From joining the anti-rape movement to advocating for the victim, the journey of Seema Kushwaha, who was preparing for judicial services in Delhi during the Nirbhaya case, has been very adventurous. In conversation with Abhishek Srivastava, Seema says that Nirbhaya's fight has been the fight of half of the country's population, including herself. Edited Excerpts:
You fought and won the very first case of Nirbhaya. What was the inspiration behind it? How was your experience?
This was my first case on the Vakalatnama but I have been a registered advocate since 2006. My fight, however, started from childhood. I come from a village background. I have felt discrimination within the family. Even today there is no primary school in my village. I was the first girl in the village to pass class IX. Since childhood, I was a bit rebellious, so I was able to relate myself to the Nirbhaya case . I was inspired by one of my teachers who used to say that those who have reached the top do not follow the beaten track. I had decided on December 17, 2012 itself that I would get those rascals hanged. From there my journey started.
It's been two years since the rapists were hanged. But violence against women remains the same. Do you still believe that capital punishment makes any difference?
In other countries, capital punishment is used as a deterrent . Here the period of its execution is more important than the death sentence. It has more impact. Should a case like Nirbhaya have continued for seven years? This is the issue of the entire judicial process. We have failed as a system. Had time-bound justice been delivered, it would have definitely made a difference.
Whether the lawyer on the other side is to be blamed for the delay?
Look, the case was listed in the Supreme Court almost 18 months after the decision of the Delhi High Court . SLP, review, curative, everything could be heard during this period. So, the first mistake happened during this delay. The other side also knew that the more the case is delayed, the more it can be made the basis for preventing the death sentence. In the case of Shatrughan Chauhan vs. State of 2014, it has been clearly stated that in case of death sentence, the convict has the right to be heard till his last breath. The other side used it to stall the death warrant till the last night through different review, curative and mercy petitions.
In the Nirbhaya case, the lawyer for the other side was A.P. Singh. You are again in front of him in the Hathras case...
He has moved away from the Hathras case. As far as the Nirbhaya case is concerned, there was no fault of A.P. Singh either. Whatever the procedural lapses, he exploited them all for the defence. He did not spend all the rights of the criminals at once. He used them all one by one.
Does it mean that there was nothing wrong with the intention of the other party defending the criminals?
See, it is the responsibility of the entire system to ensure that those against whom a crime has been committed get justice. Police and court are part of the procedure. In this procedure, if a person says that no matter how big a criminal he is, we will save him, then it does not serve justice well. Yes, everyone should get a chance. Our law is still of the British era. The attitude of the police is still to support the elite. Defence is necessary if an innocent has been framed. But if the defence lawyer starts saying that he will save any criminal, will there be justice?
In the Chhawla incident, the Supreme Court acquitted all the three criminals. In your opinion, did the victim get justice?
The victim did not get justice. It was the responsibility of the state, the police, to decide whether they were criminals or not. If the Supreme Court is saying that the investigation was not done properly, whose fault is it? If both the district court and the high court are awarding capital punishment and the Supreme Court is acquitting the culprits, then the question is not only on both the lower courts but also on the police investigation.
Do you think there is a political angle to the Chhawla incident?
I cannot comment on this. Yes, there is freedom to challenge this also in the Constitution. Review petition is being filed. I think that now there will be no death sentence in this case. The defence lawyers will base his case on the fact that the Supreme Court had acquitted them. The matter will go on and on. If anything happens at the most, it will be just life imprisonment.
If we look at both the Chhawla and Nirbhaya incident in parallel, do you think that publicity and social mobilisation also have an impact on justice and punishment?
I salute Chhaya Sharma, the investigating officer in the Nirbhaya case. Her investigation has been decisive in bringing the criminals to the gallows. In the Chhawla case, the investigation itself has been questioned. So, the investigating agency has a huge role to play in the final outcome of both. Secondly, a discussion on women's rights has definitely come up due to socio-political reasons, but no one is punished because of any debate. No media came when I was running alone.
Where is the problem -- in the investigation process or somewhere else?
There is no willpower. No sensitivity. Forty-nine percent of the population of this country is women. Girls are not just gender. They are the capital of the country. If their rights are being violated only because of their gender, then it is the duty of the state to protect them. Women's Safety Guarantee Act should be enacted. The most important thing is to make women financially independent, to give them rights in property.
Nirbhaya fund of Rs 1,000 crore was created by the state?
Ask them what they did with that money! Not a single rupee was spent from the Nirbhaya Fund for two years. Sakhi One Stop Centres were to be set up in all the districts with the Nirbhaya Fund. Till date only 200 centres have been built. Where it is made, there is no system at all. The law has been made for women, but women do not have the fees to pay to private lawyers. The Legal Services Authority does not have competent lawyers. Women's issues are basically a human rights issue. Since the State has the power, the means to disseminate information, the basic will is lacking in the State.
What has changed in the crimes against women in the last ten years?
Talking about the nature of crime, gangrapes have increased. Secondly, POCSO cases have also increased. It is also possible that after the Nirbhaya case, the manner in which women's rights started being talked about, the reporting of cases has increased. Today, women have become aware.
