PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2012 ID-53906
.
., .
.
Of truth, lies and sexual harassment........ 16.1.07 .
.
~ .
........_ SFrS uraoe on the GSCASH in an attempt to defend their activist. 1s both a desperate tactic and a sham. The ~ttack launched by the SFI on the GSCASH is not only highly vituperative. but wtll have long-term repercussions of a damagmg impact.on the perception of GSCASH as an institution among the student community. AISA condemns SFI for indulging in .
this dangerous game to satisfy their own petty ends. -We hold that the struggle for gender rights and equality is inspired by the very need to end the dominance and misuse of power to perpetuate harassment. Gender equality and a progressive atmosphere on campus is to be achieved not only by creation of progressive institutions but also through the creation of a politica1: atmosphere for radical change. The Left's commitment to gender rights in this campus does not stop at creation of GSCASH. but in the creation of a radical culture which upholds th~ funptioning and ideals of GSCASH and its decisions. And what we see today is a ·gross violation of this .
very duty by the SFI and its activists at every level. _ .
The SFI tirade begs certain questions: . · .· . .
Sflleaflet tells us that the GSCASH at some point held that Mogallan ought to submit a written apology. The .
campus needs to know: At exactly what point djd the GSCASH ask Mogallan Bharti to give a written .
apology? Did he in fact abide by the GSCASH's opinion and submit any apology? Or did he flout that .
.
GSCASH decision? · .
The SFI claims that the ~SCASH decision is biased because its Chairperson belonged to CPI(Ml) and used.
.
.
to be an AISA activist. The ABVP has always claimed that the GSCASH headed by Left persons -such as Ayesha Kidwai ,from the CPI(M} who had been an SFI leader -was biased. Would SFI agree? Is SFI saying that individuals with political and social commitments ought not to take up public posts? The .
outgoing GSCASH Chairperson, slandered by SFI, was not a one-woman enquiry committee -GSCASH procedures and safeguards ensure that a single person cannot alone influence a verdict. So by the calling the observed procedures and decisions of GSCASH biased, is SFI saying that a// the members of the last GSCASH, including other teachers of JNU and a neutral external r:epre~ntative -are all biased? Were they all members of CPI(ML)? Is the SFI' saying that the entire GSCAS'H .body stood a mute spectator to blatant bias on part of the Chairperson? , .
.
If GSCASH's functioning was so biased and inactive, why did not elected student representative in GSCASH. .
owing allegiance to SFI and now their Councillor, not speak out and alert the campus to such distortions? .
Remember that the Mogallan case has been dealt with not just by the outgoing GSCASH but an earlier .
tenure of GSCASH too; and in both cases, SFI tor. had elected representatives in the GSCASH who .
never alleged any bias. Is the SFI saying that the previous tenure of GSCASH was also packed with .
CPI(Ml) members?! SFrs crude and all-out attack on the outgomg GSCASH Chairperson is an insult to the .
credibility of the entire institution. In order to defend 1ts own activist, SFI 1s putting the entire institution of .
GSCASH on the line. .
.
.
.
Moggallan Bharti has acquired various documents of the G' >CASH by filing RTI applications, of which SFJ .
.
.
(technically a third party] has ·made selective t..se in its pamphlet, quoting passages to serve their convenience. This has only fanned slander and gossip agamst the complainants and provided fodder for the right wing to attack the working of GSCASH. His act of quoting selectively from the report reeks of a dishonest politics and an attempt to create a favourable opinion for himself. In the light of these events and their claims of respecting the decision of GSCASH and 'appealing to the campus to observe restraint' is a big sham. He has himself e.xposed the case to public debate by quoting passages from the final report of the case; if he is indeed so honest, let him publish the report in its entirety. Since Mogallan is seeking to sort out the case ·in the put;Jiic arena, let the student community judge for themselves rather than judging it through Moggallan's coloured account. We also believe there is a need for greater public debate to frame guidelines about the extent to which RTI can be deployed without compromising GSCASH's commitment to confidentiality. .
It is indeed strange to see that entire mobilisation/pamphleteering is taking place not to uphold gender rights .
and the rights of the victims to ·protest but to create an atmosphere of personal slander and intimidatjon. How .
are victims of sexual harassment, especially individuals without political backing to defend their .
rights or withstand the pressures of speaking out against organised political forces? .
.
As for the intimidations and hounding of the complainants, that is nothing new-it is part and parcel of the political culture of .
CPt(M)-The campus r~cenUy witnessed the public hounding and harassment of the two complainants. It ·was obvious that .
both complainants had no political associations and no reason to target Mogallan or SFI; since they could not be accused of .
political 'bias', SFI then questioned their sanity! Just as in West Bengat. on the first death anniversary {17 December 2007), .
of Tapasi Malik, the young Singur activist, gangraped and burnt alive by CPI(M) activists, CPJ{M) CC member Benoy Konar .
dedared that "18-year-old Tapas/ had been a 'burden' on her father because she had been unmarried; and that her father .
who had been !3 poor man, was now traveling the whole country anQ_profiting from her death"! Is this the language of gender .
sensitivity? Ear1ier, the same Benoy Konar exhorted CPl (M)'s women cadres "to show their bare buttocks to Medha .
Patkar the neid time she dared to visit Nandigram" (30 January 2007)! While the women cadre did not oblige Konar, the .
men diqthe·same and dragged her by her hair (November 2007)!! SFI's present tirade ,is part of the same culture. .
.
Acts ot sexuaf hanssment combine intimi~_ation of wmen with allega~ions on their morality, credibility and sanity .
to·ON&te a hostile environment. Such a pohtcat culture 1s a threat to JNU s struggle for a more gendeT sensitiVe campus-.
and"~'-'~~~~'eand engage in it must urgently be challenged and resisted. .
.
Awadh&Sb.:. Pres.ident. AISA, JNU . sd/-Sucheta. Jt. Secy,. At SA, .
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2012 ID-53906
.
., .
.
Of truth, lies and sexual harassment........ 16.1.07 .
.
~ .
........_ SFrS uraoe on the GSCASH in an attempt to defend their activist. 1s both a desperate tactic and a sham. The ~ttack launched by the SFI on the GSCASH is not only highly vituperative. but wtll have long-term repercussions of a damagmg impact.on the perception of GSCASH as an institution among the student community. AISA condemns SFI for indulging in .
this dangerous game to satisfy their own petty ends. -We hold that the struggle for gender rights and equality is inspired by the very need to end the dominance and misuse of power to perpetuate harassment. Gender equality and a progressive atmosphere on campus is to be achieved not only by creation of progressive institutions but also through the creation of a politica1: atmosphere for radical change. The Left's commitment to gender rights in this campus does not stop at creation of GSCASH. but in the creation of a radical culture which upholds th~ funptioning and ideals of GSCASH and its decisions. And what we see today is a ·gross violation of this .
very duty by the SFI and its activists at every level. _ .
The SFI tirade begs certain questions: . · .· . .
Sflleaflet tells us that the GSCASH at some point held that Mogallan ought to submit a written apology. The .
campus needs to know: At exactly what point djd the GSCASH ask Mogallan Bharti to give a written .
apology? Did he in fact abide by the GSCASH's opinion and submit any apology? Or did he flout that .
.
GSCASH decision? · .
The SFI claims that the ~SCASH decision is biased because its Chairperson belonged to CPI(Ml) and used.
.
.
to be an AISA activist. The ABVP has always claimed that the GSCASH headed by Left persons -such as Ayesha Kidwai ,from the CPI(M} who had been an SFI leader -was biased. Would SFI agree? Is SFI saying that individuals with political and social commitments ought not to take up public posts? The .
outgoing GSCASH Chairperson, slandered by SFI, was not a one-woman enquiry committee -GSCASH procedures and safeguards ensure that a single person cannot alone influence a verdict. So by the calling the observed procedures and decisions of GSCASH biased, is SFI saying that a// the members of the last GSCASH, including other teachers of JNU and a neutral external r:epre~ntative -are all biased? Were they all members of CPI(ML)? Is the SFI' saying that the entire GSCAS'H .body stood a mute spectator to blatant bias on part of the Chairperson? , .
.
If GSCASH's functioning was so biased and inactive, why did not elected student representative in GSCASH. .
owing allegiance to SFI and now their Councillor, not speak out and alert the campus to such distortions? .
Remember that the Mogallan case has been dealt with not just by the outgoing GSCASH but an earlier .
tenure of GSCASH too; and in both cases, SFI tor. had elected representatives in the GSCASH who .
never alleged any bias. Is the SFI saying that the previous tenure of GSCASH was also packed with .
CPI(Ml) members?! SFrs crude and all-out attack on the outgomg GSCASH Chairperson is an insult to the .
credibility of the entire institution. In order to defend 1ts own activist, SFI 1s putting the entire institution of .
GSCASH on the line. .
.
.
.
Moggallan Bharti has acquired various documents of the G' >CASH by filing RTI applications, of which SFJ .
.
.
(technically a third party] has ·made selective t..se in its pamphlet, quoting passages to serve their convenience. This has only fanned slander and gossip agamst the complainants and provided fodder for the right wing to attack the working of GSCASH. His act of quoting selectively from the report reeks of a dishonest politics and an attempt to create a favourable opinion for himself. In the light of these events and their claims of respecting the decision of GSCASH and 'appealing to the campus to observe restraint' is a big sham. He has himself e.xposed the case to public debate by quoting passages from the final report of the case; if he is indeed so honest, let him publish the report in its entirety. Since Mogallan is seeking to sort out the case ·in the put;Jiic arena, let the student community judge for themselves rather than judging it through Moggallan's coloured account. We also believe there is a need for greater public debate to frame guidelines about the extent to which RTI can be deployed without compromising GSCASH's commitment to confidentiality. .
It is indeed strange to see that entire mobilisation/pamphleteering is taking place not to uphold gender rights .
and the rights of the victims to ·protest but to create an atmosphere of personal slander and intimidatjon. How .
are victims of sexual harassment, especially individuals without political backing to defend their .
rights or withstand the pressures of speaking out against organised political forces? .
.
As for the intimidations and hounding of the complainants, that is nothing new-it is part and parcel of the political culture of .
CPt(M)-The campus r~cenUy witnessed the public hounding and harassment of the two complainants. It ·was obvious that .
both complainants had no political associations and no reason to target Mogallan or SFI; since they could not be accused of .
political 'bias', SFI then questioned their sanity! Just as in West Bengat. on the first death anniversary {17 December 2007), .
of Tapasi Malik, the young Singur activist, gangraped and burnt alive by CPI(M) activists, CPJ{M) CC member Benoy Konar .
dedared that "18-year-old Tapas/ had been a 'burden' on her father because she had been unmarried; and that her father .
who had been !3 poor man, was now traveling the whole country anQ_profiting from her death"! Is this the language of gender .
sensitivity? Ear1ier, the same Benoy Konar exhorted CPl (M)'s women cadres "to show their bare buttocks to Medha .
Patkar the neid time she dared to visit Nandigram" (30 January 2007)! While the women cadre did not oblige Konar, the .
men diqthe·same and dragged her by her hair (November 2007)!! SFI's present tirade ,is part of the same culture. .
.
Acts ot sexuaf hanssment combine intimi~_ation of wmen with allega~ions on their morality, credibility and sanity .
to·ON&te a hostile environment. Such a pohtcat culture 1s a threat to JNU s struggle for a more gendeT sensitiVe campus-.
and"~'-'~~~~'eand engage in it must urgently be challenged and resisted. .
.
Awadh&Sb.:. Pres.ident. AISA, JNU . sd/-Sucheta. Jt. Secy,. At SA, .
.