Press release I wrote today.

Imagine sitting in a park, hand in hand, with the person you love. The
air is crisp with the smell of winter; the sunset has painted the sky
in crimson hues. The atmosphere seems simply… perfect. Now imagine
being suddenly assailed by sticks, your bewilderment festered by
hateful slurs, by cameras shoved in your face, because the expression
of love in public spaces is vilified, criminalized, worthy of creating
a media debacle. Your attackers – the self-styled keepers of your
'morality' – are not unlawful passers by, but the supposed guardians
of the law.

The already infamous "Operation Majnu" is the talk of the
town this morning. Pictures of the brutalized couples have been
splashed all over the dailies; news channels are unabashedly filming
the utter pain and humiliation of these youngsters. While the violence
inflicted upon the couples is infinitely unjustified and condemnable,
it is important to tackle the reason behind the violence. If brute
force had not been used against the couples, would that make
"Operation Majnu" more valid? Our answer is an unequivocal, resounding
"NO."

The problems with moral policing are so many that is
nearly impossible to mention and consolidate them in one article.
"Operation Majnu" was not the work of a handful of corrupt police
officials. We, as a society that is chronically suspicious of
sexuality removed from marriage, are culpable for the horrific
treatment of the "caught" couples. In other words, moral policing is
not an isolated issue; it is inextricably linked to our knee-jerk
vilification of bar dancers, homosexuality, sex workers, pre-marital
sex: These are all forms of sexuality that traverse the ironclad
framework of marital and reproductive duties. By perpetuating and
indeed enforcing this narrow paradigm, we are only perpetuating
unequal systems of power.

"Eradicating eve-teasing" was the rationale given for the
conception of this operation. For one, "eve-teasing"is but a
sugar-coated way of addressing blatant sexual harassment. More
importantly, equating sexual harassment with consensual sexual
activity is not only a fallacy, but also dangerous. How is the
rounding up of couples in a relationship going to stop unwarranted,
unwanted, insidious sexual attention? If the police want to deal with
sexual harassment, ask them to pay more attention to railways
stations, marketplaces and other such public spaces as these are all
cesspools of misogynist and sexually hostile behaviour. Also, in a
country where sexual relations are shrouded in shame and secrecy,
there are no spaces for couples. Not everyone has a car to canoodle
in; not everyone can or even wants to use motels. Try as they may,
the moral police cannot stop the natural, physical, healthy desires of
young people that have nothing to do with their 'morality.'

We urge everyone – the police, press, lay people – to stop
and think about this question for a minute: If couples have to think
twice before going out in public together, where is this democracy of
which we're supposed to be so proud?

In Solidarity,

India Centre for Human Rights and Law