#MeToo strikes a chord despite limitations
There are certain parameters for news items like rape and harassments to be considered as newsworthy in the media. The incident should have happened in Delhi or some part of north India. Victims must be from upper middleclass and if they work in IT or BT it’d be even better. The news would get even more prominence if the survivors are working and belong to upper caste. That does not mean all other incidents are ignored. If media had paid equal or significant attention to all kinds of exploitations and harassments against women, things wouldn’t have come to this point. Media considers two kinds of news of exploitation of women, worthy of inside and cover pages. Because a certain group of people who are also journalists, believe women deserve bad treatment, the society has been viewing this social menace with dual standpoint.
If a Danamma has been raped and killed, police department would dismiss it as a result of ‘illicit relationship’. No hashtags appear in the social media. But if an upper middle class woman reveals the harassment she went through in her work place at the hands of a man, it becomes a cry of solidarity. And the result is there for all to see through MeToo movement. On one hand, while welcoming the success of MeToo, we also need to understand ways of extending it to be movement of all women in the country.
One thing we need to understand is, why has the media taken MeToo so seriously? It is because they are concerned about women and their rights or owing to the background of women who are part of this? If the women didn’t belong to upper middle class or rich people sharing details of the mental and physical harassment they underwent, MeToo wouldn’t have been this serious and such discussions wouldn’t have taken place on social media platforms.
In the world of celebrities and their occupations, discussions about casting couch has happened many a times. Many people have indicated if women want to progress in politics, or entertainment industry, they need to ‘cooperate’. It has also been part of social media discourse and discussion too. In the recent times, a senior politician had said this very candidly at a public event. Another politician had used this line of argument when Jayamala was made the lone minister in the current cabinet, asking what ‘favours’ she had offered to get this plum post. These ‘compromises’ are deemed pretty common in entertainment and political spaces. Even common people understand this well now. Hence when celebrities speak of the harassment they face, it is reported in the ‘entertainment’ section. Woman’s body is ‘entertainment’ (actor Silk Smita’s words) for the cinema industry and this cruely is so totally acceptable to us now.
A director will ask an actor such as Tanushree Dutta to strip and dance even if the script does not demand it. Thousands of people come together to watch it. How does one identify how she has been exploited even in the name of ‘performance’? The audience may not have touched her, but what about their animal instinct when they watch her dressed skimpily on the screen? Why is this not a basis for MeToo? Tanushree has spoken about the revolting touch she had to put up with Nana Patekar. The latter has denied all allegations. This does not absolve all the spectators from their guilt of having watched her on the screen though Tanushree has not complained against them. This problem exists on the very basis of cinema industry which thrives on a woman’s body. To restrict the argument very callously to Tanushree’s accusations would be doing injustice to a larger issue.
One thing has struck very clearly through MeToo. Woman’s suffering knows no bounds. Even if she exists in rich class, she remains a woman and has to perform all the duties as per the norms of that space. She has to face torture of being the woman. Since women of that space opened their voice, this issue has come to the mainstream. We have to appreciate all the celebrities who rendered their voice to MeToo. Through this, men who always took women for granted in media, police department, banks and courts have begun to fear the repercussions. This issue has turned into a middle class problem of working women. This is a good indication. Even if MeToo can give a small solace to working women, who face hell for being born women, this movement is successful. This movement started by Tarana Burke in 2008, should help empower women in working spaces and outside across all categories and classes in India beyond allegations and counter allegations.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
US SEC summons Gautam Adani, nephew Sagar in bribery case
New York (PTI): Adani group founder and chairman Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar have been summoned to explain their stand on the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) allegation of paying USD 265 million (Rs 2,200 crore) in bribes to secure lucrative solar power contracts.
Summons have been sent to Adani's Shantivan Farm residence in Ahmedabad and his nephew Sagar's Bodakdev residence in the same city for a reply to SEC within 21 days.
"Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it)...you must serve on the plaintiff (SEC) an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure," said a November 21 notice sent through the New York Eastern District Court.
"If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court," it added.
Gautam Adani, 62, and seven other defendants, including his nephew Sagar, who is a director at the group's renewable energy unit Adani Green Energy Ltd, allegedly agreed to pay about USD 265 million in bribes to Indian government officials between approximately 2020 and 2024 to obtain lucrative solar energy supply contracts on terms that expected to yield USD 2 billion of profit over 20 years, according to an indictment unsealed in a New York court on Wednesday.
Separate from the indictment brought by the US Department of Justice, the US SEC has also charged the two and Cyril Cabanes, an executive of Azure Power Global, for "conduct arising out of a massive bribery scheme".
The ports-to-energy conglomerate has denied the allegations and said it will seek all possible legal resources.
"The Adani Group has always upheld and is steadfastly committed to maintaining the highest standards of governance, transparency and regulatory compliance across all jurisdictions of its operations. We assure our stakeholders, partners and employees that we are a law-abiding organisation fully compliant with all laws."
An indictment in the US is basically a formal written allegation originating with a prosecutor and issued by a grand jury against a party charged with a crime. A person indicted is given formal notice to reply.
That person or persons can then hire a defence lawyer to defend.
Prosecutors said the investigation started in 2022 and found the inquiry obstructed.
They also allege that the Adani Group raised USD 2 billion in loans and bonds, including from US firms, on the backs of false and misleading statements related to the firm's anti-bribery practices and policies, as well as reports of the bribery probe.
"As alleged, the defendants orchestrated an elaborate scheme to bribe Indian government officials to secure contracts worth billions of dollars and... lied about the bribery scheme as they sought to raise capital from U.S. and international investors," US Attorney Breon Peace said in a statement announcing the charges on Wednesday.
"My office is committed to rooting out corruption in the international marketplace and protecting investors from those who seek to enrich themselves at the expense of the integrity of our financial markets."
