India: The journal Manushi stands up in defence of 'Khap Panchayats' which issue dictats seeking public honour killings amogst other things - Statement from Manushi

Manushi Intervention in the Supreme Court Stalls Unconstitutional Law Demanded by NGOs to Ban Khaps

In recent years, media has systematically led a hate campaign against Khap Panchayats projecting them as an unwanted hangover of India’s “barbaric” medieval past. Even those who had never heard or knew the meaning of the word Khap, nor ever seen or met a person belonging to any Khap joined the chorus asking the government to ban Khaps. This hate campaign was ably fuelled by NGOs, most of who are generously funded by international donor agencies to “reform” Indian society and polity. One of them “Shakti Vahini”, filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking a draconian law to ban age old traditional Panchayats, especially Khaps on the plea that they are the cause for “honor killings”, even though Shakti Vahini’s own data submitted to the Court does not support this charge.

Even though the entire purpose of this petition was to get the Central Government to pass a law to ban the very existence of Khaps and other community based Panchayats on the absurd charge that they are all “extra judicial" bodies, Khaps were kept out of the picture as a deliberate strategy. In a well-orchestrated move, Shakti Vahini did not make any of the Khap Panchayats a party in this case. Instead, it made Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Women and Child, States of Haryana, Punjab, UP, Jharkhand, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh parties to the case.

In response to this petition, the Vacation Bench of Justice R M Lodha and Justice A K Patnaik issued a notice on 21/06/2010 to all the sarkari respondents. But since Khaps were not included as a party, they were neither issued a notice nor informed about the case against them.

For two and a half years the case against Khap Panchayats was argued in absentia. Most of the state governments who were made respondents in this case, opposed the proposed new law to virtually ban traditional Panchayats but Shakti Vahini with the full encouragement and support of Central government represented by the Additional Solicitor General, Ms Indira Jaisingh kept pushing the Supreme Court Bench hearing the case to give a stringent order for the enactment of a draconian and unconstitutional law. This has been drafted for the Law Commission of India by a group of feminist activists patronized by the current UPA Government. Under the pretence of combating honour killings this law seeks to deprive rural communities of their fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

A study done by Shakti Vahini to bolster its case against Khap Panchayats is so full of nonsense that nowhere else in the world would it pass muster even as an undergraduate term paper, leave alone product of a serious research funded and supported by no less than the National Women’s Commission.

However, on 04/01/2013 as the case was near conclusion, the Supreme Court Bench of Justice Aftab Alam and Justice Ranjana Desai indicated that they cannot pass any order in the absence of the affected parties. Since Khap Panchayats were not listed as parties in the case, the Supreme Court could not invite them officially. However, the Apex Court let it be known that they are willing to hear anybody who has anything to say on the subject.

This was reported in all newspapers. Ravikant of Shakti Vahini took personal responsibility to inform two of the largest Khaps – Meham Chaubisi and Sarva Khap Panchayat of Rohtak and Jind. So a couple of days later, these Khaps received a note on Shakti Vahini’s letter head informing them that the Court was willing to hear their views on the subject.

At this point, several Khap leaders approached Manushi to press us to present their case in the Supreme Court because they feared with systematic negative stereotyping of Khaps, they would not get a fair hearing on their own merit. I decided to argue in person because some of the eminent women lawyers we approached were unwilling to be associated with Khap Panchayats. The very same lawyers, who do not hesitate to take up the case of known murderers and crooks, were reluctant to get branded as retrogressive by representing Khaps. Some of the male lawyers we approached felt that with Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaisingh arguing against the Khaps they would not get a sympathetic hearing. Therefore, I decided to appear in person especially since I had done a good deal of research on Khaps and honour killings.

On January 14, 2013, advocate Ashok Agarwal--an old friend of Manushi- appeared in the Supreme Court on our behalf and sought the permission of the Court to include Manushi and some Khaps as parties in the case and allow us to file written submissions. He also sought permission to file a petition on behalf of Dalal Khap.

On 02/04/2013, the case came up for hearing. While Indira Jaisingh on behalf of Union of India and Shakti Vahini lawyers argued for the Court to pass its orders, Ashok Agarwal and I argued that since the case had been thus far heard in absentia, we needed proper hearings before the court pass any orders. Indira Jaisingh repeatedly pleaded for at least some interim orders but we stood our ground that without hearing the affected parties any order passed by the court would violate due process and therefore be invalid. Thus, we managed to successfully stall any adverse orders against Khap Panchayats, including the draconian law proposed to be enacted against them.

In this we are also helped by the fact that Justice Aftab Alam was to retire in a few days. Therefore, he had no time to conclude the case if fresh hearings were to be started following our intervention.

Had the Supreme Court passed a hostile order against Khap Panchayats, it would have made headline news on front pages of all news papers and would have resulted in endless discussions on TV channels. But none of the newspapers or TV channels mentioned a word about stalling of court orders due to Manushi intervention.

For the text of our submissions Read :http://www.manushi.in/articles.php?articleId=1680&ptype=campaigns

--

Madhu Purnima Kishwar
Founder MANUSHI
Professor, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies
Tel: 011 23978851, 08826377770
Website:www.manushi.in