Not a Word for Gays; Not a Word for Lesbians; Not a Word for Bisexuals in BJP’s Election Manifesto, 2024!

 

by

P.S. Sahni & Shobha Aggarwal

 

Not surprising though, but cannot be left uncommented upon. Nazi Germany exterminated gays and lesbians. Modi’s BJP is making gays, lesbians and bisexuals invisible, marginalized; not even worthy of mention in their election manifesto. This shows BJP’s intent. The gay, lesbian, bisexual community better get its act together now; else it would be too late.

 

The gays, lesbians and bisexuals are being treated the way Muslims in India are dealt with. Just see the Muslim communities very low representation in Parliament. The BJP does not field Muslim candidates in elections. In the last decade the residential, commercial properties belonging to Muslims are being bulldozed and razed to the ground. Judiciary has termed this as ethnic cleansing.

 

Ever since we at ABVA, released the report ‘Less than Gay’ in 1992 – which included a sixteen point Charter of Demands (Gay Manifesto), regular attempts have been made by us to send letters to MPs and major political parties requesting them to raise the issue in Parliament. A few non-BJP members have tried to introduce private members’ bills. But the BJP MPs have stalled their Introduction. The BJP treats gays, lesbians and bisexuals as persona non grata.

 

When the issue of same-sex marriage was being adjudicated by a five judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court of India, the BJP opposed the demand. Both the Solicitor General and the Attorney General for India resisted the Petitioners’ demands. The Solicitor General even suggested to the judges to let Parliament decide. Of course, whenever the issue was raised in Parliament by MPs from Indian National Congress, DMK and (erstwhile) NCP, the BJP MPs opposed these efforts.

 

The BJP’s election manifesto has thrown crumbs at the transgender community. The BJP has promised to expand the Rs. Five Lakh health insurance cover to include senior citizens over 70 years of age and transgenders. The BJP is using the same British ‘divide and rule’ policy. The unity of LGBTQIA community is sought to be disturbed thus – crumbs for the transgenders and nothing at all for gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

 

Even this public display of concern for transgenders has inbuilt biases. All transgenders whether teenagers/middle aged/older will be clubbed with senior citizens of over 70 years. While these citizens over 70 years of age may have health issues and need medical treatment for their diseases, is the BJP insinuating that transgenders are diseased? If this be so, it displays a fascist mindset.

 

P.S. Sahni & Shobha Aggarwal are members of ABVA.

LGBTQIA Community; General Elections 2024 for the 18th Lok Sabha; and Election Manifestoes

 

Part-1

 

by

P.S. Sahni & Shobha Aggarwal

 

When ABVA (AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan) released its report, ‘Less than Gay’ in 1992 it included a 16-point Charter of Demands (Gay Manifesto) which can be accessed here.

 

Countercurrents.org on 15 August 2020 published the “People’s Manifesto for Ecological Democracy”. It included:

 

·      The rights of people with different sexual orientations – Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual needs to be respected.

·      All the laws that criminalise or discriminate against the LGBTQIA community should be abolished. India should pass laws that allow marriage among same sex and LGBTQIA communities.

 

Countercurrents.org published an updated version ‘A People’s Manifesto for Ecological Democracy – 2.0’ on 13 March 2024.

 

The Indian National Congress released its Election Manifesto on Friday, 5 April, 2024. It included:

·      We will expand Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution to prohibit discrimination on the ground of ‘disability’, ‘impairment’ or ‘sexual orientation’.

·      After wide consultation, Congress will bring a law to recognize civil unions between couples belonging to the LGBTQIA community.

 

The CPI (M) released its Election Manifesto on 4 April 2024:

·      Amend the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 to address concerns raised by the community.

·      Legal recognition and protection to same sex couples similar to marriage – ‘civil union’/‘same-sex partnerships’, legislation/s on similar lines as Special Marriage Act, 1954 so that the partner can be listed as dependent, for inheritance, alimony in case of divorce etc.

·      A comprehensive anti-discriminatory bill covering LGBTQ+

·      Reservation in education institutions; ensuring horizontal reservation in employment.

·      Ensuring crimes against LGBTQ+ persons are treated on par with crimes against non-LGBTQ+ persons.

·      Measures to address bullying, violence and harassment of gender non-conforming and LGBTQ+ students, staff and teachers in educational spaces; enforcement of UGC anti-ragging policy amendment (2016) that addresses ragging based on sexual orientation and gender identity, ensuring accessible and safe bathrooms for trans, intersex and gender non-conforming students, staff and faculty.

·      Sex change surgeries of LGBTQI should not be done without their informed consent.

 

[P.S Sahni & Shobha Aggarwal are members of ABVA.]

P.S.: Part-2 will appear on 19 April 2024.

 

  

 

          

     

32nd anniversary of release of ‘Less than Gay’

32 years back on 22^nd November 1991, ABVA released ‘Less than Gay’ – A Citizens’ Report on the status of Homosexuality in India co-authored by seven ABVA members.  The 2^nd Edition of the Report was released in November 2022.

 

The 2^nd edition has a long essay running into 18,360 words in the form of an introduction written by Shobha Aggarwal, advocate and member, ABVA. It details the struggle of ABVA (1988-89 till date) for the full repeal of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which had criminalised gay sex. ABVA has been submitting its Charter of Demands to the concerned authorities for acceptance of full rights of sexual minorities including same-sex marriage, child adoption, inheritance rights etc. ABVA demanded privacy rights in 1991 which was conceded by the Supreme Court in 2017. The Charter of Demands is detailed on page 209 of the Report. Full Report is available here.

Jewish Diaspora - Speak Up For Palestinians

 “When crime becomes authority

And hunts down people branding them criminals

Everyone with a voice and keeps silent

Becomes criminal himself.” (Poet Varavara Rao)

 

About time middle class Jews

Spread across the world

Break their silence

And speak up.

 

While you sought greener pastures in the west

Got exposed to democratic, secular ideals

Your elected government back home

Created a monstrous, theocratic state.

 

Of what use then

Your exposure to progressive, liberal ideas

While fundamentalism rules the roost

In Israel.

 

Enterprising and economically well off

Jewish establishments control the world media

Brutally manipulating news and views

To serve its political interests.

 

Judiciary - the last bastion of justice

Being systematically subverted

Under pressure

From ultra-right wing coalition partners.

 

Courts regularly legitimise

Demolition of Palestinian houses

And hand over vacant land

To right wing Israeli settlers.

 

In Shakespeare’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’

Shylock demanded his pound of flesh

Ensure this politically incorrect image of Jews

Remains buried six fathoms deep.

 

Let Netanyahu not exhume it

And revive it by revengeful acts

Jews abroad break your silence

Speak up before it is too late.

 

Netanyahu now demands his pound of flesh

Total elimination of Hamas, the fighters

Can he assure that it will be just a pound of flesh?

No more, no less; not a drop of civilian blood?

 

Present turbulent times cry out

That middle class Jews world-wide

Should collectively don the role

Of a Daniel come to judgement.

 

By roaring publicly for a ceasefire in Gaza

Urging for immediate lifting of siege of millions

And ensuring peaceful return of land

To its rightful owners, the Palestinians.

 

P.S. Sahni 

ABVA's work acknowledged in the same-sex marriage judgement

 

The Chief Justice of India in his judgement on same-sex marriage refers to ABVA and its report “Less than Gay” on page 87 para 89 of the judgement. Full judgement is available here.

On 27.04.2023 ABVA sent an open letter to the Chief Justice of India and his companion judges stating:

 

“The organization ABVA (AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan) was formed in 1988-89 and has spearheaded the gay rights movement in India since then. All our activities have been documented and can be accessed at http://aidsbhedbhavvirodhiandolan.blogspot.com/….

 

Our experience of over three decades indicates that irrespective of the party in power at the Centre there is no intention to address the LGBTQIA issues.

 

So ABVA was forced to bring out another document in 2021 titled “The Struggle Will Continue Till Parliament Debates – Nay Concedes – The Gay Manifesto, 1991 New Delhi, India” which can be accessed here.

 

Through this letter we wish to appeal to you that gay rights movement in India be not ignored when the final judgement in the pending petitions is pronounced by the Hon’ble Court.”

 

Full letter is available here.

Press Release: Same-sex marriage judgement by Supreme Court – A Damp Squib

 

Courtesy: Pravartak Isssue No. 1 (2.12 - 15.12.91)

 

While rejecting the prayer for same-sex marriage the Supreme Court of India through its judgements made the following points:

1.     This court cannot legislate.

2.     There is no fundamental right to marry.

3.     This judgement has not touched the Special Marriage Act and all personal (religious) laws.

4.     Split opinion on adoption by same-sex couples.

5.     Transgender can marry.*

 

This Supreme Court judgement on same-sex marriage does not change the ground situation at all till the Parliament brings a legislation. Same-sex marriages were taking place in India for a long long time and have been documented extensively in the 1980s and 1990s. Same-sex marriages will continue to take place in future as well. Same-sex couples certainly do not need this SC judgement to take the leap. Effectively the SC has taken the LQBTQIA community for a long ride by building up hopes but without delivering the needed marriage equality for the simple reason that the judiciary does not have the mandate to legislate. These are matters to be debated and decided upon by the legislature. Halfway through the final arguments the constitution bench judges realised their folly and even confessed that it is for the Parliament to make a law on the issue!!! It was a pathetic sight indeed then to see lawyers plead for peripheral issues like same-sex couples being allowed joint bank accounts etc! The Court then went on to request the Solicitor General to come forward with what the government would do for welfarism of same-sex couples.

 

Another negative of this judgement is that it has effectively subverted ongoing efforts viz campaign, movement for same-sex marriage. Besides, the tempo will have to be built up all over again. Street level protest politics will have to be started anew and it will have to be a long drawn out struggle with lots of sacrifices.

 

ABVA’s Role

 

ABVA had made the demand for same-sex marriage in 1991 through its path breaking report - ‘Less than Gay’. This report detailed same-sex marriages in India in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1999 ABVA documented the attempted suicide of a lesbian couple in Orissa through its report titled ‘For People Like Us’. ABVA made the demand before any country in the whole world had legalised same-sex marriage. ABVA has been petitioning since 1991 for legislation on same-sex marriage. The SC took up the issue 32 years later but as expected failed to deliver.

 

Much Ado About Nothing

 

This academic exercise undertaken by the SC has provided free publicity (live telecast proceedings for days) to the foreign funded NGOs; foreign funded PIL lawyers; the judges who were able to hog the limelight; and Gay & lesbian people who had deserted the LGBTQIA community by leaving India for greener pastures abroad and dramatically reappeared in the 21^st century at the Supreme Court of India to get their same-sex marriage with foreign spouses legalised through the ongoing cases. Thus they piggy rode on genuine petitioners. In fact halfway through the final arguments the judges made it clear that they are not amending the Foreign Marriage Act. Considerable court time got wasted because of such petitions.

 

ABVA in May 2023 had opined that the LGBTQIA community should withdraw the cases from the court. We wrote:

 

“If these 5 judges of the constitution bench declare in their judgement that Parliament alone can legislate on same-sex marriage, it will create a problem for future generations (again the section which opts for judicial route rather than parliament for their liberation) who will then have to ensure a larger bench of more than 5 judges to reverse the judgement awaited in the present case. A Herculean task indeed!

In such a scenario withdrawing cases from the court is a tactical retreat dictated by one’s conscience and wisdom; then at least the petitioners and their lawyers will come out with their self-respect and dignity intact and their heads held high.”

 

Shobha Aggarwal

On behalf of AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan Collective

Blog: http://aidsbhedbhavvirodhiandolan.blogspot.com/

 

* Madras High Court in 2019 has already ruled that a man and a transgender woman can marry.

Feminism, Patriarchy & Equal Marriage Rights for LGBTQ – A Personal Dilemma

 

 

The Supreme Court of India is likely to pronounce judgement on the same-sex marriage petitions this week on or before 20^th October 2023 as one of the judges on the bench is retiring on that day. Before the matter reached the Supreme Court in November 2022 many petitions on the marriage equality issue were filed in various State High Courts. It would have been in the fitness of things if the High Courts had first deliberated on the issue. But the Supreme Court peremptorily transferred all the petitions to itself.

 

In 2018 when the judgement on Section 377, Indian Penal Code was expected the mainstream media blitzkrieg on the issue started months before the judgement. I was also interviewed by Indian Express and Los Angeles Times as I was the first person in India to file a case on behalf of AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan (ABVA) for striking down of S. 377, IPC.  ABVA’s struggle for gay rights in the twentieth century got wide coverage in the media then. This time around the mainstream media is unusually silent on the same-sex marriage issue. Is it an indication of the kind of judgement expected?

 

For me personally as a feminist marriage is a patriarchal institution. The institution of marriage thrives and survives on inequality and subjugation of women. I have spent most of my life fighting patriarchy in both my personal and political life. Some success that I have achieved in my personal life has come at a very high cost. At the same time, as a life-long member of ABVA, I have supported marriage equality for the LGBTQ community. ABVA in 1991 came out with a Charter of Demands in its citizens’ report ‘Less than Gay’ which included the right to marry. It for the first time in India demanded that the Special Marriage Act should be amended to allow for marriages between people of the same-sex. Not surprisingly the Supreme Court while hearing the arguments categorically stated that it will confine itself to the Special Marriage Act and not the other personal laws which were also under challenge before it. However, as a lawyer I think that it is for the parliament to debate and legislate on the issue.

 

Once briefly married, now as a single woman about to soon become a senior citizen I have been grappling with the same problems faced by the LGBTQ community. How to nominate someone who is not a blood relative in bank accounts etc. What to do with my worldly possessions after I pass on? Could I give it to someone outside my blood relatives? What legal hassles will be faced by the person or institution I Will my worldly possessions to later on? The deep-seated patriarchal notions don’t recognize any relationships outside blood and marriage. This needs to change not just for the LGBTQ community but for the entire society.

 

LGBTQ couples have been getting married for decades even without legal sanction. ABVA has recorded many such instances in its seminal report ‘Less than Gay’. Over two decades ago I attended a wedding ceremony of two of my lesbian friends.  It was a different kind of wedding. They asked friends from different religions to perform some ritual from their respective religion related to a wedding ceremony. So Sikh, Hindu, Muslim and Christian rituals were performed at their wedding albeit in a truncated way. It was not a legal marriage but socially it was accepted among their friends and relatives. A Hindu and Muslim lesbian couple I knew adopted a child in the name of the Hindu woman partner. These are some of the ways in which LGBTQ community has managed to circumvent unequal laws.

 

However, there are times when at a personal level I find it difficult to accept that the LGBTQ community also wants to emulate the patriarchal institution of marriage. But legally and constitutionally I firmly believe that all citizens of India should have the right to marry. Once all have equal rights only then the question of choice arises. But in my heart I do hope for a different kind of social structure based on equality with the help of my LGBTQ friends and not a perpetuation of the patriarchal institution of marriage.

 

[Shobha Aggarwal is an independent legal researcher, advocate, Delhi High Court; activist, feminist, has had a brush with socialism. She has authored the path-breaking report “The Public Interest Litigation Hoax in India – Truth Before the Nation” published in 2005 which stays uncontested till date. She has done the ‘Advanced International Study Program in Peace and Conflict Transformation’ from the European University Center for Peace Studies, Austria.]

 

Open Letter to A Co-worker Who is Presently the Attorney General For India

 

Dear Venkataramani,

 

Recall that 40 years back in 1983-84 we – including you and me – were all active members of Jhuggi Jhopri Nivasi Adhikar Samiti (JJNAS). Many of the members of JJNAS contribute articles for Countercurrents.org e.g. Walter Fernandes, Prof. Shamsul Islam, Dr. Aurobindo Ghosh, Tapan Bose, Sumanta Banerjee, PUCL,  PUDR and Ankur to name a few. CC is edited by Binu Mathew.

 

A fact-finding team of three of us had gone to Derawalan Nagar, North Delhi to enquire into the razing of dwelling units by bulldozer. The team included your good-self; Dr. V. P. Srivastava and myself. We had prepared the report and made a demand on the administration inter alia to rehabilitate the victims made homeless. Remember a girl child named Parvati had died during this demolition drive. JJNAS had roundly condemned the demolition without notice.

 

I also recall your concern and efforts when JJNAS learnt of the death of a slum dweller, Wilson who had died due to police torture on the mere suspicion that he had stolen a ceiling fan. I cherish those times when a movement against demolition of dwelling units became a force to reckon with. Then 1984 genocide of Sikhs happened and most of us got involved in relief and rehabilitation of these victims.

 

Under the present regime demolitions (without notice) of dwelling units have become a practice especially after acts of social violence get reported. I am sure all this must be weighing heavy on your heart because I worked with you for years at that time. You were a source of inspiration to me.

 

I understand that the post of Attorney General for India is a political appointment. But recall India’s first Attorney General for India, M. C. Setalvad who could stand up to the then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru on issues where Mr. Setalvad differed. Yesterday’s issue of Countercurrents.org carries a piece by a perceptive and sensitive journalist Mr. Vidya Bhushan Rawat. The title of the piece is ‘The Supreme Court Must Stop Bulldozer Raj’. You may find time to go through it.

 

On 4 January 2019 the Indian Express carried a piece titled ‘The country’s counsel’ written by C. Raj Kumar, Dean, Jindal Global Law School and Khagesh Gautam, Associate Professor, Jindal Global Law School.

 

“The Constitution does not provide for Attorney General of India. It provides for Attorney General for India. This would seem to indicate that the AG’s client is not the government but rather the people of India.” and

 

“The AG is “Attorney General for India”, not attorney general for the government of India. In that, the AG is special for he acts “for India” and not the government. There is a constitutional expectation on the AG and other legal officers to exercise independent judgement and provide wise counsel to the government,..” and also

 

“In our system, the AG is obliged to speak truth to power and help the government to adhere to the Constitution.”

 

My friend Venkataramani, you have the powers to summon the files pertaining to the Nuh violence and the subsequent demolition. The buck stops at you. You alone can decide how justice could be done to Muslims. This one time exercise by you could send a message to the administration, police and local government to treat Muslims as human beings firstly and Indians in the same breath. If you can do that you will be remembered in history as someone who saved the country from a potential civil war. Of course you must weigh the risks involved in taking a principled stand. Besides I make this demand of you to stand up to the stature of Justice H. R. Khanna. After all during the JJNAS movement you inspired a lot of activists.

 

As for me, my friend Venkataramani, I am precisely where I was 40 years back. I have no status to speak of but my conscience is clear. I may be dimwitted but I do understand that power and prestige are big factors for most individuals. I am not apologizing for any liberty I may have taken in addressing you this letter. I do not know much about protocols. If my letter merits legal action against me so be it.

 

Thanks and best wishes,

P.S. Sahni

[Presently I am a member of PIL Watch Group and ABVA Collective.]

Press-Release: Stop Bulldozing Uniform Civil Code Till Same-sex Marriage Issue is Debated In & Outside Parliament

The future of one hundred million LGBTQIA Indians is at stake. For the last seventy five years the Indian Parliament has evaded – nay stonewalled – debate on LGBTQIA marriage and the consequent benefits to same-sex couples it entails. True, the Supreme Court is to pronounce its judgement on the issue anytime soon but it can only give a declaration which per se will not change the ground conditions. During the course of hearings the Solicitor General of India had requested the five judge constitution bench ‘to let Parliament legislate.’ So be it.

 

Since efforts are afoot towards reformation of Uniform Civil Code, this is the time for LGBTQIA marriage issue to be discussed, debated and decided upon. The issue of same-sex marriage will have ramifications extending to all personal (religious) laws directly or even if Special Marriage Act is invoked by same-sex couples. So it makes sense to address the issue affecting one hundred million LGBTQIA community and then proceed on to tackle the vexed issue of UCC.

 

It would be in the fitness of things if the Law Commission of India and the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice suspend their efforts at enlisting views of stake holders. These two bodies can restart their work after Parliament decides upon same-sex marriage. Else it would be difficult for LGBTQIA community to trust its Parliament; and yes, the support of over 90% of Indians belonging to the non-LGBTQIA population would be welcome.

 

AIDS Bhedbhav Virodhi Andolan Collective

Blog: http://aidsbhedbhavvirodhiandolan.blogspot.com/

Email: aidsbhedbhavvirodhiandolan@gmail.com

Bulldozing Uniform Civil Code – Sans Inclusion of Hundred Million LGBTQIA Indians

The present political dispensation ruling India is working overtime to wreak havoc with personal laws of religious minorities. Brute majority in Parliament will be used to crush aspirations of even the newly accepted and recognized minority community – to wit the sexual/sexuality minorities numbering up to hundred million as per Supreme Court judgement of 2018 in the case of Navtej Singh Johar & others Versus Union of India.

 

It is no coincidence that the emergence of Indian gay issues in 1991 was followed by the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 accompanied by pan India anti-Muslim violence. Again, the sustained campaign for ‘Gay Manifesto, 1991’ – with the issue of same-sex marriage reaching a critical point – is being scuttled by forcing a ‘modern Uniform Civil Code.’ Two birds are being killed with one stone.

 

Both the religious minorities and the sexual/sexuality minorities should join hands to resist this move and press for a democratic and all inclusive Uniform Civil Code. As in India, neighbouring Nepal has faced a clamour and campaign for a Hindu Rashtra. With the arrival of Maoists and Naxalites in power in Nepal since 2006 the cacophony for a Hindu Rashtra has been sidelined and gay rights have been included in the newly drafted Constitution of Nepal. Are rulers in India listening?