Tuesday July 16, 2019
Home India Acid attacks:...

Acid attacks: Stemming the free flow of toxicity

0
//

kt

By Ridham Gambhir

He slowly broke the seal of the bottle with his gloved hands and tapped the man sitting ahead of him. The girl was still walking on the footpath ignorant of these men. With an expeditious move, he threw open the bottle. The acid splashed out and incinerated her face ruthlessly. Her scream silenced the humdrum of the road while the bike raced along the corner and disappeared.

Crystal_body_AcidAttack1

Acid attacks have been experienced by some, seen by a few and read by a lot more. A woman doctor became a patient herself when two juveniles threw acid on her face in a marketplace in West Delhi. This attack took place in 2014, one year after the Supreme Court ordered a ban on the over-the-country sale of acid. The ban was announced as a result of a PIL filed by Luxmi Agarwal, an acid attack survivor.

Despite the ban, the year 2014 saw an unparalleled 309 acid attacks being reported from across the country. While the open sale is banned, the life-taking liquid continues to be sold illegally in places like Ghaziabad in UP for a minimal amount of Rs.25.

Luxmi Agarwal, at the age of 16 became an acid attack victim when she rejected the advances of a 32-year old man. Hina Fatima, a young bride was force fed sulphuric acid in the name of whisky by her husband and later splashed with a whole bottle of it. Sarojini Kalbagh, 19, died of 80 per cent burns when her ‘lover’ succumbed her to death by the fatal liquid. Noorjahan, a widow and a mother of two was soaked in acid by a dejected factory worker.

No matter which age group they belong to, women are the majority victims of such attacks. It is not out of his love, but his desire to overpower the woman and an attempt to prove his masculinity that results in such a heinous act.

To combat the rising acid attacks, the apex court has announced stern rules. Such as, anyone under the age of 18 will not be able to purchase acids like hydrochloric, sulfuric and nitric. These acids are easily available for mere Rs. 20 and are used as cleaners. Shops will have to keep details like the quantity sold and the addresses of buyers, who will need to present photo identification to purchase acids.

362217-swati-maliwal
Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) chief Swati Maliwal

Retailers will have to declare the amount of acid being stocked to the police,  the court said. Failure to do so would lead to undeclared stock being confiscated and a fine of up to 50,000 rupees. Additionally, Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) chairperson Swati Maliwal in consultation with deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and health minister Satyendra Jain, along with a delegation of 5 acid victims announced that the latter shall be provided free medical treatment at all hospitals in Delhi, including private hospitals.

It is the easy availability of acid and the rage of a spurned lover/husband that provokes him to ‘teach a lesson’ to the girl. Blaming the government authorities for such acts is commonplace but while the government is putting a check on the supply and demand of acid, how about we reappraise our gender relations and morality?

Are we to remain a silent spectator to such attacks or just a candle-bearer after these women die? Reduction in the sale of acid will not reduce acid attacks, it is the depth of humanity that needs to be explored and ameliorated.

Next Story

US: Supreme Court Blocks Administration’s Effort to Add Citizenship Question on Census

The citizenship question was meant to better enforce the Voting Rights Act

0
US, Supreme Court, Citizenship
FILE - Demonstrators protest during a Fair Maps rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court, in Washington, U.S., March 26, 2019. VOA

U.S. President Donald Trump responded Thursday to the Supreme Court’s decision to block his administration’s effort to add a citizenship question to the upcoming U.S. census by saying he’d asked his lawyers whether there was a way to delay the nationwide head count.

In a tweet hours after the court announced its decision, Trump said it “seems totally ridiculous” that the government could not question people about their citizenship on the census, which takes place once every 10 years.

The Supreme Court ruled the administration’s explanation — that the citizenship question was meant to better enforce the Voting Rights Act — was “more of a distraction” from the issue than an explanation.

Opponents of the citizenship question say it would intimidate noncitizens into not answering the census, ultimately leaving them underrepresented in Congress.

US, Supreme Court, Citizenship
U.S. President Donald Trump responded Thursday to the Supreme Court’s decision to block his administration’s effort. Pixabay

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s liberal justices in the 5-4 ruling.

 The nation’s highest court also announced Thursday that it was rejecting a request to intervene in states’ redistricting efforts.  Redrawing the boundaries of voting districts is meant to ensure proportional representation in state legislatures as the population grows and changes locations.

Republicans in the state of North Carolina and Democrats in the state of Maryland have been accused of redrawing the lines of voting districts to keep power in the hands of the ruling party.

The chief justices said manipulation of the electoral map, a practice known colloquially as gerrymandering, is a problem for state governments to solve, not the Supreme Court.

Also Read- Top 7 Must Visit Tourist Attractions in Cambodia

Thursday was the final day of rulings by the Supreme Court before its summer break. (VOA)