The co-producer of the banned BBC Documentary 'India's Daughter' today defended the decision to interview one of the December 16 gang-rape convicts saying his "voice" could be found in "many drawing rooms" across the country and should not be treated in isolation.
Dibang, who produced the film along with British filmmaker Leslee Udwin, said the convict Mukesh Singh was "a part" of our society and there was was a need to "expose" such mindset.
"I know this comment can be interpreted in many ways but for me Mukesh is a part of our society. He is one among us...Why don't we want to talk about him? I will take you to drawing rooms and you will find several people like him," he said.
Dibang was speaking at an interaction at the Indian Women's Press Corps here which was also attended by Centre for Women's Development Studies Director Indu Agnihotri, senior journalist Pamela Philipose, PCI member Rajeev Ranjan Nag, AIDWA general secretary Jagmati Sangwan and advocate Arvind Jain.
Explaining the rationale behind including the views of defence lawyers M L Sharma and A P Singh, he said the idea was to "juxtapose" their views with that of the victim's parents.
"When we juxtapose what the advocates are saying with what the parents are saying, things such as they wanted her to study and how they distributed sweets after her birth, we get a contrasting picture," he said.
The senior journalist said the debate around the issue has got "derailed" after the ban but it was in a way "unmasking" a lot of people.
"A lot of people are saying this will impact the delivery of justice but a lot of judges we spoke to said he was not saying anything new. In fact the parents told us we were waging their struggle," he said.
Dibang said the film was not made in haste and they had given due consideration to the possible adverse impact. "This is a story of how the silence around sexual violence was broken after the incident. We consciously put voices of 'we want our city back'," he said.
IWPC President T K Rajalakshmi, who moderated the discussion, said instead of banning the film, a wider debate should have been invited.
"I do not think a ban was necessary. The film could have been critiqued like any other documentary and the debate on violence against women could have been, should have been taken forward like for instance understanding the larger systemic reasons that lie behind unbridled violence against women," she said.
