Categories
World News

Girls Name for India’s Chief Justice to Stop Over Remarks in Rape Circumstances

NEW DELHI – Indian outrage is growing over comments from the nation’s chief judge on two rape cases. Thousands of women signed a letter this week demanding his resignation.

Judge Sharad Arvind Bobde, the head of India’s Supreme Court, asked a 23-year-old man accused of raping a minor whether he would marry his victim, who is now an adult.

The victim, who cannot be identified under Indian law, accused the man, a distant relative and official of the Maharashtra state government, of repeatedly persecuting and raping her from the age of 16.

The judge’s comments sparked new demands that those in power, and especially men, do more to improve the treatment of women and girls in India.

A spate of shocking attacks in recent years has led women’s groups and other activists to change long-standing attitudes towards sexual violence.

Justice for victims is rare. Of the tens of thousands of rape cases reported annually in India, only a handful result in law enforcement, according to figures from the National Crime Records Bureau. Activists say the real scope of the problem is far worse, as many cases are never reported because of the stigma.

On Monday, Justice Bobde heard a petition from the defendant in the rape case for relief from a lower court prison order.

“Do you want to marry her?” Justice Bobde asked about Indian media reports.

“You should have thought before seducing and raping the young girl,” he added. “We’re not forcing you to marry. Let us know if you want. “

Activists said they were “appalled and outraged”.

“Your proposal to view marriage as a friendly solution to the case of the rape of an underage girl is worse than cruel and insensitive, as it profoundly undermines the victims’ right to seek justice,” the company said on Tuesday open letter.

Justice Bobde did not respond.

Sex with minors is a crime in India under the Child Protection from Sexual Offenses Act 2012. Mandatory sentences range from 10 years in prison to life imprisonment, and bail is rarely given.

According to court records, the families agreed that the man would marry the girl when she turned 18. The man later failed to keep his promise and married someone else. When the family filed a lawsuit against the man in 2019, a district court granted him early bail.

However, the Bombay Supreme Court overturned this ruling and wrote a scathing criticism of the lower court.

“Such an approach is a clear indication that the learned judge is completely lacking in competence,” the court wrote.

The defendant then turned to the Supreme Court. Justice Bobde and the other two members of the bank granted him four weeks of protection from arrest.

More than 4,000 women signed the letter calling for the Chief Justice to resign, including Anuradha Banerji, an activist with the Saheli women’s rights group.

“When the Chief Justice of India makes these archaic and patriarchal comments, it signals the deeper rot in both the judicial system and society,” Ms. Banerji said. “Millions of young girls will know that their values ​​are marriageability, not personality.”

The victim’s lawyer declined to comment on Friday.

In another case, Justice Bobde appeared to condone consensual rape, according to the letter and media reports.

“If two people live as husbands and wives, however brutal the husband may be, can sexual intercourse between them be called rape?” Justice Bobde asked upon hearing a petition filed by a man accused of rape by a woman who had been his life partner.

The excitement over the judge’s comments comes a month after another Bombay Supreme Court judge, Judge Pushpa Ganedivala, blocked her promotion after criticizing several of her sexual assault rulings.

Her decision in a child abuse case that groping for a minor without skin contact could not be described as sexual assault under the Child Protection Act sparked outrage. She acquitted the man who had been convicted of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old by a lower court. The Supreme Court upheld the ruling after the Indian Attorney General said he had set a dangerous precedent.

In two separate cases, Justice Ganedivala acquitted two other men accused of raping minors and said the victims’ statements were unreliable.

Following her rulings, a Supreme Court panel led by Justice Bobde overturned her decision to make her permanent judge on the Bombay Supreme Court.

Categories
Health

My Sufferers Want Me. Can I Give up?

I live in a city that offers Covid vaccines to volunteers who have worked at a vaccination site for 15 hours. Unsurprisingly, the demand for volunteer slots far exceeds supply. I got my first shot last week. I have more volunteer shifts planned for the next few weeks. Should I give these shifts to others so they can be vaccinated? Does the answer change when I’m sure my shifts are going to friends I know are also hardworking volunteers? I feel obliged to continue to volunteer because a) I don’t want to go away now that I have the vaccine; and b) even after just one shot, it is probably safer for me to interact with patients (who are old or otherwise at risk) than with someone who has not been vaccinated at all. However, I also feel obliged to have someone vaccinated. Elaine, Dallas

Your vaccination was done early not to get you to volunteer but to make your shifts safer for you and those you serve. Stopping undermines this purpose. You’re considering quitting so someone else can be vaccinated. But someone will get that dose, whatever you do. You asked yourself the question about the “duty to have someone vaccinated”. For example, suppose you asked if it was okay to play the system to favor one or two of your friends. I’m sure this prospect doesn’t suit you well.

Having special weight on you and your friends doesn’t mean you can ignore the moral demands of others.

According to the logic of this “duty” that you claim, each of your hardworking friends should spend as little time as possible on site to get vaccinated and then pass the opportunity on to someone else. Indeed, your job is to do your job and acknowledge that the vaccination program does not exist for the benefit of those who work there. Volunteering was a gift; However, if you see work as a means of vaccinating friends who otherwise don’t qualify, you run the risk of becoming the handle. They would only distract vaccine doses from people who have been declared eligible by a vaccine distribution system designed to achieve a variety of goals. Allowing people who work at a vaccination site to have special treatment for their friends is not one of those goals.

In my state, and possibly elsewhere, food bank volunteers are given priority access to coronavirus vaccines. Is it ethically correct to volunteer at a food bank to get vaccinated earlier? Name withheld, Somerville, Mass.

The best kind of people doing what is right for the best of reasons. The moral saint would selflessly volunteer to the food bank as a way of serving the disadvantaged in her community. You admit that you are not the perfect person. But volunteering for the food bank, even if for less than admirable reasons, is still a good thing. Once again, vaccination is no reward for this good deed; There is a need to reduce the chances of people (including you) getting infected in the food bank. However, it can also be an incentive to sign up, as people in your community obviously know, and in those circumstances, it is not very likely that you will receive a lot of undeserved praise for showing up. Then, if you thought up the job of carousel among your otherwise vaccine-free friends, you would be abusing the agreement. If your motives are selfish, make sure your actions are overboard.

Kwame Anthony Appiah teaches philosophy at NYU. His books include Cosmopolitanism, The Honor Code, and The Lies That Bind: Rethinking Identity. To submit a request: send an email to ethicist@nytimes.com; or email The Ethicist, New York Times Magazine, 620 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY 10018. (Provide a phone number for the day.)