Dowry System Still Plagues Indian Women

[Guest guest]

Here is an interesting article taken from the last issue of

Frontline, a popular national newsmagazine in India (Vol.19, Issue

23, November 9-22, 2002), published by The Hindu.

 

Taking on Dowry, by T.K. Rajalakshmi, New Delhi

 

A national survey conducted by the All India Democratic Women's

Association reveals that the dowry system is widespread and has

permeated every section of society.

 

"Even as we did the survey, a very ordinary looking girl was beaten

up with a spice-grinding machine. Her fault: she was not good-

looking, nor did she bring enough dowry." — from the survey report

presented by the Rajasthan team of the All India Democratic Women's

Association.

 

"Be it any income group or caste, every section is obliged to spend

up to Rs.1 lakh at least on their daughter's wedding." — Karminder,

an AIDWA activist from Haryana.

 

THESE are voices that were heard in the course of a survey on the

prevalence of the dowry system, conducted by AIDWA in 16 States and

Delhi. The results of the survey were presented on September 1 and 2

at a two-day national workshop on "Expanding Dimensions of Dowry",

organised by AIDWA and the Indian School of Women's Studies and

Development.

 

The survey revealed that the dowry system permeated every section,

class, caste and religion and even the more egalitarian tribal

communities, particularly during the past one and a half decades,

coinciding with the progressive implementation of neo-liberal

economic policies. The survey revealed that it was no longer a

problem of just the BIMARU States (Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan,

Uttar Pradesh); it was prevalent in States that had higher-than-

average literacy rates and high prosperity levels and among

communities that had not traditionally practised the system.

 

The participants in the workshop were mostly AIDWA activists who with

their grassroots experience had collated information about

perceptions on dowry from unmarried women and their parents. Their

findings collectively reflected the nature of the stress and pressure

that had accumulated among the lowest-income groups. The data

collected and the analyses made were harsh pointers to the greed of

the system, the denial of equal property rights to women, the denial

of matrimonial rights, and the links dowry has with land ownership

and also higher education. The survey was conducted in Assam,

Tripura, West Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh,

Uttaranchal, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat,

Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. An overview

presented the historical genesis of the practice and its evolution.

 

The worst fears were confirmed in the responses to the 9,000

questionnaires — that almost all crimes against women, including

female foeticide and infanticide, were linked to the practice of

dowry. Interviews with parents of unmarried young women revealed that

the practice was not prevalent 30 to 40 years ago but had grown

rapidly in the last 10 or 15 years.

 

The sample population comprised upper, middle and lower castes, but

mainly middle- and lower-middle class families with monthly incomes

of up to Rs.5,000. Muslim families in the same income category were

also interviewed, and it was found that the system had penetrated

this section as well in recent times. The sample also included

smaller numbers of families of the upper-caste and higher-income

categories. The majority of the families in all caste groups declined

to give the daughter a share in the family property. Dowry was seen

as a substitute for a share, and a small percentage of unmarried

young women actually favoured the practice of taking dowry. However,

other survey results and testimonies showed that a woman rarely

retained control over the dowry amount as it was often appropriated

by her in-laws.

 

Mythili Sivaraman, vice-president of the Tamil Nadu unit of AIDWA,

observed that dowry was a phenomenon that went beyond the ritual of

marriage. Pregnancy, child-birth and all kinds of religious and

family functions are occasions when such demands are made. There are

several reasons for the prevalence of the dowry system, but the main

one is that it is a necessary precondition for marriage. "No dowry,

no marriage," is a fear that is widespread. Some respondents said

that a dowry brought higher status for a woman in her husband's home,

some others said that it meant security and good treatment for a

woman, and some others said that it was just an insurance against

violence. Notably, several respondents, especially young women

belonging to the lower income groups, said that the love and

blessings of their parents were enough for them; however, very few of

them thought that they could be married without a dowry.

 

The survey revealed that the practice had crept into societies that

had hitherto been unaffected by it and the accompanying heightened

consumerism. For some communities in Assam and Uttaranchal, the

practice is relatively new. In other States, like Kerala, the

expenditure on marriages had gone up and the liabilities in terms of

debts ranged from Rs.15,000 to Rs.4 lakhs among urban parents. For

rural families, the quantum is different but equally prohibitive. The

starting of a new business, a journey abroad, and even the

construction of a house are all occasions to ask for money from the

bride's family. In several communities, especially among Dalits and

tribal people, the system of bride price was gradually displaced by

dowry. The withdrawal of women from the agricultural economy and the

lower work participation rates of women even in prosperous States

such as Haryana and Punjab have resulted in a decline in the status

of rural women. Also, there is no direct correlation between dowry

and the levels of education and employment. It is not necessary, as

the survey has revealed, that a higher level of education necessarily

leads to a lower demand for dowry.

 

A RESOLUTION adopted at the end of the workshop called upon all

citizens, cutting across caste, community, region and political

affiliations, to act collectively for the abolition of dowry. The

resolution concluded that the giving and taking of dowry was perhaps

the only crime that enjoyed wide social sanction among the victims as

well as the perpetrators. The dowry system was related to structures

and policies that subordinated and devalued women in the economy, in

the family, in the social and cultural spheres and in public life,

the resolution said. Such devaluation entailed marriage being the

only option for a woman, and as a consequence, single women were

reviled and humiliated, it said. This had the overall effect of

increasing the vulnerability of women to dowry. The resolution

rejected the justification that dowry was the daughter's share in the

natal income or property. Dowry, it stated, could never be a

substitute for equal rights in inheritance. Equal rights in natal and

marital property and income emanated from the constitutional

guarantee of equality and its denial was tantamount to violating the

Constitution, the resolution emphasised.

 

It was resolved to launch a national campaign for the abolition of

both the caste system and dowry because together they tended to

reinforce the system of caste endogamy. Representative committees

would be formed in several States to lead the campaign against dowry,

said Brinda Karat, general secretary, AIDWA. The resolution appealed

to religious leaders, especially leaders of the Hindu community, to

denounce publicly all practices that strengthened son preference. The

campaign, which would be launched shortly, would include public

protests against ostentatious displays at weddings. It would seek

steps to encourage inter-caste, own-choice and non-dowry marriages;

to close down centres where sex-determination tests are performed;

and to stop advertisements and media-related programmes that

encourage the dowry system in all its myriad forms. There will be

mass campaigns that would be marked by public pledges, protest

against son preference-based religious rituals, and rejection of all

efforts to include biased material in school and university textbooks

and syllabi. Lastly, anti- dowry struggles would be made part of the

mainstream political struggle, the resolution said.

 

It is significant that the issue has come up after a long

interregnum; one of the reasons is AIDWA's rich experience in dealing

mainly with working class women and the emerging reality that there

has been no abatement of the practice despite the Dowry Prohibition

Act and changes in the criminal law (the Indian Penal Code and the

Indian Evidence Act). The system, if anything, has manifested itself

in the most dehumanising forms of consumerism and avarice. What was

earlier the prerogative of the ostentatious few has become a common

phenomenon. While several respondents to the survey demanded that the

laws be strengthened, it was clear that legislation alone was not

enough to check the menace. Laws cannot lead to social transformation

in the absence of a campaign or a mass movement.

 

As Supreme Court advocate Kirti Singh pointed out, the state did

nothing to implement the law or create among the people awareness of

the law. One of the most important amendments to the IPC (Section

498A), which deals with deals with cruelty and harassment for dowry,

made cruelty a culpable offence, but it has been left open to

interpretation. Cruelty in this case is defined as harassment of a

woman by her husband or his relative to coerce her or her relatives

into giving a dowry. It is defined as wilful conduct likely to drive

a woman to suicide or to cause her grave physical or mental injury.

Punishment for this extends to three years with a fine. The Indian

Evidence Act, 1872, was also amended to provide that if a woman

committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her

marriage, and if it is shown that her husband or any relative of her

husband subjected her to cruelty, the court can presume that such

suicide was abetted by her husband or by the relative.

 

THE earliest legislation on dowry was passed in 1961 but it was a

total compromise between those who were concerned with the issue and

those who felt there was nothing wrong with the giving or taking of

dowry, said Kirti Singh. The report of the historic Committee on the

Status of Women in India (1975) held that there were hardly any

complaints or convictions under the Act. In the early 1980s, the

Joint Select Committee of the Parliament on Dowry noted that the

practice had spread to all classes, communities and castes. The

women's movement was witness to a rising number of dowry deaths

during that period and subsequently launched a successful campaign in

the early 1980s that resulted in some significant amendments being

made to the Dowry Act, 1961. One such amendment broadened the

definition of dowry to include that anything given in connection with

a marriage and given either before, at the time of or after marriage

would be deemed to be dowry. However, customary and traditional

presents could be included in the definition of dowry only if their

value was disproportionate to the financial means of the person who

gave them.

 

Yet another amendment, Section 3(1) related to the penalty for giving

and taking dowry. According to this, a person who gave, took or even

abetted the taking or giving of dowry shall be punishable with

imprisonment for not less than five years and a fine of not less than

Rs.15,000 or the amount of the value of the dowry, whichever is more.

The penalty for demanding dowry was made stringent; punishment for it

extended from a period of not less than six months, extendable to two

years with a fine. Giving or taking dowry was also made a cognisable

and non-bailable offence, which meant that the police were bound to

investigate all offences relating to dowry under the Act once they

got to know about it. Another amendment, Section 8A of the Dowry

Prohibition Act, held that where a person was prosecuted for taking

or abetting the taking of a dowry or demanding a dowry, the burden of

proving that he had not committed the offence under those sections

was on him. Despite this, women's groups pointed out that unless the

very act of taking/giving dowry was not proscribed and prevented from

occurring (in majority of the cases, complaints were either made

after the relationship had broken down or a murder had taken place),

there would be little change.

 

After the initial amendments in 1983 and 1984 (mainly due to

pressures from the women's movement), in 1986, the Act was amended

again, empowering State governments to appoint Dowry Prohibition

Officers, who not only had a preventive role but also had powers to

collect evidence against people who took dowry. The efficacy of such

officers is a different question.

 

However, the reality for the Indian unmarried woman, mainly from the

middle- and lower-income groups, has remained unchanged despite legal

and other interventions. The social mind-set has worsened, and the

evidence for this can be seen even among the law-enforcing agencies.

The tendency to demand more money comes from a perceived easy access

to consumer goods. This phenomenon has been accentuated in the wake

of the economic liberalisation unleashed during the past one and a

half decades. It seems that the wide choice in the consumer goods

industry has opened up a wide range of dowry items.

 

Utsa Patnaik, Professor of Economics at the Jawaharlal Nehru

University, mentioned the wide disparities in the calorie intake of

the top 30 per cent and the bottom 30 per cent of the population.

Patnaik, a guest speaker at the workshop, spoke of the "ballooning

consumerism" and the fact that this kind of a rapid polarisation had

never been witnessed in such a short period of time.

 

Representatives from other women's organisations too attended the

workshop and pledged their support to the anti-dowry campaign. There

were trade union, student and youth representatives as well. Clearly,

it was not just a women's issue; for the campaign to be effective it

had to involve all democratic sections of society.

 

Source:

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1923/stories/20021122002909600.htm