Ethically Right Or Wrong?
If the police acted at the right time the incident could have been prevented from happening. After the incident police were able to remove Vijay P. Nair’s youtube channel. The deleted channel streamed a handful of defamatory videos. Santhivila Dinesh’s channels are still on youtube. It has not been taken down. As of 6th December 2020, Lights Camera Action has 55.4K subscribers. It means that there are at least 55.4K people who agree with what he says. His words influence these people.
Police only charged only three weak bailable provisions of the law. Following were the charges pressed against Nair: Indian Penal Code section 354 A(1) – sexual harassment and sexually colored remarks; IPC section 509 – insulting the modesty of a woman, and section 120 (O) of Kerala Police Act – a public nuisance. The charges were not at all strong that cyberbullies walked out freely. In August 2020, Nisha Purushothamon, a leading journalist, filed a complaint on cyber cell after being cyberbullied. Posts containing vulgar messages were posted against her. The sections invoked against the accused were similarly used in Bhagyalakshmi’s case. In Purushothamon’s case instead of 354 A(1), 354 D ( for stalking) was used. Two people arrested in connection were able to walk out free. A grand reception was organized by the Communist Party Unit in Chavara, Kollam. Diya Sanaa, a gender rights activist, who was with Bhagyalakshmi while confronting Vijay P. Nair, filed a complaint in cyber cell of Kerala against a cyberbully a month ago before the incident. No charges were pressed against the cyberbully. There were no existing provisions to arrest the accused man.
In my survey, 63.6% of women said they will contact the cyber cell of Kerala if they face cyber harassment. But will justice be served? Rima Kallingal, Parvathy Thiruvothu, Diya Sana, Nimisha Purushothoman were only four of many who were not served justice after officially filing a complaint. In September 2020, there were no cyber laws that were able to be used against cyberbullies like Vijay P. Nair. But today as a consequence of Bhagyalakshmi’s case Kerala cyber laws are being reformed. It is right that Bhagyalakshmi, Diya Sana, and Sreelakshmi Arakkal took the law into their hands. They physically attacked Vijay P. Nair. Physical attack is a criminal offense. Right after the confrontation Vijay P. Nair reportedly said that he will not file any charges against the protesters. He even admitted his fault publicly. But after some time he declared that he is going to legally file a case. What might have led to his change of decision? There are widespread anonymous reports that some members of the patriarchal society are behind this decision. It is a molester’s world.
Physically hurting someone is not right. It is morally wrong. In November anticipatory bail was granted to Bhagyalakshmi and two others by the High Court of Kerala. Justice Ashok Menon granted bail on the execution of a bond of Indian Rupees 50,000 (Almost US$ 680). Ashok Menon suggested that even though vigilantism shown by the group cannot be accepted, imprisoning them would not teach them a lesson. The fact that Bhagyalakshmi and the gang reported themselves before police right after the incident, and never attempted to escape from police suggests that they were willing to cooperate with the police. These ladies also did not have a criminal background. So can they be labeled criminals? By taking the law into their hands, what this group of women did was morally wrong. But were they not forced to do this by the system? The fact that new cyber laws are being made is proof that their action is making a positive difference. If Kerala has stronger cyber laws, women would not be forced to take laws into their hands. ***
Table of Contents
- Kerala a South Indian State
- Cyber Harassment Cases in Kerala and Culture
- How fish fries can make someone feminist?
- Parvathy Thiruvothu- A Fearless Woman
- Bhagyalakshmi and group
- Ethically Right Or Wrong?
- A Positive Change
- References