Private Concerns in Public Discourse: Women-Initiated Community Responses to Domestic Violence

Bhatla, Nandita and Anuradha Rajan. 2003. “Private Concerns in Public Discourse: Women-Initiated Community Responses to Domestic
Violence.”  Economic and Political Weekly 38(17):1658-1664

In this paper, the authors explore women led community based responses to domestic violence across five sites in India. Three community based initiatives were studied for this study.

1. Shalishi – Traditional system of arbitration utilized by Shramaji Mahila Samiti in West Bengal

2. Nari Adalat/ Mahila Panch in Baroda and Rajkot in Gujarat organized by Mahila Samakhya program

3. Nari Adalat/Sahara Sangh in Saharanpur and Tehri Garhwal in Uttar Pradesh organized by Mahila Samakhya program

All three initiatives have evolved from village level processes of village women’s collectives. Village level sanghas(women’s collectives) are the foundation of the Mahila Samakhya program. One Sahayogini(is a village level organizer from the Mahila Samakhya program) is responsible for 10 villages. Here, she organizes sanghas and helps them work on issues that matter to them. As domestic violence became and important issue, the sanghas formed a new forum known as the Nari Adalat(Women’s Court) to deal with the issue. The Nari Adalat(NA) meets at a centralized place in the village. Women with complaints file an application with the NA and they summon the other side to a meeting. Issues of violence are discussed in public meetings and arbitration is initiated. The village sangha provides basic facts required for the arbitration. The Sahara Sangh acts like a centralized pressure group or think tank which discusses strategies to deal with these cases. The cases are handled by the sanghas themselves.The Shalishi on the other hand, does have centralized sittings, but both these groups include important leaders from the village. The Shalishidhars are women trained to take a woman centric approach in handling these cases.

These initiatives are based on the primary premise that decisions through these initiatives which are embedded in the community, are better enforced. Community sanctions seem to have more power than orders from a court far removed from their lives.Psychological pressure is exerted on the perpetrator.  Moreover, courts are much less accessible to poor women. Since these initiatives are embedded in public spaces, these initiatives have been able to convert individual issues into social problems. These initiatives also help in educating the public on this problem.

A democratic process of arbitration is followed since the process occurs in a neutral setting. Finally these initiatives, since they are women led, provide victims a safe space to share their problems. Poor women, seldom have such forums available.

During the arbitration process, when perpetrators provide reasons for the violence, the facilitators of the NA/MP educate the men that violence is not justified at any point. Thus they are able to question some gender stereotypes, thus changing social norms.

By placing the women’s interest as the starting point for negotiations, the facilitators were pushing the limits of the cultural and normative boundaries of the community. Primarily, they were questioning the notion that violence was a private matter.The feminist agenda of the arbitration process was evident in terms of the kind of voice, issues and concerns that were highlighted.

The authors find that women felt a sense of individual transformationin the case resolution process itself. In the Nari Adalat, the victims were finding a space to exercise their own agency and voice.