Tuesday, November 16, 2004

The presumption of guilt

November 17

The law usually considers an accused "innocent until proven guilty". However, in the case of Hindus -- and Hindus alone -- in India, it appears that the accused is "guilty until proven innocent". This is what has happened in the case of the Kanchi Acharya, and there are innumerable other cases.

In the case of others, it is "innocent even after proven guilty". For instance, there is Teesta Setalvad, who had a website with a mangled map of India (with all of Jammu and Kashmir given to Pakistan). This website was up for several years. Showing an incorrect map of India is a serious offense in India, a non-bailable, cognizable offense. However, even after it had been demonstrated that Setalvad had this on her website, no charges were pressed against her.

This merely proves that if you are a non-Hindu, you are always innocent. By definition.


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I'm a little confused by this. Isn't Teesta Setelvad a Hindu? Or is it your contention people you don't approve of, like Setelvad, are non-Hindus? I'm not objecting to that contention, I'm just trying to clarify what you are saying.