The reports confirm, Managing editor of Tehelka, Shoma Chaudhury has resigned and wrote a letter to the management (*1) of the magazine and the staff that she did not want questions (*2) raised about her integrity(*3) affecting the magazine. In the resignation email Shoma Chaudhury said that she believed (*4) she had acted in instant outrage and in solidarity(*5) with the journalist who had suffered sexual assault.
She justified (*6) her actions after receiving the complaint and said that “things have been "misconstrued and have snowballed" (*7) exponentially in the media, based on "half-facts and selective leaks".” She admitted she could have done things differently but rejected the charges of a cover-up (*8) and said that she believed she had acted in consonance with with her feminist positions. She said,“I would have liked to continue at Tehelka to see us through this dark time, but I am no longer sure whether my presence is harming or helping Tehelka,” .
INDIA HONEST wishes to discuss the contradiction involved in many of the points raised in Shoma's above mail/letter, the points as marked by * are as follows:
(*1) Through all this turmoil, that was created by the promoter/owner editor Tejpal, Shoma as the managing editor, was the immediate legal in charge/public face to handle the official acts, statements, but since she now relinquishes her post as managing editor, she needs to clarify who in the Tehelka will be answerable to the authorities and media for any thing subsequently coming up now, as related to Tehelka.
Simultaneously she must have owned/explained clearly her duty and responsibility as regards to whatever has materialised till date, to reply to the appropriate authorities and to the public/media. She cannot act now in such a way where she can abscond from her duty to reply for Tehelka, till date, specially her acts and omission as regards to Vishaka guidelines.
(*2) : She must admit, what integrity she maintained, when she failed on both the counts, for Tehelka---she failed to adopt Vishaka , and for the victim, she criminally victimised her by refusing to report to the police, and forcing her to keep silent, hiding and twisting her views on the incident.
(*3) : integrity to the majgine has been missed legally, when she failed to use Vishaka, and to the staff victim, when she acted to suppress the case, against the wishes of the victim.
(*4)(*5)(*6) : Shoma Choudhary, who acted in hand-in-gloves with the owner Tarun, has surprisingly created an remarkable history of investigation, when she received information of serious cognizable offence on her mail box, investigated it fast and asked the accused to choose his own course of punishment, and also gave the final verdict, along with the acceptance certificate from the victim, all in a day.
What Shoma boasting, as "believing", "solidarity with the victim fellow journalist" and "justified" , is to be seen as what Shoma Choudhary has delivered in her "verdict of instant justice" , asking Tejpal to opt for a punishment :, a) an emotional apology and b) "an vacation for six months" from attending office, rather rejoicing the sweet and sour memories of past with the daughter equivalent victim.
Do you, the great feminist-principle insister Shoma feel proud for your this justification "This is an internal matter, the journalist concerned is satisfied with the action taken", or are you ashamed of the this ?
(*7) (*8) What has snowballed Madam Shoma, your innocent justice or your criminal cover up ? You are the better person to answer. But this opportunity is not with you anymore, as you are equally liable legally for your culpability in the crime by your boss Trun Tejpal and your escape route has been sealed by your own outrageous media outburst, exposing your double standard.
The better option with Shoma is to forget her past adventures sting journalism on public/opponents, and come clean,as this journalism drama is played on yourself and Tejpal only.