THE WHISTLEBLOWERS OF SAUDI ARABIA: THE KINGDOM OF MEN

Chrystopher Wylie and Afzal Kohistani are considered two of the most well known whistleblowers of modern day acts against individual rights. Investigative journalism by N. Ram on the Rafale deal and Suki kim for her undercover work in North Korea have been considered a couple of the most daring acts of the day. But equally or more important have been the exposés about the kingdom of oil, dates, gold and men: Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has been on the news lately for a range of reasons. With Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman’s (MBS) ‘revolutionary’ changes, Act East policy, attempts at diversifying the oil based economy and the blood chilling murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate at Istanbul, the limelight has finally shifted from Donald Trump to MBS. At the same time, the world has also turned its one open eye to young women who have fled from Saudi Arabia. The year began with Rahaf Mohammad Al qunun barricading herself in a Thai hotel, in an attempt to prevent her deportation back to Saudi Arabia. She did not want to face the same fate of Dina Lasloom who had been intercepted by Saudi authorities at the Thai airport and deported back to Saudi Arabia in 2017, never to be heard from again. Al qunun, the daughter of a Saudi Arabian governor (who disowned her as ‘mentally unstable’), described the alarming abuse and threats she faced at home. She was locked up in her room for six months because she cut her hair the ‘wrong way’ and beaten up by her elder brother for removing her niqab. This incident throws light on Saudi Arabia’s rampant guardianship or wali system. Under Saudi law, each woman has a male guardian, who may be the woman’s husband, father, brother or son. Without their permission, women are not allowed to marry, travel, obtain a divorce or open a bank account and do many activities that are considered trivial for women around the world. Though the wali system is not explicitly mentioned in Saudi law, it is practiced according to the understanding of officials and institutions such as the police, hospitals and courts. This means that the boundaries and scope of the wali system is like an amoeba and is subject to individual interpretation rather than scholastic jurisprudence. The shallow nature of the system can be summarized when activist Wajeha Al- Huwaider said that if she wanted to remarry, she would have to get the permission of her son. Defenders of the wali system like Noura Abdulrahman, who was employed in the Saudi Ministry of Education called the basis of such a system as “love”. She said “They (the guardians) ask nothing in return- they only want to be with me. The image in the West is that we are dominated by men, but they always forget the aspect of love”. Even assuming that the first sentence is true, the second sentence lacks both common sense and logic. What this system represents is not love but pure cruel slavery. What is loving in beating up a woman just because she decided to step out of the house alone? What is loving in deciding a woman’s entire life to suit the male guardian’s needs with no regard to the woman? And most importantly what is loving in a patriarchy? It is important to remember that this system is more about patriarchy than about religion. In 2019, Saudi Arabia launched an app called Absher which apart from providing a plethora of services like renewing passports, applying for jobs and Hajj permits, can also be used to track the whereabouts of a woman under a man’s guardianship. The app would send a message to the guardian if it detected the use of passport at the border by the woman under his guardianship. Al qunun’s story could be considered a repetition of Laura’s (pseudonym) who was also granted asylum in Canada. Across the globe, stranded in Hong Kong, are two sisters Reem and Rawan (pseudonyms) who spent six months in the city instead of a two hour stopover on their way to Australia. They also retell stories of abuse in the hands of their father and brothers. Currently they are hanging on a loose thread of hope that they would not be deported. They describe themselves as “fish trapped in a little oasis that is rapidly drying out”. Reem hopes to become an author to tell the sisters’ experiences to the world. Saudi Arabia is known for many gender unjust laws such as the muttawa or religious police and gender segregation in buses and stadiums much like the Apartheid system. MBS has been praised for allowing women to drive and go to stadiums. The thing about freedom is that is cannot be served in small doses. Neither can it be superficial to please an international community. Giving women the right to vote in 2015 and the right to drive in 2018 is not called freedom, it is called a late dawning to allow their mere existence as humans in the world. When the entire world was ready to take severe action against the kingdom over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi why not about the centuries old male guardianship system? It is ironic that Sophia the humanoid robot who was granted citizenship in Saudi Arabia was not forced to wear an abaya like the millions of women in the kingdom. Al qunun’s dramatic escape is a milestone in the path to freedom for Saudi Arabian women. In the words of Al qunun “I am sure that there will be a lot more women running away. I hope my story encourages other women to be brave and free”.

ALL EYES ON YOU: THE PRIVACY PANDEMONIUM

Eons ago, many inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent lived in the Harappan civilization. They were seafarers, city dwellers and incomparable craftsmen but there was one thing that stood out: most houses did not have windows facing the main street. Indians were concerned about their privacy from 2600 BCE. Fast forward to 4000 years later the Supreme Court in K.S. Puttasawamy Vs Union of India upheld privacy as a fundamental right, much to the merry of our ancestors. Shortly the same apex court upheld the validity of Aadhar card while striking down many arbitrary sections. But a series of recent government orders may put this intrinsic element of Indian life, which has been safeguarded ever so dearly by generations of Indians, in jeopardy. By the powers decreed upon it by Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 the government has given rights to 10 agencies to intercept, decrypt or monitor communication through the electronic media. The agencies include the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Narcotics Control Bureau and Enforcement Directorate. The guidelines specify that these agencies can snoop on the online activities of netizens on the grounds of when there is a threat to national security, national integrity, security of the state, friendly relations with other countries, interests of public order and decency, or to prevent incitement of an offence. The proportionality of the necessity for such surveillance would undergo a litmus test by a review committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary in the Centre and Chief Secretary in the case of States. In case of emergencies, it shall be approved by an officer in a position not less than that of Joint Secretary of the Ministry/ Department of Home Affairs. The order quickly heated up into a political bawl with the media pouncing over it. Allegations that India is becoming a ‘surveillance’ or ‘police’ state were thrown across the houses of the Parliament.  Though the legal framework provided on paper sounds reasonable and convincing, it is the reality that shakes the foundations of democracy. It is important to look at this development in a global context. Repercussions of unwarranted surveillance by the State and private entities led to the rise of Edward Snowden and Cambridge Analytica. Similar scenarios must not be played out in India. In the wake of the 2019 general elections, the newly found powers of these agencies have created deep rooted fears in the minds of people. Ideally, these agencies would ensure that India remains safe as it is emerging as a key policy maker in worldly matters. But if there may be any activity on part of any government sanctioned entity adverse to the rights of Indians and the cornerstones of democracy, there would be no way out. It would simply create a vicious cycle with greater power to a few humans through algorithms, keys and the digital space to decide the government of their choice to rule all other humans and make policies benefiting them. Little can be done on our part but to hope that the government realizes that its course forward would have a tremendous impact on the future of the country, empowering or endangering the citizens. Well it is important that we must not put our ancestors to shame.

#ME TOO: AN ABHORRED AWAKENING

The #metoo campaign has spread across borders and reached the country which worships women as goddesses at the same time carries out chilling violence against them. It has barged into the doors of the highest levels of the government and in many fields has caused shocking revelations. Alok Nath, MJ Akbar, Nana Patekar, Chetan Bhagat, Vairamuthu and the list goes on. Many of these men had gone for the more courteous way of dealing with allegations by either publicly apologising or by stepping down. Not surprisingly, some others have denied such allegations by branding them as a ‘publicity stunt’ and misused the legal tool of the judiciary: defamation. But India’s experience with the #metoo movement is different from that of other countries. It is important to understand that India is slowly opening up by questioning and challenging its own and others’ beliefs. Decriminalisation of Section 377, Striking down Section 497 and allowing women into the Sabarimala temple are just a few examples. Like a little child with wide eyes, it is slowly opening its horizon of thinking, accepting and rejecting new ideas suiting to its needs. With that background, it wouldn’t be shocking to see a few well known personalities sidelining this movement. They ask what they think is a very valid question “Why are you opening up now but not then?” and statements like “You could have just slapped him” This sort of victim blaming is unacceptable in any time context. The victim’s mental state when they are being harassed is unfathomable for these cultural specialists. Instead of extending their support for those who came out, it has become a norm to question them and suggest what they should have done. This shakes down the victim’s morale as in spite of telling the truth they are chided over a time span for them to recover. Even if they had ‘slapped’ them or actually faced the torturous process of going through trial years ago, what would have happened? It would have brought about no radical change in society simply because of the fact that society then was not one which encouraged victims to speak up and harassment topped the list of taboo. As a matter of fact, a law for sexual harassment at work place was in place only 5 years ago. There is also the popularly held belief that #metoo movement is temporary and does nothing more than shame a few abusers. This is incorrect on various levels. The fact that millions of women have spoken about their traumatic experience makes them an army of warriors. They are not going to go away any time soon. Hollow apologies and unequal compensation behind the screens have been replaced by public apologies, stepping down, and court trials. It is set in motion a radical change and belief that there is some force which is there to support the victim and leaves the abusers with a strong message that they are not going to be let free. Some have even made the movement seem like a sort of game where people just accuse each other to settle scores. The Union Minister for Shipping and Finance asked “If someone makes an allegation that such a thing happened, when the incident happened we were playing together while in class 5, would it be fair?” The #metoo movement is not some sort of political arena where people make blunt unchecked allegations against each other. This is a worldwide phenomenon which involves a serious level of criminality. When John Oliver (political comedian) asked Anita Hill (a famous advocate who accused her senior of harassment in the 80s but was instead subjected to public scorn) whether men should be scared to be around women, she answered “Not if they are not harassers”. #Metoo movement has left something innate to human life: hope. Hope that no victim would go unheard and no harasser would go unpunished. As Winfrey Oprah said “Take us to the time where nobody has to say ‘me too’ again”.