The low and declining sex ratio in the country is no longer a subject
matter of debate or doubt. The child (0-6 years) sex ratio has declined
from 962 in 1981 to 945 in 1991, 927 in 2001 and to 918 in 2011. If we
had the same sex ratio in 2011 as in 1981 we would have had 3.9 million
more girls. This is the number of girl children that have been
eliminated. The danger is real and present and needs urgent response.
It
is no longer a secret that medical mercenaries determine the sex of the
foetus and disclose it to the parents. They do so for profit and in
violation of the law. An estimated 500,000 to 600,000 girl children are
eliminated by sex-selective abortions every year through nearly twice
the number of sonographies - making it a million rupee industry.
Lucrative
profit margins have made MNCs actively aid and abet this "crime for
profit" - whether it is the suppliers of ultrasound machines or those
facilitating advertisements on the internet or through search engines.
The problem continues unabated.
But today we are at the cusp of
an opportunity. For the first time in so many decades, a prime minister
has recognized the problem from the ramparts of the Red Fort and has
asked the doctors not to fill their coffers by killing the unborn girl
child. He went a step further in Panipat on January 22 and asked the
people whether they would like to eat their bread with the very hands
that were soiled with the blood of the unborn girl child. How much more
forthright can a prime minister be?
And it has not just been
rhetoric. On January 22 the prime minister himself launched the Beti
Bachao, Beti Padhao (Save the Daughter, Educate her) as a flagship
campaign from Panipat in Haryana, challenging the problem at its very
epicenter. It is both a bold gamble and an unprecedented opportunity.
But
let us pause and see how Internet search engines are faring in this
battle. Under the law, advertisements offering sex determination
services are prohibited in India. While the advertisements in print and
television have practically disappeared due to the intervention of
courts, the internet has become a source of vigorous promotion of sex
selection. Various search engines have become equal opportunity
offenders by simultaneously targeting different segments of Indian
society. For the elite, they target advertisements from clinics in
Bangkok and Dubai as also Cyprus, Britain and the US. For the middle
class, ordering of online kits has been made easier by providing easy
access to various links from trillions of internet pages. For the
astrologically inclined there is a vast treasure of mantras, suitable
tithis (dates) and the like, not to speak of the Chinese gender charts
and ovulation advice et al.
The Supreme Court of India,
responding to a PIL filed in February 2000, took a number of pro-active
measures and issued appropriate directions to the authorities concerned .
But the issue of Internet advertisements had, until quite recently,
remained intractable - mostly due to the complex and technical nature of
the operation of the net.
Unlike print or electronic media where
advertisements are viewed by the entire public, the Internet facilitates
direct targeting of only interested persons. Thus there is no public
outrage caused when individuals in their private space access
information and services and commit the crime of sex selection.
While
the response of the ministries concerned had earlier been less decisive
on the technical and legal aspects of the issue, the IT and health
ministries have in a couple of recent hearings taken a clear and firm
stand against the Internet giants. To some extent, this was also
facilitated by the recent developments in the US and Europe, where these
search engine giants have complied with the directions of various
courts to disallow certain contents violative of local laws.
The game
becomes different when these companies face Indian courts. One of the
companies had initially argued that the Indian courts have no
jurisdiction since their servers were located in the US. Interestingly,
some of the search engine companies have stated before the US Congress
that they are bound by the local laws of the destination countries.
Yet,
we find these giants dragging their feet in following the directions of
the Supreme Court in India - for instance, its order of December 4,
2014. One finds some of the offending advertisements not being removed
from the net. On January 28, a two-judge bench gave unambiguous
directions to Google, Yahoo and Microsoft that they "shall not advertise
or sponsor any advertisement" that violates the law.
What should
we do next? Remain vigilant and check the violations on the net and
then file contempt petitions before the Supreme Court with concrete
evidence through printouts and details of the route followed on the net
to reach the advertisements. The violations of Supreme Court orders
amount to contempt - nothing more, nothing less. We must therefore bring
each contempt to the notice of the court. Eternal vigilance is the
price of liberty - in the present crisis, it is the price of survival
itself!
But is that the only way to be explored? No. These
Internet giants also understand the language of markets and profits.
After all they abet violation of the law because of profits, However,
the profits of these companies come from their subscriber base. So, they
sure will understand the language of consumer boycott. Imagine what
will happen if civil society, college and school going girls and boys
and conscientious users start putting these search engines on notice
that they will discontinue using their search engines if they do not
stop aiding and abetting the foeticide service providers. The search
engines will surely see reason. They must be told that they have enough
avenues of making money. Abetting the elimination of millions of girl
children is the least honourable among these.
The Fourth Battle
of Panipat has begun. These net giants, and we, their consumers, have to
decide whether they stand with the daughters of India or stand against
them. Let us fire the first salvo.
(31.3.2015. Satish B Agnihotri
is a retired senior civil servant. The views expressed are personal. He
can be contacted at [email protected] )
