On Wednesday, the morning after Madras High Court judge P.Devadass wrote his order directing a rapist, who had applied for bail, to ‘mediate’ with his victim, outrage broke out.
Lawyers and women’s rights activists were provoked to anger by the order that some of them termed ‘shocking’, ‘atrocious’, ‘patriarchal’, ‘going beyond the brief’ and outright ‘illegal’.
Judge Devadass recorded in a judgment on a bail plea from a man imprisoned for rape of a minor — who bore a child out of that union — that it was a “fit case for attempting compromise between the parties. ‘Mediation’ mode is best suited to them, he said in the order.
“Keeping the appellant inside the jail and asking him to participate in the mediation talk will not result in any fruitful result. He should be enabled to participate in the deliberations as a free man…”
“How can the victim of a serious crime like rape have confidence in the legal system if all it can do for her is to tell her to mediate with her rapist,” asks K.Santhakumari, president, Tamil Nadu Federation of Women Lawyers. “For women victims of sexual violence, and especially so if they are poor, registering a case and going to court itself is a process that is frankly frustrating.
How absolutely cinematic to announce that it would be best for the victim to marry the rapist to secure her and her daughter’s future,” asks Ms. Santhakumari.
Judge’s order retrograde: activists
Experts question the need for suggesting mediation when that was not even the prayer by the convict himself. > Read more
