VIOLENCE against women is on the rise; equally the assertion by women to report the violence and seek justice. However, conventional justice dispensing mechanisms for women, whether statutory or social, face severe limitations in extending what is ‘just’ and ‘right’. Extra-legal strategies and alternate platforms have often proved far more effective in aiding women in their quest for justice. Rooted in cultural and community norms, the alternatives actively engage women and the community in a dialogue on what is just and right. Such a process also helps to take the discourse to a higher level, challenging and, at times, even changing community norms.

SWATI (Society For Women’s Action And Training Initiative) has been working for the social and economic empowerment of women in Surendranagar district of Gujarat state. The district, popularly known as Jhalawad, was once ruled by the Jhala Rajputs who gifted the district its highly feudal culture, the main victims of which were and continue to be women and lower caste groups. Several indicators, including the low sex ratio (869 per 1000 males) and the state’s second lowest rate of enrolment of girls in school, are reflective of discriminatory attitudes and practices. Though incidence of domestic violence is rarely directly reported, the high number of maintenance case before the courts and legal aid cells provide testimony to the contrary.

 

 

Women rarely seek recourse to justice primarily because of insufficient support at home and in the community, lack of information and confusion about whom to approach and what needs to be done. Another reason is experience with unscrupulous lawyers who often misguide and try to pro-long the case. A fear of the legal system, which most women find unfathomable, is another major reason.

SWATI works in four blocks through block level women’s collectives called the Mahila Vikas Sangh (MVS). Over six thousand women in three blocks are members of the MVS. SWATI has taken up the issue of violence against women and systematically built up a facilitative environment of awareness and support at the village level, and professional as well as institutional support mechanisms at the organizational level.

Typically, SWATI’s initial work on violence involved working with the formal system for addressing cases of violence. This it did through establishing legal aid and counselling support services for women facing violence and discrimination, creating legal rights awareness and mobilizing community support at the village level through various forums, including formation of vigilance committees. However, the formal legal system was found too distant and unresponsive and addressing domestic violence at the village sangh level had certain limitations of women facing rebuttal and pressure of relational and neighbourhood ties.

A need was felt for an objective and capable forum that could overcome some of these issues. Thus a more structured paralegal platform for handling issues of violence and exploitation or for advising and supporting the women was created at the level of the mahila vikas sangh. The mahila nyaya samitis (women justice committees), as these forums are called, are administered by women, trained and equipped with a gender just approach.

 

 

The nyaya samitis have been activated over the last year through a process of training and actual handling of cases. The samitis are today active in two blocks of Patdi and Dhrangadra in Surendranagar district. This article seeks to analyze the role of the nyaya samitis in seeking redressal for women and their potential as an alternative to the other redressal mechanisms, both the jati panch/panchayat set up by the community and governed by customary norms and rules that the caste has set out for itself, and the statutory mechanisms set up by the Indian state.

In order to equip and orient the mahila nyaya samitis, SWATI carried out intensive training of sangha (village collective) level women leaders. Over 45 women in the two blocks of Patdi and Dhrangadra were trained. The training programme involved building a feminist perspective on violence against women, imparting knowledge of the laws for women, legal and extra legal mechanisms, counselling, record keeping and arbitration skills. The samitis are already functioning in Patdi and Dhrangadra blocks under the aegis of the mahila vikas sangh. The platform has given them a community based identity and a sanctity that spans across communities.

Caste in several parts of India is referred to as jati, nati or nat. Every caste has a jati panch (caste leaders) and jati panchayats (caste assemblies). The main role that a jati panchayat plays is to uphold and guard the customary practices that form the identity of the caste. In most castes these customary practices assume the symbolic value of caste ‘honour’ and identity, which if transgressed can attract punishment ranging from monetary fines to being declared an ‘outcaste’. The stigma of being an outcaste extends to the entire family and future generations of the transgressor(s). This proves to be particularly hurtful because it may cut off the social interaction ranging from food to marrying one’s children within the caste. Jati panchayats also regulate social relations and conduct of the jati members, mediating disputes in marriages, property and inheritance.

 

 

It has been observed that the jati panchayat is a major institution that sanctions and promotes violence against women. Robert Hayden in his study of the Nandiwalla caste panchayats observes: ‘Despite the fact that the caste panchayats are admired for their non-violent and self reliant conflict management/resolution capabilities, there is no denying of the fact that this "folk system" has not been fair to dalits and other weaker sections of society’ (Hayden, April 1999).

Traditionally no women anywhere, whosoever, are part of the panch. In most communities women, unless they are the accused or are the accuser, cannot even attend jati panch meetings. Not only does the system work against providing basic rights to women, it also condemns any alternative justice giving mechanisms.

Among the several cases before the nyaya samiti, the case of Harkhu Thakore (a koli patel woman) deserves to be analyzed as it marked the beginning of SWATI’s understanding of the role of jati panchayats in upholding and perpetuating violence against women. The nyaya samiti, with the backing of the mahila vikas sangh, questioned the jati panch and its functioning directly.

Harkhu ben of Dasada village was forced by her husband Ganesh bhai and father-in-law to leave her marital home. Her husband alleged that their child was not his. Incidentally, Harkhu’s father-in-law had also made the same allegation against her mother-in-law, his first wife, and forced her to leave the house.

 

 

Her father-in-law called for a meeting of the jati panch and sought a divorce for his son. The panch summoned Harkhu and her family and forcibly made Harkhu sign the divorce papers, and subsequently levied a fine of Rs 15,000 on her family for divorcing her husband. Technically they were correct. The law made by the jati panch said that if a woman divorced her husband, she would have to pay a fine of Rs 5000. In this case they also levied a charge of infidelity, raising the fine to Rs 15,000. The panch demanded Harkhu’s father pay the amount by 5 May 2003.

Nani ben, a dalit woman of Nagwada village, advised them to approach the mahila nyaya samiti in Patdi. The case was discussed at the monthly meeting of village representatives who were furious at the treatment meted out to Harkhu. Discussions revealed that everyone had experience of the unfair and ad hoc judgments doled out by the jati panch, that the jati panch was a highly partisan and corrupt institution, that its judgments were always in favour of the rich and powerful. Most often the rulings tended to fault and punish the woman and her family and, even when given in favour of women, reflect a patriarchal mode and invariably go easy on the men.

It was decided to challenge the jati panch’s decision on Harkhu. Representatives of over 20 village sanghas went to village Sushia and questioned Tala bhai, a member of the panch, for his role in Harkhu’s case. Though taken aback, he agreed that the panch had done wrong. The women demanded that the nyaya samiti summon the jati panch. The panch ignored the first summons. However, since the case had received publicity, the jati panch was under pressure to vindicate their stand. A contributory factor was that on 8 March, at a sammelan to mark the International Women’s Day, Harkhu and her father spoke openly about the treatment meted out to them in a gathering of 400 women.

 

 

The jati panch was summoned a second time. It is indicative of the pressure the mahila nyaya samiti could exert that on their written summons, the jati panch leaders from 14 villages came to the mahila vikas sangh office for a discussion. Harkhu’s parents, her husband’s family and women from various village sangathans were also present. At the meeting Harkhu lashed out at the panch and her father-in-law. She publicly exposed him by revealing that he had thrown out her mother-in-law using exactly the same accusations. The jati panch was left with no justification for why they had forced her to sign the divorce papers.

The panch now shifted tack, converting Harkhu’s charge against her father-in-law into an issue of disrespectful behaviour. They walked out, threatening dire consequences for SWATI, the mahila nyaya samiti and Harkhu’s family.

Harkhu’s struggle and her family’s harassment by the panch continues. In the meantime Harkhu has filed for maintenance in the court. However, since then, another woman who suffered atrocities at the hands of the jati panch has approached the mahila nyaya samiti for justice.

 

 

The patriarchal value system of the jati panch has been documented elsewhere too. In the Nandiwalla gram panchayat, if a kallar man misbehaves with a woman (in local parlance termed madipitittu elluttal, pulling the saree), the village panchayat usually decrees that the sister of the offender be brought to the village square and her saree pulled by a male member of the affected woman’s family. It has to be the offender’s sister and not his wife since she comes from another man’s family (Hayden, 1999).

Despite many such experiences questioning the integrity of the jati panch, why do people still approach them? One obvious reason is the expensive, long and tiring procedures marking the Indian judicial system. The jati panch at least achieves a quick disposal of the case. It does not matter if in the process justice itself is disposed off. The other reason is the alienation of the legal system from cultural and community norms and social practices. This is invoked by communities to prevent women from approaching the courts since taking recourse to law is seen as an external intervention in what is believed to be personal and private to a family or, in a wider sense, to the caste/community.

It is in such situations that the mahila nyaya samitis hold out hope. They have an inherent sense of community sensibilities along with a gender just perspective shaped both by feminist ideology and the law of the land. They score over other systems for they focus on changing attitudes and community norms.

The samiti functions as a formal system on an informal platform. The women have undergone intensive legal training in a gender just framework. They meet on fixed days in the offices of the mahila vikas sangh and people with complaints come to get their cases heard.

 

 

The nyaya samitis follow certain procedures that are quasi legal and similar to existing legal aid support and social security forums. The mahila nyaya samiti, for instance, minutes all its discussions and the decisions are written up as formal documents signed by both parties and witnesses. A central feature of the methodology involves converting the private complaint of a woman into a public debate. The mandal women/leaders, the working committee of the MVS, constitute a strong presence at the arbitration forum. This plays a crucial role in converting family dynamics into topics for democratic discussion on what is right and wrong. The case of Jamna – a koli patel woman, is illustrative.

Jamna of Naradi is a member of the sangathan. Mother of five, she and her husband work as casual labourers. Her husband drank heavily and often beat her up. On several occasions she left home for her parent’s place, but was forced to return because of the children. Matters really got out of hand when her husband mutilated Jamna’s hand. The village sangha women were incensed, insisting that this was not to be tolerated and that Jamna should complain to the police. The mahila vikas sangha helped her file a police complaint against her husband. The police was requested by the women to give Jamna’s husband a ‘thorough’ beating and keep him for a while in lock-up. He was arrested on her complaint and the police did exactly what the women had requested. Jamna’s husband has since returned, now drinks less and has not dared to beat her again.

This case illustrates an important feature of the process and approach. It brings into public debate what was hitherto private, pushing the community into thinking above what is just and unjust and helping take progressive decisions that could win acceptance and consent of the community. Otherwise, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine a situation where a man who is arrested and beaten up at his wife’s instance, not only accepts her but is also apologetic about his behaviour. More important, the community too accepts this.

 

 

In a typical court case even if the man is awarded six months of punishment, it does not mean he has changed, that the situation for the woman has improved, or that the woman has got justice. Justice will prevail only if the woman is allowed to live her life with respect and in peace, with her rights intact. For this the man, his family and the community all need to realize that such conduct is unacceptable.

The samitis work on changing the community’s understanding of what is acceptable and what is not. In the process they have reshaped community norms, for instance, expanded the definition of maintenance to include the time the woman spends away from the matrimonial family without formal divorce. How this happens is exemplified in the case of Nagji ben.

Nagji ben of village Dasada in Patdi block had shifted to her natal home due to dissatisfaction with the arrangements at her marital home. She approached the nyaya samiti for help. Her husband and his family agreed and it was decided that Nagji ben would join him only after matters had improved for which he requested a time period of three months. In the interim, he agreed to pay a maintenance of Rs 1000 a month.

This is symbolic of true attitudinal change and has implications for setting up new community norms. What distinguish the nyaya samiti ‘methods’ of addressing violence are the perspectives that inform them and the processes they follow. Take the case of Harkhu, illustrated earlier. How could any ‘proof’ have resolved the problem when its roots lay in the attitudes and perspectives around relationships?

 

 

The nyaya samiti is an inexpensive and accessible forum. What adds to its acceptability is that the decision-making involves giving time to craft workable solutions rather than focus on absolute positions of right and wrong. Further, it admits to the possibility of renegotiation if the proposed solution does not work. The women who arbitrate at the forum are from the local socio-cultural milieu. Alongwith sensitivity to women’s issues and an understanding of violence, they also draw upon an intuitive cultural sense of the beliefs, values and normative codes of the area. This contributes to the effectiveness of their judgment which is based on information gathered from the immediate community about the family and its situation. All this goes into the process of negotiation. In sum, the biggest strength of these women is a sense of right/s, gender justice and an understanding of the legal system. The use of local cultural idiom and mores has further enhanced the acceptance of these forums (Bhatia and Rajan, April 2003).

It would be difficult to visualize such a forum without a strong basis in a movement for mass awareness and support. The samiti draws its power and legitimacy from its rooting in a larger collective or platform that supports and promotes this process. That it has the possibility of going beyond is unquestionable, for ‘it represents the effort to reinvent the local conflict management/resolution heritage without perpetuating the exclusion of women, dalits, minorities and other weaker sections of the society, and the domination and exploitation of landlords’ (Hayden, 1999).

Nevertheless, the nyaya samitis have significant limitations. For instance, high stake cases such as property disputes are not brought to them. The forums are being reduced to mediating on women’s issues and not functioning as community arbitration forums, thereby limiting their influence. There is need to broad-base them to include other issues of discrimination and exploitation. They must move beyond matrimonial relationships and norms and respond to other forms of gender-based and caste violence.

The nyaya samitis in a sense work as a bi-legal forum that can take recourse to the formal legal system if its mediation and judgement is not adhered to. There is need for such initiatives to expand and gain wider legitimacy in the social as well as judicial domain. Such plural conflict management/resolution mechanisms and processes can add to the country’s socio-economic-political health, vital in situations where justice is often delayed (and hence denied) by our slow, overburdened and increasingly expensive courts.

 

References:

Robert M. Hayden, Disputes and Arguments Amongst Nomads: A Caste Council in India, 1999.

Nandita Bhatia and Anuradha Rajan, ‘Private Concerns in Public Discourse: Women Initiated Community Response in Domestic Violence’, Economic and Political Weekly, 26 April 2003.