Tag

Politics

Browsing

 

Wrestler and activist Vinesh Phogat transitions to politics by joining Congress for the upcoming Haryana elections. Her activism and family dynamics add complexity to her candidacy for the Julana constituency.

The pipeline from sports to politics is a well-trodden path in India, with several celebrated athletes transitioning from stadiums to political offices. Vinesh Phogat, a celebrated wrestler, is the latest to make this leap. In a bold move, Phogat joined the Indian National Congress on 6th September, emerging as one of the party’s prominent faces for the upcoming Haryana elections. Since then, Phogat has submitted her candidacy for the Julana Assembly constituency. While adding a fresh dynamic to the Congress campaign in Haryana, her entry into politics has also sparked debates and controversies, drawing attention to her wrestling accolades and the circumstances surrounding her political journey.

Athletes entering the political arena are not unique to India. Globally, several high-profile sports personalities have successfully made the switch to politics, often leveraging their popularity and influence to garner public support. A prime example is Imran Khan, the legendary Pakistani cricketer who transitioned from being a World Cup-winning captain to serving as the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Khan’s political journey, marked by his determination and public charisma, is a testament to how athletes can reshape their image and career beyond the sports field. Similarly, Vinesh’s accession into politics signifies a shift in her career trajectory, aiming to translate her on-field grit into political clout and her fandom into a voter bank.

Closer to home, the comparison to her cousin, Babita Phogat, is inevitable. Babita, also a wrestler of repute, joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in 2019 and even contested in the Haryana state elections. Although Babita did not win her seat, her move was seen as a strategic decision by the BJP to leverage her appeal among Haryana’s youth and sports communities. This parallel entry into politics, albeit on opposing sides, has created a controversy within the Phogat family, with the cousins now split between rival parties. The tension between the two has raised eyebrows, particularly in Haryana’s political circles, where the familial discord could impact public perception and voter behaviour. In a recent statement, Babita accused senior Congress leader Bhupinder Singh Hooda of “creating a rift” within the Phogat family by bringing Vinesh into the party, suggesting that his move was a calculated effort to weaken the BJP’s support in the state by playing on internal family dynamics. The accusation has only deepened the perception of a widening chasm between the Phogat sisters, who were once united in their journey to promote women’s wrestling in rural India.

Adding fuel to the fire is the ongoing scandal surrounding the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) and its former president, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. Earlier this year, Vinesh Phogat emerged as one of the leading voices in a dramatic protest against Singh, accusing him of sexual harassment and mismanagement within the sport. The explosive allegations sparked a nationwide uproar, igniting demands for Singh’s resignation and significant reforms within the WFI. In a surprising twist, Singh has openly mocked Vinesh’s political ambitions, dismissing her candidacy as nothing more than a “Congress-scripted drama.”He accused her of using her political platform to undermine the BJP’s influence in Haryana, suggesting that her activism was a conspiracy orchestrated by the Congress rather than a sincere commitment to public service. This contentious backdrop raises eyebrows, as the public speculates whether Vinesh’s political ambitions are merely a tactical maneuver by the Congress party to exploit her sportsperson/celebrity status in a bid to challenge the BJP and its allies. The tension has deepened, with Singh’s scathing remarks not only polarizing public opinion but also framing Vinesh’s candidacy as a potential pawn in the BJP vs INC conflict.

Furthermore, Vinesh Phogat’s recent disqualification in the 2024 Paris Olympics finals cannot be ignored. As one of India’s top wrestling talents, she faced a technical disqualification that abruptly ended her Olympic aspirations, igniting widespread sympathy and support among fans and the general public. Vinesh was anticipated to be a strong medal contender, and her disqualification was perceived as a significant blow not only to her personally but also to the reputation of Indian wrestling as a whole. As disheartening as the setback was, it could inadvertently bolster her political campaign. The Congress party may be counting on her ability to convert this wave of sympathy into votes, leveraging the emotional resonance of her story to rally support in the Julana constituency. With her public persona now intertwined with this narrative, Vinesh’s campaign is uniquely positioned to tap into the electorate’s sentiments, which could prove pivotal in the upcoming elections.

In her campaign, Vinesh has embraced the “rustic bahu” image, aiming to connect with the people of Julana. This persona seems to resonate particularly well with local women, who have been welcoming and supportive of her candidacy. However, one can’t help but question the authenticity of this image, with some speculating that it may be a calculated effort to cultivate a voter bank rather than a true reflection of her character. The dichotomy of being both a celebrated athlete and a down-to-earth figure is a delicate balance, and as the election approaches, it remains to be seen how voters will perceive her true self.

With polling in Haryana set to commence on 5th October, all eyes will be on Vinesh Phogat as she embarks on her first election as a candidate. Will her performance in the elections mirror her spectacular performance on the mat? The outcome of this election could redefine not only her political career but also her legacy as an athlete cum social activist in India. As voters consider their options, the question remains: can the ‘rustic bahu’ make a lasting impact in the political arena, or will she remain a star confined to the world of wrestling?

Read Also: Beyond the Fields of the Olympics: A Transcend into the Ball-Park of Humanity

Featured Image Credits: The Times of India

Ashita Kedia

[email protected]

Gandhi is introduced as a messiah of morals to a child. Stories of the three monkeys turning the other cheek and the celebratory personhood of ‘the father of the nation’ have cast him away from ideologies appreciated critically to a domain of morality concerning only the judgement of an immediate right or wrong; this domain is scary for it appeals widely but negates a deeper philosophical intervention or understanding of the figure, what he stood as, and why he appeals still.

The modern Indian liberal attitude of tolerance and non-violence draws heavily on the principles of the Mahatma—a politically potent image inflated with the task of disseminating a high moral cause. Gandhi advocated for a legitimacy of authority to be found in the conscience of man, extending to include a moral regeneration of the people. This emphasis on ‘regeneration’ comes from the idea of the moral decadence of Indian people that resulted in colonial enslavement, thus allowing British rule. His path to freedom is that of an enlightened anarchy.

This rejection of constitutionalism and parliamentary democracy for Gandhi doesn’t come from a Marxist critique of democracy, which nonetheless repulsed him for being anchored in violence and the denial of God. The British parliament to Gandhi is a ‘sterile woman’ for not having ‘done a single good thing’ and a ‘prostitute’ because ‘it is under the control of a minister who changes from time to time.’ Why then is this non-democratic father of the biggest democracy still revered and set as a principle?

This essay is not an attempt to demystify Gandhi or dissect his ideological perspectives, considering the mixed bag his thoughts were and the considerable changes they underwent. Neither does this discredit his contribution to the freedom struggle. It rather tries to frame Gandhi’s relevance in a post-colonial world.

In a country that prides itself on elevating demigods with cult followings seasonally who influence entire elections, run scandals, encroach on lands, are crime apologists, and turn tides over with their bhakts, the occurrence of the image of an academic Mahatma shouldn’t then feel very alien. This nation of ours produces ‘godmen’ that talk of the culture taught by the Vedas, the Upanishads, and the Gita and always desperately want to “go back to” and restore the lost. Their appeal to reason involves the acting on a soul force which carves out an existence replicating some past, further nudging us towards living a more perfect life in embodying this now realised historical truth. As ahistorical and pathetic as it sounds, it works when nationalism taints it and it appeals to a nation fraught with poverty, patriarchy, corruption, casteism, and obviously, the aftertaste of centuries of imperialist-colonialism.

The appeal for religion that comes strictly from the Hindu tradition and charms the upper caste consciousness, parading as spiritualism and distinguishing between good and bad Hinduism is a peak Mahatma move from Gandhi. For Gandhi, the acme of Hinduism is to be found in the Ramrajya. The rule of Ramrajya was a central element of his political philosophy and social vision for India; it stood as the manifestation of a philosophical anarchy that his ideas professed. The memory of that Ramrajya reverberates strongly today as one would see in the right-wing fundamentalist ruling state wanting to capitalise on vote banks using a similar analogy. Now, one doesn’t need to venture into the fraudulent concept of the Ramrajya and what it entails for minorities living in India. Such imagination of an ahistorical lofty state is in essence anti-equality, and attempts to extract the good from the fundamentally bad are attempts of deception. While there are Gandhian politicians/academicians who excessively differentiate Gandhi’s conception of an ideal state from the current trends, it only means that this idealism is confusing and largely interpretative while also being highly remunerative to talk about for the appeal it holds still after 77 years of independence.

This ascetic image of Gandhi is carried by the tokenistic ‘Mahatma.’ The deification of Gandhi, where he is seen as a saint who fasts, meditates, prays, abstains, and lives in an ashram while also providing a stage for people to opine regarding the role of women in public life, capitalism in a developing country, caste relations, the importance of import substitution, the significance of village life of family relationships and tradition, in general, work best in the Indian context. Our modernity isn’t too modern or radically progressive and always finds a place back to the religious to validate any step forward; all that is now scientific predates to a past where it has been discovered but apparently lost.

Gandhian philosophy is of spiritual passive resistance, which is a method of securing rights by personal suffering; it is the reverse of resistance by arms. It requires the use of soul-force over body-force. While the ambit of spirituality can be all encompassing (since it has no specific criteria of inclusion) and helpful, it detaches an individual from the product of a society and historical events. Injury to the self in resistance to the state still forms a criterion of recognizing a protest as valid and non-retaliatory. The figure of Gandhi emerges in resistance to the police while one defends and keeps defending their nature to be non-violent and peaceful. Violent attacks on the state, on the other hand, are deemed consequential and thus not acceptable, deserving a public trial of punishment. 

While it is certainly true that the celebrityhood of Gandhi has been withering, his ideas and philosophies still haunt us. So long as we remain a nation obsessed with religion forming our politics and us conceiving moral Mahatmas in every sphere, the ghosts of Gandhi will long endure.

 

Read Also : Spinning Selfhood : The Story of Gandhi Bhawan, Delhi University

 

Image credits: Pinterest

 

Bhavana Bhaskar

[email protected]

TW: This article references acts of sexual violence 

As the nation lets forth a clarion call for justice surrounding a raped, mutilated and desecrated body, governments deflect blame while remaining complacently paralysed. The question that reverberates – to politicise the raped body, or not to politicise? 

West Bengal, and the nation as a whole, sports an odious record of mercilessly politicised cases – Nandigram, Amta, Sandeshkhali, Nirbhaya, Hathras, Unnao and recently, R.G. Ka  are now exempting the last, hollow, intangible apparitions of the distant past. We gather in armies for a few breaths, armed with candles and rage. Then, we forget. We forgot. The serving memory summons two images: First, that justice was and is a thing of the legends, wished for yet having no practical manifestation. Second, that the raped body has turned into a battleground for the state powers to rub clean their own slates with, and to use as a conduit through which to inundate the others’ with ad hominems and catastrophic, yet priorly known failures. In simple words, we do not remember justice as an object or idea served and we do not remember the raped body that has been spared the indignity of apathetic opining by the unimaginative and fortunate. We do not remember the raped body that has been spared the opprobrium of having been transformed into a political agenda.

Is this to say that we must depoliticise cases of rape? To answer this, we must follow a pattern of thought based upon irrefutable evidence. Let us take the recent offer of sex workers in Kolkata to perform as the means to a man’s sexual ends. There are three particularly macabre consequences of such an act of what may be called none other than self-immolation, and certainly not for a benevolent cause, as a pathetic majority is making it out to be. The three understandings of the rapist and the figure of the raped betrayed in such an admission are that 1) most understand rape to be a direct consequence of intractable desire; 2) it is tacitly understood that for men to repress their bestial inclinations in civilised company is inconceivable; 3) the inherent recourse to self-effacement in the face of such a crime is glaring; the identity of the victim, as it would to a murderer, hardly matters to a rapist. 

The psychology of a rapist has seldom been satisfied at the cost of carnal access to a non-consenting, struggling body. The rapist has, time and again, gone above and beyond to inflict pain upon, mutilate and deform the body. Therein it must be understood that gratification of sexual desire is not the object of rape. Hence, we cannot deny that rape has been, is and possibly shall continue to be a political weapon. Rape behaves as an act of asserting and imposing a condition of control that is an axillary of the patriarchy. The patriarchy is fed by and perpetuates itself through the political machinery of a civilisation. Rape is and must be conceded to be a political weapon; one that is used to establish a statement of subjugation and one that materialises in the brutal encroachment upon an individual’s bodily autonomy. 

The same weapon manifests in the form of hasty judgements of rape cases, their disproportionately protracted trials, which even parade such rapists, garlanded and paunched, on national television – comfortably absolved of all crimes. The patriarchy protects rapists for rape protects the patriarchy by ensuring its survival. 

This is a fairly simple argument to understand. It is not so fairly simple to accept it as universal truth. Given this argument were true, the existence of men that do not rape, or that do not succumb to such “natural biological desires” would be tantamount to the admission of biological anomalies and there is no evidence that points to that fact. There exists a fair proportion of men that exhibit perfectly healthy levels of sexual desire and are not brought to such violent outlets. Research has yielded a plethora of results pursuant to the popular positive correlation between the levels of testosterone and the degree of sexual desire experienced – such evidence remains inconclusive. Therefore, it is no more than an excuse to extenuate the rapist by ascribing the act to a biological compulsion. Once again, rape appears to be the satisfaction of a political security; the assurance that is begotten through renewed acts of rape, that subjugation is possible and that the man is still cushioned at the top of the ‘social chain’ as it were. 

One of the chief premises of ecofeminism and deep ecology has been that environmental disregard in the face of a rampant incipient urbanisation, industrialisation and colonisation is only a reflection of patriarchal tendencies. The ego-centric man, modelled in the image of the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the Romantics, must control all that is not themselves; the forests, the resources of the earth, the decision as to whether an animal survives or is slaughtered, the women, the children and ultimately, by extension, the earth. There are incidents where men have raped dogs, goats, and even komodo dragons. We might take the instance of where men have raped pre-pubescent children and senile old women. To think that these figures could excite sexual arousal in a man is admittance of either of two facts, or both: All men that rape are veritably paraphilic and unfit to inhabit civilised society or, that the identity of the raped is of no consequence to a man. While the former is a possibility and indeed, I am fairly certain, is the reality in several cases, the latter furnishes the argument I have explored throughout this article. Rape, being a tool to exercise control and assert dominance, obviates the need for the identity of the individual that is raped to be known. The individual’s body therein becomes a faceless vessel through which the rapist wields a political weapon, a political assertion of position and power, and a political consequence of supremacy. 

The kernel of the argument must now be clear. It is impossible to depoliticise the raped body or the intentions of the rapist. To say that it is a humanitarian issue is mere sophistry. While it happens at the cost of the raped body, one cannot deny that every single case of rape ultimately reflects upon the government and its ineptitude. Every single case of rape is an immediate exposé of the inner, corroded workings of the judiciary. Every single case of rape carries on its back the heavy history of raped bodies that haven’t been produced to the legal system, let alone been prepared with justice. Every act of rape is political as is every raped body. We must identify the culprits that draw us away from this recognition. Governments have contrived for themselves and popular understanding, a meaning of their own that serves to deconstruct the acknowledgment of a crucial face of rape; they have effectively discouraged the political consciousness of the event of rape through textbook whataboutery. But we must construe the idea of a political weapon as it is, and so rape is a political weapon, whether it be yielded by the rapist or the state, and it stands to the same effect. Given this, we must also understand that it is necessary to deal with it as such. Approaches to counter a political weapon cannot be apolitical. Names must be dragged and the authorities universally questioned, however ruthlessly, however politically, but it must be done by the multitudes of whom, by whom and for whom the government(s) exists. 

Read Also : SC Takes Up RG Kar Case Amidst Medical Community’s Outcry for Justice

Featured Image Credits : Sandeep Adhwaryu for TOI

Aayudh Pramanik

[email protected] 

 

Sorry, the old RaGa cannot come to the PressCon right now. Why? Oh, cause he’s dead. Let’s explore his journey from the Prince of Political Dynasty, to Pappu, and then Beyond.

Perhaps one of the most interesting things about the General Elections of 2024 was the escalated and expeditious participation from Generation Z, a large strata of whom finally got a direct vote in the election of the Government. This participation was also rooted in the Twitteratis and their constant political pundit-esque commentary that remained persistent throughout this apparent festival of democracy. From the viral “Dimple Bhabhi Hatiye…” tweet to the pookie-fication of Narendra Modi, nobody escaped the brunt of the internet folks. A leading player in the battle for the seat of prime minister was Rahul Gandhi, who displayed a staggering transformation. From him being posted to the edits of ‘Daddy’s Home‘, his subsequent babygirlification and portrayal as the Batman of Indian political scenario et.al., RaGa seemed to be a Twitter favorite; pre, midst, and post the election season. And this, comes as a surprise for someone who has long been ridiculed by both, the politicians and the masses, as ‘Pappu’.

When the National Democratic Alliance, on its third subsequent win, boasts about a new era of Modi 3.0, it is notable that this also embarks the beginning of RaGa 3.0. Something that is even more remarkable is how every epoch of his political career draws a direct parallel to the state of the current opposition in the country. In retrospect it might appear to be a vague statement, however, this opinion piece attempts to substantiate the same, and for that, the political trajectory of Rahul Gandhi needs to be analyzed in a trifactorial manner.

In a political climate that was being conditioned for Priyanka Gandhi to be the new face of the Indian National Congress, with the re-emphasization of her parallels to Indira Gandhi, the launch of Rahul Gandhi as the face of INC was a rather unanticipated change for the politicians and the masses alike. In a direct parallel to Rajneeti (the 2010 Prakash Jha Directiorial’s) Samar Pratap, played by Ranbir Kapoor, ‘a foreign returned relatively less-known to-and-of the political scenario‘ heir was placed into the position of a party supremo. However, that is where the parallels end, while Samar goes on to become a force to reckon with, RaGa displayed a relatively inconsistent political profile. His political prowess at that time focused largely upon as the ‘uniter’ of the nation, working on reducing the caste and religion-based divisiveness in the country. Subsequently, he won from the ancestral seat of Amethi and was popularised as the Yuva Neta, and harbinger of justice, by the media. However, despite this popularised imagery that he had cultivated around himself, he refused to hold positions of power within the INC and rather struck to the youth wings. The launch of RaGa drew a parallel into the INC as it witnessed a rejuvenation of the Gandhi Parivaar within the leadership positions, after 14 years of absence, albeit in an indirect mannerism with Manmohan Singh being the Prime Minister then.

Post the smooth and apparent surged political prowess, the era of Rahul Gandhi 2.0 comes into play with the elections of 2014 and beyond; the General Election of 2014, posed a drastic change in the climate of the Indian Political Scenario, wherein the 10-year streak of the INC was fiercely shattered by the National Democratic Alliance and its figurehead, present Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The dramatic downfall of the INC marked the beginning of RaGa as the undisputed King of Bloopers and the face of Indian Political Memes, the person who was hailed as the Prince of the Politically Dynastic Gandhi Parivar was now ridiculed as ‘Pappu’, and worse. The lack of a proper redressal mechanism from the INC upon the same, and RaGa’s subsequent infamous statements like the ‘potato-gold‘ alchemy theory, the hug in the parliament, misgendering of the Speaker, et.al., cemented the NDA alliances claim of the ‘Shehzada’, in attempts to mock his lack of proper developmental work despite the privilege he was equipped with. A subsequent political debacle also surrounded the Indian National Congress, as it witnessed the lowest-ever tally of 44 seats post the 206-seat mark they achieved in 2009.

Post the 2019 stint of the National Democratic Alliance, and its subsequent chants of Abki Baar, 400 Paar; the public expectation from the erstwhile political bigwig declined, and an absolute majority of the present ruling party was largely accepted and anticipated. Despite the anti-heroic downfall that the INC witnessed, he kept walking (quite literally) and conducted two Nyay Yatras, which is speculated to have become a source of connection between the common man and the INC, and the reason for its subsequent victory in certain places. His newfound oratory skills and social media tactics labeled RaGa as the herald of the change of the apparent de-Modicisation and Democratization of the country. The connection that he attempted to build at a grassroots level, and better redressal skills, led to a surge in the INDIA vote bank, and a subsequent declination in the expected votes for the NDA.

However, RaGa’s relatively newer 3.0 trajectory did not stop there, the 1st July speech in the parliament, ended the era of his silence and negligence regarding the political climate and the flaws of the NDA, as he delivered a speech outlining the very same. The Speech won him further accolades over social media, as the netizens proclaimed that the tectonics of the Indian Political Scenario witnessed a shift that day, the void of an improper Leader of Opposition seemed to be filling. This is followed by his recent visits to places that have been impacted by violence and improper governance like Manipur, Assam, site of Hathras Stampede, loco pilots of Delhi, et.al. This is a clear indication of a political consistency, which he is infamously unknown of. The transition from Pappu to the Leader of Opposition, depicts a shift in the political ball game of the country, a probable subdued indication of the resurgence of the INC, and a new arena into his political trajectory. However, it remains long to be seen whether this political conundrum turns out to be a sham, or has Prime Minister Narendra Modi finally found an able competitor.

Read Also: Saffron Politics: A Path To Majoritarianism

Featured Image Credits: X

Shikhar Pathak

[email protected]

An event by the student group ‘Brahmins of DU’, sponsored by the University of Delhi, was supposed to be held on May 10, 2024, i.e., Friday. However, the event faced protests from the left-bloc of student politics, alleging casteist and discriminatory sentiments, causing the event to be consequently canceled.

In the continual skepticism over the democratic nature of Delhi University and the inherent ‘saffronization’ and ‘brahmanization’ that is allegedly being promoted by the university, there was yet another DU-Admin-sponsored event organized by the student wing, ‘Brahmins of DU’. The university-wide association announced an event titled ‘Brahmins and the Tapestry of Hindu Civilization: Weaving Bhartiya Heritage and Calling Astikas to Fulfill Rșiṛṇa  that was programmed to take place on May 10, 2024, at the Conference Center of the North Campus, along with a campus-wide ‘Shobha Yatra‘ on the same day.

The event received widespread backlash from the student community, citing its alleged casteist approach. This was further vitalized by claims from Professor Abha Dev Habib, an Assistant Professor at DU, who, in conversation with EdexLive, cited a recent example of how events are being ‘policed’ and ‘restricted’ and a poetry reading session on the Palestinian crisis that was supposed to be held on April 15 was canceled by the university ‘without citing any valid reason’. In opposition to the event by ‘Brahmins of DU’, the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), under the umbrella of Humans of DU, organized a parallel event on the same date, i.e., May 10, 2024, at the Arts Faculty. The event organized was a photo exhibition and open mic themed around the ‘Saffronization’ of DU and against the ‘Normalization of Casteist Politics on the Campus’. Students university-wide joined the event in solidarity with the cause and presented their ideas, pieces, and writings, and the words of prominent Dalit writers like Omprakash Valmiki were also echoed.

Aditi, State Committee Member SFI Delhi, adds about how the undertakings in the university are a “direct reflection of the societal tapestry of our country”, expressing her fear over an ‘uncertain future’ wherein incidents like the “recent TISS debacle could be replicated in Delhi University”. She further states that, with opposition events like this:

 we will not let them destroy the dissent, debate, and other progressive nature of our campus.

Besides SFI, the All India Student Association, AISA, also made a post on Instagram condemning the event, stating:

Their ideologies promote hatred, discrimination, and division, which directly contradict the values of equality, solidarity, and social justice.

While the SFI Event was an alleged success in presenting their opposition to the events and undertakings held by the group Brahmins of DU, the event organized by Brahmins of DU did not materialize. In a consequent press release, SFI states that fervent backlash and dissent from “progressive student pressure groups” and political bodies compelled the administration to call off the event organized by ‘Brahmins of DU’ eventually.

Read Also: TISS Scholar Suspended for Two Years Due to ‘Anti-National Acts’ and Protests Outside Parliament

Featured Image Credits: SFI Official Instagram

Shikhar Pathak

[email protected]

 

 

In a swift response, Delhi University takes action against a staff member accused of sexual harassment, reflecting a commitment to student welfare. As students rally for justice at the Central Institute of Education, officials ensure a thorough investigation by the Internal Complaints Committee, prioritizing safety and transparency.

The University of Delhi’s Establishment Branch has terminated the employment of a non-teaching staff member who was allegedly involved in the sexual harassment of a student at the Central Institute of Education (CIE) earlier this month. The incident occurred in the Department of Education’s new building, per the student’s official complaint with the Head and Dean of CIE. The defendant is alleged to have engaged in several inappropriate behaviors, such as unwanted approaches, invasive personal inquiries, and acts that created a great deal of discomfort and fear for the student’s safety.

The student has asked for her peers’ support, expressing how the encounter violated and deeply distressed her. She also expressed fear for her safety because the harasser was walking around the department unhindered. Students came together to plan a demonstration at CIE on Wednesday to support the student’s right to justice.

The Indian Express was notified by Pankaj Arora, Head and Dean of CIE, that the Internal Complaints Committee was notified of the student’s complaint as soon as it was received on Monday. The accused, who worked for the company under a contract, was let go early on Wednesday.

We have engaged in extensive discussions with the students and have assured them that the university’s ICC will handle the matter with care.” Arora said in response to the protest.

While the ICC investigates the case, questions remain about the student’s ongoing safety and the support system available. Did the University offer counselling services or connect her with external support groups specializing in trauma recovery? Transparency regarding the ICC process would also be beneficial. What are the expected timelines for the investigation? Are there resources readily available to explain the process to students involved in such cases?

The case is presently under review by the ICC, and until the process concludes, it would be challenging to disclose specific details of the proceedings.” said DU Proctor Rajni Abbi.

The Students’ Union or other student committees at CIE likely played a crucial role in supporting the student and organizing the protest. Including a statement from a student representative would amplify the students’ voice and highlight the collective stand against harassment. The incident serves as a stark reminder of the prevalence of sexual harassment in educational settings. By creating a culture of support, ensuring a fair and transparent investigation process, and implementing robust prevention programs, universities can foster safe learning environments where every student feels empowered and respected.

Read Also: Where are you ICC: Looking at DU’s History of Sexual Harassment 

Featured Image Credits: India TV News

Divya Malhotra

[email protected]

On March 8, 2024, the ABVP – led DUSU (Delhi University Students Union) announced an initiative where 10 women would assume the role of DUSU President for one day each, commencing from the first day of Navratri, April 9.

Having begun on the first day of Navratri i.e. April 9, 2024, the ABVP-led Delhi University Students Union (DUSU) announced a commendable initiative where 10 women students will be chosen for the role of DUSU President for a day each.

The names of the 10 students were selected from a competition wherein the participants were asked to write an article on “The Role of Women in Making Viksit Bharat”. Tushar Dedha, DUSU President, took to his Instagram on April 5, sharing the official list of names of the 10 selected students which included Isha Awana (Department of Hindi), Akshita Johar (Ramjas College), Sophiya (Swami Shraddhanand College), Anshita Chauhan (Daulat Ram College), Deeksha Lingayath (Sri Venkateswara College), Ankita Anand (Centre for Hindu Studies), Zainab Nigar (Hansraj College), Shyama Arunbhai Trivedi (SPM College), Preeti Singh Nain (Kirori Mal College), and Sakshi Patel (Satyawati College), who served as the first DUSU President on April 9, as a part of the campaign. She is a third year B.A. Programme student hailing from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, and aims to help financially weak students through her position.

Preeti Singh Nair, the second DUSU President under the campaign, spoke to DU Beat about her selection and how it aims to empower women while increasing their participation in politics to bring about a change not just at the University level but even at the national level in the future.

We have the incredible opportunity to learn about DUSU’s functioning and receive valuable insights into student politics. This campaign in itself sends an important message as it aims to empower women students to hold political offices at the national level, as it gave every selected student the space to put forth major problems in our colleges before the union. Personally, I felt incredibly happy, although surprised, to have received this opportunity out of more than 5000 students who had participated in the competition. Having witnessed the lack of inclusive and accessible spaces for PWD (persons with disabilities) students in most DU colleges, including mine, I wish to use this opportunity to bring about major changes and take a stand to make our campuses inclusive and accessible for all. – Preeti Singh Nair, the second DUSU President 

In conversation with the media, Tushar Dedha, added that these one-day DUSU presidents will have all the powers of the chair to take decisions and issue any notice concerning students during their term.

On each day of the Navratri, a woman will head the DUSU as its President, exhibiting Nari Shakti. We have taken this initiative to promote women’s representation in student politics. 

Read Also: After WRB, Gender-Based Representation in DU’s Student Unions Too?

Featured Image Credits: Arush for DU Beat

Gauri Garg

[email protected]

With the recent acquittal of former Delhi University Professor G.N. Saibaba after a torturous 10 years of imprisonment under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), we take a look at one of the most important tools in the market of India’s barely-there-democracy: the UAPA.

In the Athenian State of 621 BCE, lived a statesman named Draco. Draco prescribed death for all criminal offences. Laws that were written in blood, not ink. Think of the word ‘draconian’ named after this infamous statesman, but in the Indian context, and perhaps what comes to mind is the notorious Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) of 1967. 

Student activist Umar Khalid spent a total of three years behind bars in Tihar, with his bail pleas rejected consistently. The case moved from bench to bench. 84-year-old Stan Swamy, booked under the Bhima Koregaon case during his imprisonment, had asked for a sipper and straw in jail, citing Parkinson’s disease. It took the authorities a month to approve his request. On July 5, 2021, he passed away in jail, still awaiting trial. Journalist Siddique Kappan, on his way to cover the Hathras rape case, was arrested and detained similarly for a period of two years without trial. 

What brings these cases together is UAPA. Stringent conditions for bails (the accused will not be given bail if the first impression of the court is that they are guilty), the ability to declare an individual ‘terrorist’, and detention without producing any incriminating evidence have ensured the overturning of the precept of innocent before proven guilty. The investigating agencies are allowed to take up to 180 days even to file a chargesheet, which, in the case of Kappan, he claims to never even have received firsthand.

The process thus becomes the punishment. The asymmetrical power balance between citizen and state is clearly exploited to the citizen’s disadvantage. Dissecting the acquittal judgement of Professor G.N. Saibaba, Karen Gabriel, and PK Vijayan write for The Quint that the law comprises both the set of legislation that the state has to enact and uphold as well as the rules of procedure that the state must adhere to while doing so. They assert, “Procedure is an invaluable protective measure, not an incidental convenience.”

A Brief History

In the year 1967, the Indira Gandhi administration sought to bring out a law against the secessionist activities that the government observed in the country. The Parliament thus passed the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. What initially emerged as legislation to counter the problem of secessionist tendencies, however, would quickly assume an altogether different colour. 

After the Prime Minister’s death and with the advent of the Punjab insurgency, the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act (TADA) was introduced. Criticised widely by human rights organisations for its arbitrary tendencies to centralise the onus of justice, it was later withdrawn. TADA trickled down in 2001 to POTA (the Prevention of Terrorism Act) in 2002, which met with concerns of misuse and was scrapped by the UPA government in 2004. The provisions of POTA, however, were in essence transferred onto the UAPA, which was the first introduction of anti-terrorism into the primarily anti-secessionist legislation. The central government could now overlook rules of evidence when it came to interception of communication and vested in its hands the power to declare any organisation as a terrorist organisation without trial. 

In 2008, the Act was further amended to include longer police custody, longer jail time, and harder bail provisions. The latest and most important amendment in 2019 empowered the NIA further and gave the government powers to declare individuals terrorists. 

But It Works, Right?

The hardlined stringency should then naturally warrant efficiency in curbing the “disturbances” that it claims to protect us from. The Home Ministry’s 2020 report, on the other hand, tells us that only 212 of the 24000 convicted in UAPA cases in 2016–2020 were found guilty. As Kappan puts it, “a conviction rate of less than 3%.”

Acquitting DU professor G. N. Saibaba, who has been in prison for 3600 days, the Bombay High Court noted:

No evidence has been led by the prosecution by any witness to any incident, attack, act of violence, or even evidence collected from some earlier scene of offence where a terrorist act has taken place, in order to connect the accused to such an act…

The court further stated that there had been an evident “failure in justice” in the flouting of mandatory provisions in Saibaba’s case. The appalling conditions of his imprisonment, along with those of many others, lead one to wonder whether the crushing impact that callous state persecution has on an individual’s life can ever be undone with mere acquittal. 

The persecution of intelligentsia, which asks difficult questions of institutions, is no new phenomenon. Considering, however, that as we function under that nimble concept of what is known to some of us as a democracy, the state would do well to clothe its atrocities better and be less conspicuous about them. The UAPA, with its in-your-face authoritarian tendencies, does not seem to be helping in that front. 

Read also: The Donkey Dance of UAPA: Criminalising Dissent in a Hollowing Democracy

Deevya Deo
[email protected]

This is a piece of political satire. Readers are requested to bear the same in mind and proceed with caution.

Bearing in mind the democratic character of elections in our country, the government has launched special “hide-and-seek” training programmes to launch troops who will catch any suspicious spies at the ballot box, trying to endanger free and fair elections in 2024.

Greetings Everyone! Would you like to hear a story? I can’t assure you if it’s fact or fiction, or perhaps it might be switching between those lines. Nonetheless, let’s just recite the tale.

In December 2023, the National Informatics Centre Services Inc. (NICSI) released a tender for procuring surveillance equipment, including drones and facial recognition technologies (FRT), for monitoring the union and state elections of 2024 as a part of the special “hide-and-seek” training programs. These programmes intend to train and launch specialised troops who will catch any suspicious spies (dangerous voters), trying to threaten the democratic character of the 2024 elections.

Just like in every epic saga, there is a hero, the hero’s best friend, and obviously a villain. And of course, in this tale, our precious government happens to be the hero. Poor them! All they were trying to do was protect our beloved democracy. I mean, they just tried to eliminate those damn spies. How will we safeguard our title as “the world’s largest democracy” otherwise? And the NICSI, as the typical hero’s best friend, just tried to support their best friend in this noble endeavour.

The said tender laid out plans for live-webcasting the polls and counting processes during elections and drafted the setting up of a “centralised command and control centre” to monitor activities in real time in order to “prevent unfair practices and maintain law and order at polling stations.” NICSI intended to achieve this by installing field surveillance vehicles, drones, systems extracting data from FRT for voters, IP-based cameras, LED TVs for screening the live data, and web-based audio and video streaming software on polling stations and counting halls.

Such noble intentions indeed! But of course, tragedy had to strike, and the menacing villain had to foil this plan!

The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered the cancellation of the said tender and sent a notice to NCISI after the digital rights body, the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), sent a letter to the ECI expressing concerns over breaches of citizens’ privacy and the potential misuse of voter data on January 17, 2024, and tweeted about it. The ECI spokesperson tweeted,

When the NICSI tender came to our attention, the Commission directed NICSI to immediately cancel it. The said tender was not floated with ECI approval. The Commission shall not allow invasion of citizens’ privacy in any manner during elections.

The wretched ECI, of course, could not sit still while the valorous hero pursued their noble initiative. Apologies for letting my emotions get the best of me; I mean, it’s just a story. But why does the ECI keep trying to frame the government with absurd allegations like “the proposed use of monitoring and surveillance technologies is antithetical to a free and fair election” or “the extensive deployment of video surveillance equipment will hurt individual fundamental rights, particularly the right to privacy and dignity” and how “citizens have a legitimate expectation that their voting choices remain confidential and free from unwarranted scrutiny” and “voter surveillance is voter intimidation and hampers the conduct of free and fair elections” and blah, blah, blah!

But, unfortunately, in this story, the villain won.

The National Informatics Centre Services Inc., on January 19, 2024, cancelled its tender seeking proposals from companies to provide surveillance equipment. According to IFF (the villain’s best friend), ECI’s decision to withdraw the tender is a positive step. They believe that there also needs to be an investigation to determine how and why a tender with such far-reaching implications for citizens’ ability to vote freely and without fear was released in the first place.

The villain may have won this time or might just keep winning every single time (hopes of every idealistic citizen in a democracy), but obviously the hero will keep trying and will come back stronger! (unfortunate reality).

Read also: Saffronisation Out in the Open, Finally!

Featured Image Credits: India Today

Gauri Garg
[email protected]

Recently, controversy erupted when the ‘Ambedkarite Queer’ attendees at the 2024 Mumbai Pride Parade were allegedly barred from chanting “Jai Bhim,” a popular slogan for Dalit liberation and the annihilation of caste. In the light of this missing intersectionality, along with the all-too-familiar hijacking of Pride by corporations professing ‘rainbow capitalism,’ the question arises: where is the soul of Pride today?

While Pride stands as a symbol of celebration of diversity and a fight for equal rights, it has been exploited over the years not only within the realm of capitalism but by political parties in the country, who have been handed over the task to initiate laws for marriage equality by the honourable Supreme Court. India hosts several Pride marches across cities like Mumbai, Pune, Delhi, and many more. However, the history of the Pride march illustrates several obstacles, like police and legal restrictions, all over the country.

Recently, the Pride March conducted in Mumbai on February 3rd, 2024, witnessed bouts of ‘political tokenism’. Altercations were reported between groups that were accused of raising ‘political slogans.’ In reality, it so panned out that individuals who identified themselves as ‘Ambedkarite Queers’ were barred from chanting ‘Jai Bhim’ and their posters of B.R. Ambedkar were snatched by the Pride Volunteers. While Pride is a celebration of the diverse gender spectrum, it is also a battle for equal rights for all. While gender and sexuality sadly pose a barrier in today’s world, individuals also have to surpass other social barriers like caste and religion, depicting the intersectionality of oppression. While Pride aims to propose a ‘safe political space’ for claiming moral individual rights, incidents of such sorts explain the ‘hollowness’ behind its façade of progressivism within the country.

Furthermore, the reading of the Preamble of the Indian Constitution conducted during Mumbai Queer Pride allegedly missed out on the word ‘secular.’ Interesting, sigh. Apologies if this smells of ‘saffronization’ of long-protected social justice spaces as well. Allegedly revoking the word ‘secular’ sadly reeks of an established right-wing government injecting its agendas into what was supposedly a liberal safe space. Nevertheless, members of Mumbai Queer Pride soon after published a public apology on Instagram, citing their “respect to stand with every cause that intersects with Queer lives.”

Much earlier, the 2020 Pride, then scheduled to be held in Mumbai, was cancelled owing to protests related to the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, squashing the annual celebration of the city’s widespread queer community. Similarly, even Delhi’s Pride Parade, which has been held since 2008, has witnessed over hundreds of police personnel and restrictions in place every year (yes, queer people are ‘too dangerous’ after all).

Indeed, several questions come to mind. Can Pride ever be apolitical? Can the fight for queer rights be fought without taking into account intersectionality? And most importantly, is the liberation of any queer people possible without the liberation of all queer people, intersecting religious, caste, and other social hierarchies?

While the answers seem obscure, Pride Marches was initially conceived with the idea of creating a protected sphere for queer individuals where their individuality is celebrated and their need for fundamental rights amplified while the rest of the world shuns them. Pride today has been tainted with flimsy populist politics, evident from such policing and legalities.

With the 2024 Lok Sabha elections nearing, we flashback to the 2019 elections and the manifesto promises of providing equal footing to the LGBTQ+ community within society with equal opportunities in health, education, and work by all the political parties. While the abrogation of Section 377 served as a major win for LGBTQ+ rights, the ruling party, after coming into power, has since taken scarce measures to ensure a safe space for the community. There has been hardly any legislation for trans inclusivity in employment, health, education, and likewise.

This brings us to another pertinent question: are political parties using the ‘fight for equal rights’ as an ‘agenda’ to gain votes from the youth? Has the soul of Pride been sucked into the circle of ‘vote-bank politics’? A student from Lady Shri Ram College, University of Delhi, shared their opinion on this matter,

A lot of institutions before electoral processes conduct ‘rainbow representation’ for tokenistic purposes, and even after they get elected, they hardly create any change for the betterment of the community. Pride also witnesses ‘rainbow capitalism’ where organisations are’selling’ queer people while they are intrinsically homophobic or transphobic in their manufacturing purposes or ideologies. It’s tragic and cannot be solved unless the majority from every electoral poll holds MPs and MLAs accountable for providing equal gender rights.

National-level politics, besides capitalism, have exploited the LGBTQ+ community with manifestos that are just fantasy and rainbow-themed products in corporate organisations, while rejecting jobs for any individual who identifies as a part of the community under the garb of a progressive corporate work environment. Several examples can be cited from student politics as well. Pride marches conducted by student political parties, while turning out to be a huge success, get overruled by the spotlight due to how ‘woke’ the political party is. An instance of this can be pointed out in the Pride March conducted by the Student Federation of India (SFI) at the North Campus of Delhi University in 2023. Several gender-rights collectives that were part of the parade claimed that the march was boiled down to an ‘SFI-led event’ with SFI flags overruling the Pride flags. After all, it’s never a fight for equality, but ‘look how progressive our party is’ implying that ‘do not forget to vote for us; elections are just around the corner!’ 

“Pride will always be political,” they say, but moral boundaries between what is an election stunt and a genuinely progressive cause are the need of the hour; otherwise, it plainly delegitimizes the fight of generations. For years, caste oppression, poverty, economic inequality, and a lack of education have been favourite playthings of parties running for elections. But LGBTQ+ rights are now grabbing the spot of the top favourite toy of political parties, which are hell-bent on turning it into another token movement. While social justice movements embedded within the realm of politics are getting fooled by the world of politics itself, is there no way out of this paradox? Is justice, indeed, blind?

The abrogation of Section 377 was never about the liberty of the LGBTQ+ community. It was always tagged as one of the greater ‘achievements’ of the ruling party and the Prime Minister. While ‘taking credit’ remains a societal norm, social justice can hardly prevail in such a society.

As long as same-sex marriage still remains a far-fetched dream in a country of the twenty-first century, it is important to think how many Pride Marches, police restrictions, legal obstacles, political tokenism it will take for justice to prevail and to live equally in this unequal world.

Read Also: Pride, Privilege, Politics: A Third-Year Perspective on Being Queer in DU

Featured Image Credits: DU Beat

Priyanka Mukherjee
[email protected]