya-police/

Featured Image Credits: Deccan Herald

 

Gauri Garg

[email protected]