PUTA. A QUEER INVADER

[Download .pdf Version]

Vikram Doctor is a journalist working with the The Economic Times, the Times of India’s sister business publication. As a professional responsible for the dissemination of information and as an activist for the rights of lgbt people a lot or work is done, in Mumbai, for the abolition of the crime of homosexuality, contemplated in the infamous article 377 of the Indian penal code. In the last year the situation has greatly accelerated, thanks to a cause initiated by several associations which work for the prevention of HIV/AIDS and against article 377. According to the previously mentioned associations, the legal sentence and social condemnation derived from article 377 increases the possibility of the spread of the disease and forces millions of people into hiding without necessary information and suitable healthcare. The case, being discussed now in the high court of New Delhi, is at a crossroads: after having heard the positions of both sides (one for the decriminalization of homosexuality: and the associations against, namely the federal government, though not completely) the judges have retired to their chambers – to discuss the previous issues – . The judges will discuss their eventual verdict and we shall know if they will welcome the requests of abolition or if on the contrary they will support the present status quo. At any rate, the discussion in the high court has sparked a debate in Indian society and mass media.

In order to understand where we are now, how the Indian population will respond to the debate and what future prospectives exist we have asked Vikram Doctor to answer the following questions and he has kindly responded by email.

1. Vikram, when should we expect the verdict of the High Court?

Any day now. We don’t know for sure because the High Court will only let us know the day before that they are posting a decision. So it depends on how long the judges take to do their decision. The arguments have been thorough, this is quite a high profile case and the judges are known to be independent and conscientious, so a decision should be due soon. But we don’t know when.

2. If it is positive and welcomes the requests of the associations what effects will it have?

Strictly speaking the decision, whatever it is, will be a limited one – it will be limited to the state of Delhi, and will probably also be limited in time too, because it will almost definitely be appealed to the Supreme Court for a final decision. If it is positive then our opponents who include an AIDS denial group and a right wing nationalist, possibly supported by India’s Home Ministry, will almost definitely appeal it to the Supreme Court, which could apply a stay order. If it is negative, the queer rights groups could appeal it (but we haven’t really got a firm
strategy for this yet).

But this is technical. If we win it will be a really big symbolic win, because it will be the first time a really high court in India is pronouncing on the subject of homosexuality. Also, among the High Courts in India, the decisions of the Delhi, Bombay and Chennai High Courts are often given particular importance because they are particularly well respected courts. The decision will probably not be binding on other courts, but it will send a strong signal to the legal community on the direction that queer rights in India should take.

We already have evidence of how this case is affecting the law, even before it is decided. About a year or two ago, a young British man called Desmond Hope was accused of violating this law in Goa. The High Court of Goa gave him bail on the grounds that the fact that this case was being fought showed that attitudes towards homosexuality are changing in India.

3. Will the crime of homosexuality as stated in article 377 be abolished in all of India?

As I stated, no. The decision will be limited to Delhi, but its effect will be felt across India. Also, I should make it clear we are not asking for Section 377 to go, but are only asking for a very narrow change – we are asking to courts to declare that it does not apply to consenting adults. This is because the law still has use in cases of child sex abuse and male rape. Ideally there should be a new law to deal with these, but in its absence we hope the courts will use their power to exclude consenting adults from this law.

4. How do you think the majority of the Indian population feels about lgbt people’s civil rights?

I don’t think the majority of India’s population feels anything about LGBT people, positive or negative. I think there is less overt homophobia here that in Europe and certainly the US, though that doesn’t necessarily translate into automatic acceptance.

Part of the homophobia is simply due to less visibility and understanding of homosexuality – so once that increases, there will be mroe homophobia. There is awareness of forms of alternate sexuality that have long been part of Indian society, like the hijra community. There is acceptance of this, but it comes with very definite prejudices some of which are extended to the gay community.

In some cases we have leapfrogged a bit, so elite groups, for example, like those in Bollywood or the media, are often gay friendly because they’ve picked it up from abroad. But its a form of acceptance that comes with its own stereotypes that can be a problem. Also, there is a general fear of people being too open – you often hear parents telling their kids that they are OK with them being gay, but they don’t want them to march on the streets for it.

I think there is some truth in that Indian society tends to be fairly tolerant, though its easy to make too much of this. But homophobia in its formalised form is a Western imposition on Indian society in the form of Section 377, and I do think, optimistically, that once it goes, progress in India will be rapid.

5. For us Europeans it is difficult to understand Indian society: multi-ethnic, multi-religious, secular and democratic. They seem like unexplainable paradoxes. In what way will the quality of life improve for lgbt people in India?

But “multi-ethnic, multi-religious, secular and democratic” is a pretty good description of Europe itself, in its totality. India is easily understood in such terms – all you need to do is substitute a bureaucracy in Brussels for a bureaucracy in Delhi (we just don’t have a revolving Presidency!). So to extend the analogy a bit, life will definitely improve for people in some places, not as much for people in other places (Poland!) and be mediated by local cultural factors. There will be an overall improvement, but probably not as fast and as clear cut as journalists and activists would like!

6. After the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Arundhati Roy wrote a worrying article for the daily “Outlook.” In the text the Indian writer claims that India runs the risk of entering into a regional war with neighboring Pakistan and the explosion of a civil war within its own borders, fomented by the inter-religious hate between Hindus and Muslims. In her opinion, the personal liberties and civil rights of Indian citizens risk serious danger. India risks being a theocratic state instead of a secular one. What do you think about the situation? What ideas do you have concerning the near future?

I would certainly not diminish the dangers that India is facing now, but I would equally be unlikely to take Arundhati Roy as my guide to them. Ms. Roy specialises in ideologically extreme, near hysterical analyses that are presented more for Western audiences than with an eye to convincing anyone in India. There is little difference, in the end, between her brand of intolerance for other opinions and that of the Hindu right which she opposes. She has a great deal of contempt for the roots and realities of Indian institutions of governance and discourse that are certainly imperfect, but are far more real than she would give them credit for. In the general elections that are coming soon the Congress – an organisation that Ms. Roy despises for all that it is secular – may lose and we might have a Hindu right government, but then we have had that before, at a time when they were much stronger, and we survived that, and presumably we will survive again. I am sure there are many Italians that hate and fear Mr. Berlusconi, but I doubt they would say that Italy will not survive his tenure in power, but that in effect is what Ms. Roy is saying with respect to the Hindu Right.

7. The 18th of December the European Union presented the United Nations with a proposal for the universal decriminalisation of homosexuality. The petition greatly angered the Vatican and nations with a Muslim majority of citizens. If India abolished the crime of homosexuality, it would be the largest democracy of the world to achieve such an important feat. It would provide millions of Indian lgbt people with dignity once again. Is the petition to the United Nations being discussed? Has any link been made between it and the abolition of article 377?

I think some queer activists did raise this, perhaps with a view to discussing if this unholy alliance of two fundamentalist groups (fundamentalist Catholics and fundamentalist Muslim, to distinguish them from the liberal strains that exist in both cases) could be used to build our case in India, contrasting our focus on human rights, with their focus on hatred and discrimination. But really on this issue all fundamentalists are likely to think alike, whatever their religion or feelings for each other, so people who oppose us would oppose the petition, and those who support us would support it anyway.

In practical terms also, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (our foreign affairs ministry) tends to extreme caution and to avoiding getting into contentious areas. So we know of cases where diplomats have been personally sympathetic, but they will abstain on such votes or maybe even vote against progressive measures if that seems to be where the numbers lie. Also the diplomats have pointed out to us that their hands are tied as long as Section 377 exists in India, whcih is another reason why this Delhi High Court case is so important.

What I think might be interesting to do is to confront the Vatican with the consequences of its policies. I’ve noticed that after Benedict/Ratizinger comes out with something really homophobic, the Vatican tends to come out with a statement saying that they only oppose giving gay people rights like marriage, but they do not believe gay people should be treated like criminals. Well, India gives them a chance to prove themselves on this because all we are asking is not be treated as criminals – we are not talking about marriage or anything else now. So going by the Vatican’s logic they should be supporting our petition – will they do that?

8. Various associations in Europe and throughout the rest of the world are promoting a “Cause” on Facebook to support the request of the decriminalisation of universal homosexuality. Almost 100,000 people have joined the cause. We would like to involve Indian associations and their activists. How would you advise us on the matter? Could you help us?

We can easily put the matter out for discussion in groups of gay activists and I‘m sure you would get a lot of support. I have to admit, cynically perhaps, that I wonder how much point such universal online activities will have in matter where, as is being proven again and again, what really matters is local grassroots organising ( as activists in California have learned to their cost with Proposition 8).

Its too easy with queer activism to try and do things top down, to sit in meetings and make large plans, and to organise things online. These things are important and are not mutually exclusive, but too often people think that taking part in such things is all that needs to be done. And that is just not true. Change happens when gay people go out and meet other people and deal with the police and do all the things on the ground that are needed to really change things.

[Download .pdf Version]

Lascia un Commento