India's President Droupadi Murmu prominently flagging the Kolkata doctor's rape and murder issue while remaining silent on similar other crimes negates the Constitution, argues S.N. Sahu.
—
RECENTLY, President of India Droupadi Murmu expressed her anger and anguish on the issue of the alleged rape and murder of a young lady doctor in Kolkata.
But she hardly referred to the numerous criminal assaults on women and girls who also became victims of the horrible offence committed against them in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and other states around the same time when the Kolkata crime took place.
The President's office is constitutionally bound to be above partisan politics, so when a President comments on an issue, the commentary should not single out an incident in a way that can be twisted for political gains. Rather, the commentary should be broad-based and suggest ways to solve the problem more substantially.
Even earlier, President Murmu has displayed inexplicable indifference and never uttered even a condemnatory word on the yearlong continuing violence in Manipur, where the modesty of numerous women has been outraged beyond measure and some of them were made to walk in full public view with their clothes completely removed.
By stating that "enough is enough" and urging people to wake up to the pervasion of crime in the context of the murder and rape of that young doctor of Kolkata and remaining indifferent on multiple cases of grievous sexual assault on women and girls in several other Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-ruled states, President Murmu has made herself susceptible to the charge of adopting a partisan approach in dealing with such horrendous acts.
“The President's office is constitutionally bound to be above partisan politics.
The way she flagged the Kolkata doctor's rape and murder and chose not to apply the same standard in the case of similar and other monstrous crimes against women raises many questions about her functioning as head of the State who remains above partisan considerations.
It is worthwhile to mention here that top BJP leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union home minister Amit Shah have quite often dragged Droupadi Murmu and the office of the President of India she occupies into partisan electoral politics during election campaigns.
There have been numerous occasions when while appealing to the electorate to vote for the BJP, Shah has stridently claimed that the BJP, under the leadership of Modi, had for the first time made a tribal woman, Droupadi Murmu, the President of India.
While doing so, he used to point fingers at the Indian National Congress party for neglecting tribals while considering candidates for the post of President of India during its rule over India spanning several decades.
Never in the history of our republic has the occupant of the President's office been dragged by the ruling party at the centre during an election campaign for electoral dividends.
In fact, both Modi and Shah, by doing this, dented the might and majesty of the office of the head of the State, the President of India, and unfairly treated that office from the perspective of partisan considerations.
Murmu should have instructed them not to drag the office of the President of India into the vortex of electoral politics based on the enduring legacy of her distinguished predecessors who remained far above any political calculation and persuasion.
The above context is essential to evaluate the role played by Murmu in selectively taking up the Kolkata doctor's rape and murder case and only peripherally stating, "[I]t was not the only incident of its kind, it is part of a series of crimes against women."
Conspicuously focussing attention on the Kolkata incident and just making a passing reference to other crimes against that backdrop invited sharp criticism against President Murmu in social media and other quarters.
“President Murmu has displayed inexplicable indifference and never uttered even a condemnatory word on the yearlong continuing violence in Manipur.
It does not augur well for the office of the President of India which has a glorious legacy of remaining above party politics.
Take the example of President K.R. Narayanan, who in his address to the nation on the eve of independence on August 14, 2000 referred to the alarming increase in crimes against women evidenced in the statistics compiled by State agencies.
"No place," he remarked, "is safe for them, not even their own homes." Quoting the words of Swami Vivekananda that "the land of India is soaked …with the tears of widows", Narayanan said, "Today, it is soaked by the tears of women in general, and even girl children, who are ill-treated and murdered."
Citing a case of an abducted, raped and murdered five-year-old girl, he referred to remarks of the sessions court judge who, while adjudicating the case, let the accused go scot-free on the ground that the prosecution could not be able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond the shadow of doubt.
“Today, the greater the robber, the bigger the thief and the cleverer the cheat, the more honourable, the more distinguished and the more dignified his seat.
Narayanan quoted the judge who said, "Dark clouds of doubts are hovering all around, the benefit of which is to be given to the accused." He then painfully observed, "Indeed, there are dark clouds of prejudice and callous unconcern hanging over our society with regard to the problem of rape and atrocities on women."
He asked with sadness, "Since neither conscience nor common sense is responding to this tragic problem, should not the lawmakers rewrite the laws so that a deterrent against such crimes exists in society?"
He then quoted Kazi Nazrul Islam, the national poet of Bangladesh, who, while talking about the colonial times in Bengal, had observed, "Today, the greater the robber, the bigger the thief and the cleverer the cheat, the more honourable, the more distinguished and the more dignified his seat." Narayanan urged us to take care not to have those times return to our society.
President Murmu should adopt such a nuanced approach to script her response to the frightening occurrence of crimes against women.
She should be mindful of President Pranab Mukherjee who, in the context of nationwide outrage over the Nirbhaya rape and murder case in 2012, did not spare those who indulged in the acts of snuffing out a young girl's life after violating her body in a gruesome manner and appealed for adopting measures to prevent the occurrence of such horrifying incidents of crime.
President K.R. Narayanan's responses to the 2002 carnage in Gujarat when Modi was the Chief Minister of the state are of critical relevance for those occupying the highest office of our republic.
Even after two months of that communal conflagration in Gujarat when violence continued unabated, he issued a press statement on April 29, 2002, and expressed his deep anguish and pain.
Had he been the President of India now he would have never remained silent on Manipur violence and certainly would have issued a statement in the pattern of what he did in the case of Gujarat communal inferno.
Narayanan characterised the Gujarat communal carnage as the "crisis of our State and society" and appealed to all citizens to restore communal harmony and do everything to end the violence and restore the tradition of tolerance and harmony.
Such a nuanced approach is a categorical imperative on the part of the head of the State and Droupadi Murmu should follow the invaluable legacy of her distinguished predecessors. In doing so, she will better serve the cause of our Constitution which she is oath bound to preserve, protect and defend.