Vigilante violence

THERE can be little justification for the lynching of an alleged perpetrator of rape at Dimapur in Nagaland. It appeared to be a reaction to the BBC documentary on the Nirbhaya case which exposed the slowness of the judicial system in India. Nevertheless, people cannot be allowed to take the law into their own hands. The police at Dimapur say that they were so overwhelmed by the mob that they could not take action. But that is a lame excuse. They could have sent for reinforcements. Their method of communication needs to be looked into. It is true that rape victims often do not get justice and justice is delayed in most cases, despite the fast track courts. Even their FIRs are often not registered by the police. It goes without saying that the system has to be thoroughly revamped. On the other hand, while people’s wrath at the sight of a rape may be understandable, it should not lead to counter-violence. At Dimapur, attacks were also made on establishments belonging to people from outside Nagaland. Such vengeance and the extra-legal execution cannot be forgiven.
It is not true that an angry mob baying for blood cannot be brought to justice. The incident was caught in camera. It should not be hard to identify the persons who incited the mob. Conversely, the outrage should create greater awareness in the authorities. Cases of rape and violence against women should be concluded as quickly as possible. If the proceedings are protracted, witnesses may change their statements and the rape victim is pushed into life-in-death. Civil society protests in Delhi had an immediate impact. In Nagaland, the rapist had not even been convicted. The outrage and the reprisal should be a warning to potential culprits but at the same time people should be told that vigilante justice is not the answer.