In the first episode of this season, we examine what state violence actually is and how it plays out. The episode sets the context for what State violence looks like in India, and who the stakeholders involved/impacted by it are. We investigate this with the wonderful Chandni Chawla, a human rights lawyer in Mumbai who represents a variety of clients charged with criminal offences. Join us as we break down the fundamentals of state violence with Chandni Chawla and our hosts Sanchi and Uttanshi of One Future Collective!
Content warning: Mentions of violence, physical assault, custodial torture.
Transcript
[Intro]
Sanchi
Hello everyone and welcome to our podcast, Uncuff India by One Future Collective. My name is Sanchi and my pronouns are she/her.
Uttanshi
My name is Uttanshi and my pronouns are she/her. We are your hosts today, and it’s so good to have you all listening in. In today’s episode, we will unpack the meaning of violence in the context of state agencies and explore whether states can be perpetrators of violence themselves. If yes, we will also explore how this violence can manifest and discuss whether and how accountability from the state can be demanded.
[Intro ends]
Sanchi
Yes, States and State agencies are rarely seen as perpetrators of violence and harm, especially against their own citizens. They are, in fact, often seen as agencies which protect and act in the best interests of their citizens, which is how we might want it to be. However, this may not always be the case. It is possible that the State engages in covert forms of violence against their citizens for many different reasons.
Uttanshi
To discuss this and to share their insights on this particular theme with us at One Future Collective, we have with us the lovely Chandni Chawla. Chandni is a human rights lawyer from Bombay, who practises criminal law at the Bombay High Court and the lower courts as well. She represents a variety of clients from those accused of charges of terrorism as well as towards bodily offences. She also focuses on providing legal aid to women under trial prisoners, who are unable to afford legal representation, and to survivors of gender based violence. Thank you so much Chandni for taking the time out to join us today. We’re very excited to hear from you and learn from your insights.
Chandni
Thank you Sanchi and Uttanshi. Thank you very much for having me. I am very excited for this podcast as well, and this is a great topic to have a podcast on.
Sanchi
Lovely. Thank you so much. Thanks for joining us, Chandni. And let us dive right in and begin dissecting the topic at hand. Chandni, let us first talk about what you think of State violence. Do you think that states can engage in committing violence against their own citizens? And if yes, then what different forms can such violence take place in?
Chandni
I think my answer is an absolute yes. I mean, especially with my experience as a defence criminal lawyer. In the work I do, especially we engage with the State every day. it’s our every day. The opponents are the State; and the different kinds of violence we see is just rampant. So, I think State violence can definitely be in the form of physical violence and that’s very obvious. We see it in our everyday lives, we see it when we open the newspaper; but I think it can also take the form of other violence, which are non-physical. So, I would first like to talk about the physical forms of violence and especially speaking from my experiences, the physical forms of violence which I see around me everyday is custodial torture. It’s violence which takes place within the four corners of the police station. It’s violence which takes place the moment somebody is accused of a crime, and the entire process which goes in the interrogation of that person, right? And violence is used, and even though it is physical violence, at many times, that physical violence cannot be seen. And that is why to prevent that kind of physical violence, there are various Supreme Court judgments which say that there have to be CCTV cameras installed in every police station. This is to ensure that there is no custodial violence, but despite this, custodial violence is very rampant and I definitely see it in my experiences as a lawyer. But moving on, apart from violence perpetrated in custody, we also see violence on the roads, right? For example, if there is a policy., if there is a document which people want to oppose and they want to take to the streets — they want to protest — we definitely see at many times that the State, in the form of the police or other forces, perpetrates violence against students, against protesters. We see them getting lathi-charged, we see people opening tear gases. So, definitely we see physical forms of violence, especially when somebody is opposing the State and the State policy. There is also other forms of violence we see, which I call violence. It’s in the form of intentional spreading of misinformation. We see that happening a lot by the State agencies. We see a lot of trolling on Twitter and other social media platforms. We see a lot of misinformation being spread by popular media, which is controlled directly or indirectly by the State. So, I would think that this is also definitely a form of violence. We definitely see violence where people want to speak out against the State and when they try to do that, when they write against the State, their voices are suppressed- they are either accused in false cases, they have to be imprisoned for those cases for many, many years. So I think to answer your question, yes the State is one of the biggest perpetrators of violence in my mind.
Uttanshi
Thank you so much Chandni for that. And while you were speaking, I was just trying to understand, you know, how wide the meaning and scope of something like violence can really be. Traditionally, we’ve only understood that to be physical forms of violence, but hearing you speak, I’m also realising that there are sometimes non-physical types of violence. Sometimes, you know, violence that we can very easily look against, or look past, or ignore because we’re not seeing it cause direct physical harm onto anybody. So, thank you for sharing these different types of violence. It is definitely making me think in a certain direction that is quite helpful to get a sense of how we should be thinking when we’re talking about State violence, and how it may not always be as easily detectable as it may be in some other spaces. While we’re talking about this, do you think that it’s important for us to be able to address and call out such violence that the state engages in? And by us, I mean us as citizens, but also as activists, as human rights organisations, any other stakeholders involved in the process — anybody that’s not the State. Do you think it’s important for us to be able to call it out?
Chandni
I think absolutely. I mean non-state actors have a huge role to play when it comes to calling out violence perpetrated by the State. This is actually a very difficult process, but I think it becomes very important to have checks and balances in place. So, the State as a machinery does have checks and balances in place. For example, the judiciary is a check & balance, right? But apart from that, as citizens, I think civic participation is extremely important in any democracy. We say that the State is by the people, for the people, and of the people, right? And how do we hold them accountable becomes a very important question. But before that, it’s very important to do that because if we say it’s the State by us, for us and of us, so they are supposed to be accountable to us, right? So I’m not sure if you’ve heard of the Jawab Dehi Andolan, which is a movement which is taking place in Rajasthan. Some of the people who are involved in this — I mean I work with them. So, this is a movement to press the government to come up with an accountability bill, right? As we are talking about accountability, as we are talking about calling out State violence, I think this is an extremely important step that through the legislature we are trying to bring about a law for accountability of the government towards its people. And why is this important, right? For any good governance, for any State to observe human rights, where they are signatories to so many treaties on human rights. I think it’s important, it’s a role of every citizen to hold the State accountable. And I think we, as say civil societies, activists, students are very privileged in some sense or the other because we do understand how the State machinery works. And I feel it is our responsibility not just to hold the State accountable, but to spread awareness among the other population who do not know how the State works, right? So I think it becomes extremely important because, you know, the movement from democracy to non-democracy, to other forms of government, to fascism is extremely slow and we might not even be aware that it might be taking place. So to prevent that, the only way is taking small action every day, being aware of our rights, making others aware of their rights and just calling the State off if we feel that there are any policies, if there is violence which they are perpetrating, whether it’s physical violence or non- physical violence. So it is extremely, extremely important to call out state violence, especially in a democracy.
Sanchi
Thank you so much for bringing all those very pertinent points, Chandni. I think through what you’ve shared we have now clearly established that the State can and does in many, many different ways inflict violence against citizens. And we’ve also seen through what you shared why it may be important to call this out, and what might happen if this goes unchecked. Thank you also for giving us the example of the Jawab Dehi Andolan and for us to be able to see how this might be done in action-what are some ways through which we can call out such violence that the State is engaging in, but I want to go a little back to something that you pointed out and discuss more about that. You said that it might be difficult for us to at first recognize and call out this violence. So I’m just wondering what makes it so difficult to address this violence that is perpetrated by the State?
Chandni
Thank you for that question. I think it’s a very pertinent question. And the answer to that is not a straightforward answer because the State is such a powerful agency. So there is a huge power imbalance between the States and its citizens. And in such a scenario, when there is a huge power imbalance, calling out the one which has the most power is going to be difficult and it is always difficult. And, you know, there is an innate sense of legitimacy which the State gets because of its nature of being the State, right? And in such a scenario, addressing, acknowledging that the State can perpetrate violence and calling out the state violence can become very difficult. To give you an example, we can see what’s happening in the past couple of years, right? People who are calling out state violence, they are being accused in false cases. The biggest case which comes to my mind is the Bhima Koregaon case, where so many activists, lawyers, students, journalists, who are working in their individual capacities, who are trying to hold the state accountable, are now presently in custody for the past almost four years. We’ve lost one of them because he was 83 years old. There are many more who are still very old and are suffering, and it’s only because of speaking out against the State that they are in custody today. And it’s not just them, right? There are many journalists, many whistleblowers, who have to face the blowback only because of speaking. So when this happens, when we see this in our everyday life around us, when we read about this in newspapers, it creates a fear-psychosis. I mean, I feel it today that students, for example, today do have a sense of fear if they feel that they need to speak out that they are being extremely cautious. I’m not saying it’s not good to be cautious — it is extremely good to be cautious, but at the same time, why should one feel the need to be cautious to call out the State? So, I think it’s firstly the fear-psychosis. People feel that there might be consequences for speaking out against the State. For example, there might even be consequences for holding this podcast. I mean, I don’t know! We never know, right with the kind of surveillance which is taking place in today’s country? And this makes it extremely difficult to speak out against the violence perpetrated by the State. This makes it extremely difficult for people. For example, when we go to different areas and try to mobilise people, you can sense that fear, psychosis, you can sense that, you know, ‘if I speak out, there might be consequences, there might be other consequences which I might face because of speaking out against the State’. So that is something which makes it very, very difficult to speak out against the State- there’s also majoritarian support, which the State naturally enjoys being the State. So, speaking out against the majority is always going to be difficult and has always been difficult. So, I think these are some of the reasons which make it very difficult to speak out against the State.
Uttanshi
Chandni, as you were speaking, I was also thinking of another point that was coming up while you were sharing your reflection — is that, there is also so much attached to the State, right? So many of my welfare schemes, so much of my documentation. It is not just, I think, the fear that I will get arrested or I will get beaten up, but then it goes back to the previous conversation we were having about how this fear of violence, this fear of being treated differently by the State can manifest in other forms as well, which takes away from my ability to lead a life — where I still continue to have access to welfare schemes, where I still continue to have access to some services which are attached to the state government by virtue of it being the government itself. And while we’re thinking about all that, and I think you’ve already given us a few examples of State violence in the Indian context. But I was thinking it may be useful for our listeners and for us to set some more context for the conversation we’ve been having so far by you sharing with us a few examples of what does state violence look like in IndiaAre there any examples of it? Or would you like to elaborate on the examples you’ve already given — just for us to develop their understanding?
Chandni
Taking my example of, say, custodial violence forward, I only spoke about it broadly, but it’s very important to understand that there are various intersections involved and there is intersectional violence which the State perpetrates, right? We’ve seen violence against minorities, violence against the disabled, violence against the LGBT population, violence against transgender, which is much more rampant as compared to violence against an able-bodied upper caste person. At least according to my experience, it is very important to keep intersectionality in mind when we speak about violence. So, I’ll just give you an example of a state policy. So, for example, the Kerala government came out with a policy. They advertised for the post of a female housekeeping staff. There was a separate advertisement for male housekeeping staff, and separate advertising for female housekeeping staff. So, a trans person who identifies as a woman applied to the post for the female housekeeping staff, but the Kerala government refused to give them that post. So, when this went up to court and this was challenged, the court recognized that this is an exclusionary policy that you only have advertisements for the post of a female and a male housekeeping staff. The court in this case — it’s a very recent case, it was only like 10 days ago — acknowledged and went on and quashed this policy and said that the trans person who identifies as a woman can definitely apply to the post of a female housekeeping staff. So, this policy in my mind is an example of violence, right? It is a form of violence. It might not seem like violence because as we spoke that what comes to our mind when we talk about violence is only physical violence, but exclusionary laws are the biggest, biggest, biggest example of the State perpetrating violence. A couple of years ago, we saw the entire debate which was taking place around CAA and NRC, right? And at that point of time, we could see the impact of these laws on the minority community. We could see the impact of these laws on people who are disabled, on trans folks — nobody spoke. I mean, people spoke about it, I’m not saying they didn’t speak about it, but I think it’s very important to identify intersections when it comes to violence and understand the impact of violence on people who belong to marginalised communities or belong to minorities. As I was speaking, we’ve also seen violence against students, against protesters. I’ve seen it during my college days. I don’t know if you both have seen it during your college days, but I’ve definitely seen it rampant when students take out rallies, when they do come out and oppose laws- they do face backlash, not just from the state, but from their university itself, right? And where is that coming? That’s coming because the university is fearing the State. If the university is a public-funded university, the university will fear that the State might stop funding them. When we spoke of welfare schemes, when we spoke of policies, if I go to a slum today and try to mobilise them to speak against the State, they might feel that ‘no, tomorrow, probably the water will get cut out in my area; I might not get my ration from my kirana shop’. So, this is the impact and this is the fear which makes it extremely difficult to speak out against the State. And as we spoke that, you know, spreading misinformation is the biggest, biggest form of violence which we see in today’s world and that is happening all the time. I mean, in the way people are calling it WhatsApp University, but I do see that fake information is spread about different policies, about different schemes of the government,which are circulated on WhatsApp to various people. So, this in itself is also an instance of State violence. We, at least, to add on, I mean in my experiences as a criminal lawyer, we do see State agencies which go ahead and plant evidence against the accused all the time. We see it all the time. So, if they can go to the extent of planting evidence, the instances of wrongful prosecution in the country are extremely high. So, as I was saying, right, that if the State can go to the extent of planting evidence and that happens, I mean, I see it in practice almost every day. So, you can only imagine the other forms of violence which the State is perpetrating, and we’re not even aware of that, right? And I think invisible forms of violence are also which exist and it is extremely difficult to even understand that this is a form of violence that is taking place against us. So as I was saying, right, like at least physical forms of violence, I see it around me as a practitioner all the time and as I spoke about exclusionary laws, about exclusionary policies, welfare schemes, means other forms of violence which we do need to speak out against. So yeah, these are some of the examples of violence which come to my mind.
Sanchi
Thanks so much for taking us through those extremely important manifestations of State violence in our country, Chandni. I think I’ll also speak for our listeners when I say that listening to you today has really broadened my understanding of what violence itself can look like and what are the different ways in which it comes out through the State agencies. And I think, especially, the examples of exclusionary policies that you shared, of how the law itself functions in such binary ways and how that becomes a tool of violence — I think that has really got me thinking and it has definitely given me lots to think about more as well, even after our conversation ends. And how just exclusionary policies then as tools of violence ensure the marginalisation, or the further marginalisation of already marginalised groups. Like you also shared how the CAA & NRC at that time, how we weren’t really looking at the impact it had on already marginalised groups such as people with disabilities, as trans people, and how much this really matters and the weight of this has really got me thinking and I’m wondering about possible resolutions for this now. So Chandni, what do you think? What does accountability look like in such cases and how can it be made possible?
Chandni
I think that’s a question we all need to keep discussing to come up with practical solutions, right? I mean, it’s a question to which there cannot be a concrete answer, but it should be an ongoing debate. So, the first step, according to me, is at least starting a debate and to have an ongoing debate on this particular question on how do we make the State accountable and that will only happen through mobilisation, through spreading awareness, through holding, for example, workshops, through holding awareness sessions, especially for people who do not have access to information right? As I was speaking, that we are all very privileged because we have access to information, but there are a huge list of citizens who do not have access to information, who do not have access to enough news. So, if we are able to reach that population of the country and if we are able to spread awareness — just awareness about State policies to people and I think just start questioning each policy: ‘Do you think this policy is exclusionary? Do you think this policy is inclusive? How does this policy benefit you? Does this policy harm anyone?’ If we are able to start these discussions and debates, I think we will move closer to accountability in the near future. For example, the movement for RTA, right, the Right to Information was in my mind, one of the biggest movements for accountability. And it’s only after years of struggle, years of mobilisation, that today we do have a law of RTI and we do have the right to collect information. And that’s only been possible through mobilisation, through spreading awareness. The other thing which comes to my mind is, as I was saying, that it becomes extremely difficult to speak against the State because of the power structures, right? So, if we are able to break these power structures, if we are able to get power into our hands as citizens — and that will happen only through changing vote bank politics, right? That will happen only when more and more people realise the value of the vote, the value of their vote. It is only then that the power imbalance which exists between the State and the citizens today, will reduce. So, participation in democracy, participation in democratic processes, is also very important to demand accountability and make sure that the State is accountable to its citizens. So I think, yeah, these are some of the instances which come to my mind and, definitely right, it is extremely important to challenge exclusionary policies. For example, the Kerala example I gave you: if the trans person wouldn’t have challenged that policy, that would just go unnoticed. So it becomes very important that — where we feel that a certain policy is exclusionary or biased or discriminatory, it is very important to challenge that policy in courts. And we do have a separation of powers within how the State functions today, right? We do have the judiciary, which is an independent body, which can look into State policies and mechanisms. So, it becomes very important, according to me, to keep questioning and to keep challenging State policies wherever we feel they are exclusionary and discriminatory.
Uttanshi
Thank you so much Chandni. And I fully agree with you when you said that, you know if we start talking about this, it’s a conversation that can go on for as long as time. We are really thankful to hear from you to learn from your everyday experiences and your expertise in this matter. Thank you so much for taking the time out to be able to have this conversation with us. Once again, we’re really thankful, very grateful for you and to be able to have this conversation with you. Before we close, do you have any closing thoughts on this entire conversation? Anything you would like to share with our listeners for them to take back home? Anything that’s coming up for you?
Chandni
Yeah, thank you, Uttanshi. Firstly, thank you for having me over. As last thoughts, as I’ve said throughout this podcast, right, that I feel it is extremely important to keep questioning and it is extremely important to keep the debate alive. So, my only last thought is that whatever you see around yourself, which relates to a State policy, which relates to any state action, I think it’s very important for everyone to question and to challenge the State policy, if you feel it is exclusionary. So, questioning will only make you think more and which will only take you closer to understanding the internal biases you carry, right? Like, as we said that we feel the State, because of its nature of being the State, cannot go wrong. So, it is very important for each one of us to challenge these notions and it’s only then I think that we will see true change, and we’ll be able to challenge State policies and understand violence a little better. So yeah, I think these are my closing remarks and thank you very much for holding this podcast. And I do hope that OFC keeps hosting such podcasts in the future. And this is one of the ways where OFC is conducting these debates and which is one of the ways to actually keep the State accountable. So this is, I think the podcast in itself is an example of demanding accountability from the State, which is great. So thank you very much for having me.
Sanchi
Thank you so much for joining us today, Chandni. And I think that I will speak for everybody who’s listening in to say that we have indeed learned a lot and we are very, very happy to have had you today. And, as Uttanshi said, thanks a lot for your time. Thanks once again.
[Outro]
Uttanshi
Thank you for tuning in today. Please leave us any questions you may have as voice notes on Anchor or in our DMs. We would love to hear from you. This podcast is brought to you by One Future Collective.
Sanchi
Yes, thank you so much. And don’t forget to follow us on Instagram and Facebook at OneFutureCollective and at OneFuture_India on Twitter. And keep an eye out for future episodes out on every second and fourth Thursday of the month. Until next time!
[Outro ends]
Leave us your feedback on the episode as DMs on our social media or as voice notes on Anchor.