By Ranjona Banerji
Before the Me Too movement, one of the seminal 21st century points of inflection in the women’s movement in India was the Tarun Tejpal case. Suddenly, in 2013 we were astounded by an “apology letter” made public by Tehelka, where its editor in chief and owner of the publication admitted to sexually assaulting a female colleague. In flowery and verbose prose, Tejpal then punished himself with a six-month a sabbatical as “atonement”.
This, and what happened after, is all in the public domain. Tejpal is a well-known public figure, influential, powerful and with powerful friends and enemies. Tehelka itself appeared to be fearless, as it took on governments and spread its influence with its “Think fests”, far larger than its actual size. All very commendable.
Except. To many at the time, and this included many old-school feminists, Tejpal was too big to fail. They knew him well as a friend. His journalism standards and models were great. His talent was undeniable. So who was this chit of a girl who complained against him and threatened his reputation? An awful game of “he is more important than her” played out in the media in the first few months of the trial. Tejpal’s friends in the media presented their defences of his behaviour, as did Tejpal himself, and in all of them, the victim was blamed.
For being young, aware of herself, forward, contemporary, and so on. The very same commentators, in all other cases, would scream blue murder about victim-shaming, now happily did it themselves to protect one of their own. Impossible conspiracy theories grew up that Tejpal was being accused because he was against the BJP. Anything in fact to protect him. Tejpal himself, whatever he wrote in his bombastic letter, now did a full 180 turn and also indulged in full-scale victim-blaming and shaming himself.
And now the judgment that acquits Tejpal is also full of the most despicable cringeworthy, infuriating victim-blaming. As award-winning journalist Rohini Mohan heartbreakingly said on Twitter on May 27: “350 pages into the Tejpal judgment I’ve already decided that if I’m ever raped or sexually assaulted (a possibility every Indian woman factors into her life), I will never report it.”
Later, she said to me, “I also want to say that I will still try to speak up against violence, it is just that I fear it so much more now.”
To take away the safety net of legal recourse to an already discriminated against section of humankind: what could be more despicable and shameful?
But tragically, as we saw in the Me Too movement in India, whether in the media, academia, entertainment where the main complaints emerged, the odds are against the female complainant. Whether it is some feminists or the traditional, patriarchy rules. From unfortunate feminists you hear that tragic trope: “we dealt with it silently, so should you”. From traditional society we hear: “if women step out of their limits, this is what happens”.
And all this patriarchy is represented in the acquittal judgment by the Goa sessions court on May 21, 2021 – almost eight years after the event. It blames the victim for not looking traumatised enough in photographs, it says as a liberal woman who was physically fit, she should have known what to do when assaulted and other such complete travesties of law.
This article in Scroll.in goes through the case and the judgment in detail:
https://scroll.in/article/995880/the-tejpal-rape-case-verdict-and-the-goa-court-quest-for-the-ideal-sexual-assault-victim
The Bombay High Court has stepped in to get the victim’s details redacted from the judgment, an appalling miss on the part of the Goa judge. The judgment will also be appealed by the state.
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tarun-tejpal-case-hc-directs-sessions-court-to-remove-anything-that-reveals-identity-of-woman/article34655577.ece
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/tarun-tejpal-verdict-astonishing-erroneous-says-goa-seeks-early-appeal-hearing-7333400/
If this is how courts respond to a complaint of sexual assault, then the question, as many have been raising, of the “perfect victim” arises. In this particular case, as in the Priya Ramani versus MJ Akbar case, there is a clear unequal power balance between the female victim and the male editor. There is fear of the consequences, because you are unsure of your ground or you are the sole breadwinner of your family. The assailant is also far more powerful than you. To overcome these fears and still make a complaint shows enormous courage.
The Goa sessions court judge Kshama Joshi, as Mohan has pointed out, has now made recourse to the law more difficult for women in India. As if it was not difficult enough already. The horrors inflicted in the Nirbahaya case shocked India. And yet in the Hathras case, we saw the state shielding the assailants in spite of a gruesome gangrape and murder.
For the media itself, the lessons remain stark. We talk a lot. But when push comes to shove, surely the lesson of the Tejpal case cannot be that when the odds are stacked against us, the system reverts to upholding patriarchy?
Ranjona Banerji is a senior journalist and commentator. She is Consulting Editor, MxMIndia. Her views here are personal