The ongoing controversy over the interview of one of the convicts of the Nirbhaya gangrape case has exposed the Great Indian Hypocrisy. Can there be a sensible halt to the tiring show of our double standards and a focus on the more significant aspects related to the issue?
Why are we complicating the issue by raking up all sorts of debates?
A number of theories are floating all around on whether the interview and the subsequent decision to air a documentary film on Nirbhaya was right or wrong. A lot of confused minds are raking up debates of propriety, legality or even nationality (for example, why a foreigner was given an access to a convict in jail?)
If interview is permitted, then the airing should also be
Each of these theoretical debates are unrefined and arguments for the sake of it. Instead of making things complicated, we ask a couple of simple questions: Why did India allow Leslee Udwin, the filmmaker to interview the convict if it thinks it to be improper? And, if it indeed gave the permission, then why is there so much objection to the airing of the document?
Either we block the entire exercise or we let it happen. If Udwin took the interview, it is for sure that she was going to use it as a medium and not hide it in her study table drawer.
The Mukesh Singh interview reminds one of The Silence of the Lambs plot
In 1991, a Hollywood film named The Silence of the Lambs had made a big impact. In the movie, an under-training FBI officer was assigned the duty to interview Hannibal Lecter, a former psychiatrist and cannibalistic serial killer in jail so that his thoughts and insights could help track another serial killer called Buffalo Bill who used to skin women after murdering them.
Did the Indian govt did it all wrong under public protest?
The current case about interviewing Mukesh Singh, one of the five accused who has been sentenced to death in connection to the December 2012 gangrape, resembles the plot of the film.
An unapologetic male mind as revealed by Mukesh is nothing new, let's not crucify him just because he is a convict
If Mukhesh Singh has revealed the mind of a stubborn and unapologetic male, then there is really no reason to create a noise saying it was improper to interview him as it only humiliated Nirbhaya. Instead, such interviews should be taken up more to chalk out future courses of dealing with all kinds of crime against women, including rape.
Nirbhaya has been no less humiliated by the people's representatives, the politicians
The unfortunate woman who died 13 days after undergoing the horror, has been no less humiliated by our double-faced politicians who shed their tears for rape victims keeping in mind the party colour colour of the party(s).
Indian government has goofed up big time, should it rectify itself first before running after foreigners?
The Indian government, which gave the film maker the permission to take the interview in the jail, reportedly violated its own circular of 2012 that made the verification of background of foreigners seeking a permission to visit Indian prisons.
Even the convict had appeared for the interview in normal clothes and not jail uniform. If we are a country so particular about the sensitivity of this issue, then why on earth was there no seriousness attached to the interviewing procedure?
This Great Indian Hypocrisy around the Nirbhaya case interview and documentary has been nailed. And one is also sure that this isn't the final time Indians have done it.