Most of the laws passed by the Indian parliament do not have actual statutory sanction, if seen from an intellectual perspective. For most the acts are passed by parliamentarians, most of whom do not have much knowledge in English. It is only in English that all citizens are equal before the law. For, in Indian vernaculars, people get split into an array of levels. For example, in the hideously feudal south Indian language Malayalam, You is Nee, Ningal, Thangal/Sar. He is Avan, Ayaal, Adheham/Sar. And more.
In fact, everything in the social system comes in different layers of nobility and/or disrespect and despoiling.
Now, who writes the laws? A few persons who are having pure academic qualifications. Do persons with pure academic qualifications have knowledge? My experience is that they are devoid of knowledge.
For example, I know many persons who are MAs in English, and some of them are college teachers. But ask them as to who is Enid Blyton, or of a nursery rhyme; they have no idea. They then claim that these are not literature. Well then, ask them about an English classical writer like Sir Walter Scott, Oscar Wilde, R L Stevenson, Somerset Maugham; they have not much idea about them. They say, that is all old English. We do not have to study such English. No one reads them.
I once gave the book: Moon and Sixpence by Somerset Maugham to an MA in English, who once told me in a very self-righteous manner I am a post graduate in English. He gave me back the book after one week saying that he couldnt understand the book. It was quite surprising, for my schooling going daughter could read it, while a Post Graduate in English couldnt understand it.
This is more or less the case with the writers of the Acts in the parliament.
There are three Acts that I would like to allude to here.
One is the Right to Education Act.
Second, the Domestic Violence Act.
Third, the Child Labour Act.
In all three of them, I have seen the inputs of mediocrity.
In the case of Right to Education Act, I was witness to the fact that my children who were quite good in so many academic and non-academic subject being forced into schools run by mediocre teachers on the force given to statutory authorities by the Right to Education Act.
In the case of Domestic Violence Act, I see that it goes much beyond the scope of violence, and enters into premises it has no right to. For example, the whole of Indian communication system is based on feudal languages. The right over a wife by so many persons including that of her parents, her uncles, her aunts, her brothers, brother in laws, her sisters, her sister in laws, all the others on her husbands side, the neighbours, her boss, her colleagues and much more can be of draconian levels, given the feudal input in our languages.
It has to be curtailed if a decent family life has to be run.
Moreover, the concept that family is a unit, which is apart from other competing units, has to be understood.
The Domestic Violence Act simply goes to destroy all safeguards that have been built over the centuries. Just because some nut who momentarily got associated with making statutory laws was given some powers to intervene.
Beyond all this, the writer of this Act has some mental condition that seems to hate all men. He or she who wrote this Act seems to be stringed to an idea that if a woman is married to a man, she has to be saved from him. It is a crazy persons idea. Husband and wife is one unit. If this is not understood, then that family shall literally be the slaves of others. For that family will fight it out inside and others will take over them.
Handing over a person to the Indian police is an act that would call for divine retribution. It is an abominable act. Naturally a wife, whose husband is not willing to obey his wifes uncles and aunts dictates will be prodded to hand him over to the police. Indian police personnel come from very low intellectual and mental standards.
What would be the respect that a wife would come to have for a husband who has been insulted in front of her by the police? Insult in Indian communication need not have abusive words. Just a change from Aap to Thoo, or from Ningal to Nee. If he is made to plead in terror, what becomes of their relationship? What about the wife, who sees the power of the police personnel and the lack of power of her husband? Her admiration for them would go up, and for her husband, it would go down.
Respect, I stress, respect, which is the essential item in Indian relationships, vanishes. If this is what the nuts who drafted the Domestic Violence Act aimed at, well then, what they deserve is something equally terrible.
Now, the Child Labour Act. I am of the opinion that children do have the right to work or do business. It only improves their intelligence and skills; and also social mobility. It is better than being under low quality teachers, who would use low level words to them. The issue here is that in our feudal language systems, children generally end up on the lower, despoiling side of the language codes. The protection that children need is from this issue; that is protection from being at the butt end of a lower word attacks. Such words as Nee, Thoo, Avan, Aval, eda, edi etc.