The writer Vidyut invents a reasoning : Tehelka: Did victim realise the effect of leaking her side to media? (Editor’s note: This piece was originally submitted for publication to Kafila but did not clear moderation. It was subsequently published on amjanata.com. We are publishing it on Firstpost in the interest of a spirited debate. )
Vidyut wrote, "Because you are a journalist and feminist, I would like to ask you, would you recommend a victim of rape to release one sided correspondence in a high voltage campaign? Do you think it will help her interests? Do you think it helped your’s? For that matter, what is your objective? As a reader and someone interested in the freedoms and rights and empowerment of women, your method of going about this has been very alarming. This has been magnified by a media that carelessly chose to recycle your articulate voice rather than finding their own. You may be the victim, the entire media is not and the sense of outraged accusation echoing has created a very unbalanced story".
INDIA HONEST could not reasonably understand, how the victim her case, by opting to the fight out her case when the entire management in collusion with the accused, attempted their best efforts to dump the victim, with a paper apology, while paving way for the accused to go scoot free.Moreover it is beyond imagination, how the writer is boasting of being one interested in the freedoms and rights and empowerment of women,while equating the media and public outrage with the crocodile tears of Shoma Choudhry in her outrage on the incident, at the same time suppressing the case by announcing "this is an internal matter and the victim is satisfied with the emotional apology.".
Again the logic of Vidyut that "to raise the issue of the victim, the media has to be the victim itself, " is simply cruel and absurd.
Vidyuat elaborates :The result is that we are in a place where a situation having two sides is being reported as outrageous and used to imply guilt. I cannot, of course blame you for the actions of others, but I hope you understand my concerns in the larger interest of women, when I say that this has alarming implications for them. It will not be long before people realise that something that wasn’t even rape a short while ago has not even seen the accused be able to speak a few lines uninterrupted to present their side. And this is not just limited to Tejpal, but Shoma as well. I do not dispute that rape must be punished, but it creates a worrying question .................because we cannot deny that Tejpal has stepped down, Shoma has stepped down, an organisation may collapse, and we are nowhere near a court of law yet. It raises alarming questions ....................... of guilt. It is a terrifying example of how a feminist who knows her rights and how to articulate them can turn media into an instrument of punishment using selective releases of information and defaults we have painstakingly established to create a compassionate audience for women.
INDIA HONEST still could not with the logic and rational, behind the reasoning offered by the writer.Are you suggesting that as the politically patronised sting investigator Tehelka may collapse by her accusation of a fact, then it will cause a big harm to the nation or to the investigative journalism, so the victim even after having gone through with the agony of rape (alleged) by the accused owner of the scrupulous magazine, should remain quite ? What type of supporter of freedoms and rights and empowerment of women Mr Vidut is ?
Vidut concludes his contention of regret : "It is unfortunate that apparently no one anticipated the glaring political bait in Tejpal and Tehelka being in a rape scandal. This is a mess. And like you said, it will be a long battle, that you haven’t made easier for yourself either, if you actually expect justice from a court of law. If all you wanted was to bring Tejpal down, then that is good, because that has gone down well and I will feel better that at least some good has come out of this".
INDIA HONEST now is able to understand some reasoning, what Vidut is intending to suggest. By suggesting that the path of getting justice is long, he is true, as the accused is really such a big shot with huge political backing from behind,and he correctly concluded and justified his verdict ahead of Court, that is was a political bait on Tejpal.
But where Vidyut has differed from Shoma Choudhury ? Shoma, herself has done similar things before her ultimate resignation :"What Shoma Choudhary has delivered in her "verdict of instant justice" ,that is asking Tejpal to opt for a choice punishment :, a) an emotional apology and b) "an vacation for six months" from attending office, rather rejoicing the sweet and sour memories of the past, with the daughter equivalent victim" ?