Smt. Ghazala Meenai,
Joint Secretary (SD),
Room No. 616, ‘A’ Wing,
Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001

Dear Ma’am,

 Subject: Recommendations on Rights of Transgender Persons Bill, 2015 released by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment

We, the Telangana Hijra Intersex Transgender Samiti held a consultation on the Government of India’s Rights of Transgender Persons Bill, 2015 on the 30th of December. The Consultation brought together community members from across Telangana and Andhra Pradesh at various communes of hijra and transgender people in Hyderabad to discuss the new bill which has been made available on the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment’s website. We subsequently participated in a consultation on this held by the South India Transgender Samithi of which we are a constituent, which brought together community members from across South India at the Indian Social Institute in Bangalore, on the 30th of December.

The unanimous position arising from this consultation was that the deadline of 4th January, 2016 given by the government to submit comments on the Bill was incredibly short and unfeasible. For example we were only able to properly discuss the bill face-to-face with community members from Hyderabad for their input, and we had only input by phone from some members in the districts. It was agreed by all present that the deadline needs to extend by at least by 45 days with the end date for recommendations being 15^th February 2016. During this period the government of India must take the initiative to consult all community members. This is feasible given the small size of our community. Without such effective consultations and time period given the entire exercise will prove to be a failed one that disregards the varied deeply personal and political struggles of the transgender and intersex communities for self identification and dignity.

In terms of substantively discussing the Bill, the following issues were flagged as seriously worrying:

1. IDENTITY: The entire struggle of transgender and intersex people is for us to be able to live in our chosen identities. However, the bill does not provide a mechanism for self identification – instead the autonomy of the individual is severely diluted through the proposed certification process of a complex two-tiered mechanism which risks trapping transgender and intersex individuals in a bureaucratic apparatus to obtain basic recognition of their identity. It runs contrary to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment’s very own report of 2013 on Transgender people and the principle of self-identification mandated in the NALSA vs. UOI judgment of the Supreme court, which proposed a minimum of procedural barriers for asserting one’s identity. We likewise propose an attestation process through a notarized affidavit to be the only relevant document for change of name and gender on all forms of ID with no insistence on Sexual Reassignment Surgery (SRS), Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT), psychiatric certificates etc. Many of us in the transgender and intersex community have struggled with the deeply unscientific understanding of psychologists, psychiatrists, magistrates, district collectors, social workers, etc. who pathologize the transgender and intersex community and we are not comfortable with them having authority over declaring people as transgender or intersex. Above all, it is both paramount and the inviolable duty of the state under the NALSA vs. UOI mandate of the Supreme court to preserve the autonomy and the sole prerogative of the transgender or intersex individual to decide their chosen gender. Once a transgender or intersex person has filed the notarized affidavit attested by a district magistrate, all government and private bodies that produce identifying documents and certificates, including ration cards, driving licenses, gas connections, private/public educational certificates, bank accounts passports, PAN card, voter ID card should be compelled by law to change the name and gender of the person on the ID/certificates/documents they have issued in the past. They should only list the changed name and gender, and not provide both names as alias the way that ration cards currently function.
2. CERTIFICATION: For benefits from the state, there could be a certification process, but the certification panel needs to include a majority of transgender and intersex people from all the diverse identity backgrounds – equal numbers of transwomen, trans men, intersex, hijra, shivashakti, jogappa, mangalmukhi, aravani, jogta, etc. that are locally and culturally relevant. The composition of the transgender and intersex people on the board should rotate and change every year. Any psychiatrists/social workers/government administrators on the board must be approved by the community members, and the community members should constitute the majority of the board.
3. INTERSEX: Intersex people’s concerns should be incorporated into this bill and they should be included in the scope of the bill. The bill’s title should be expanded to read as “The Rights of Transgender and Intersex Persons Bill”, and every mention of “transgender person” in the bill should be replaced with “transgender or intersex person”.
4. PENALTY: The Bill in its present form is at most a reflection of intent, but has no clauses that elaborate on the penalties for non-compliance. If there no penalties for defaulting on the provisions of the Bill then the bill will be completely unenforceable and will be nothing more than a piece of paper. Such a penalties section was part of Chapter IX, Section 49-50 of the private member’s Rights of Transgender Persons Bill 2014 Bill No. XLIX of 2014 as passed by the Rajya Sabha. It also does not specify a clear line of duties and responsibilities when it comes to governmental and non- governmental agencies. Beyond that, it was also felt that the Bill needs to cover a more specific range of offences against the community beyond what it already does, including atrocities, police violence, name-calling, lack of access to public and religious spaces, and exclusion even from burial grounds.
5. VIOLENCE: The way the bill defines violence is seriously flawed. To start, it is limited to “intentional use of physical force or power” which includes self harm. First of all, defining physical harm as having to be intentional to be considered by this bill limits the reach of the bill and compromises cases of violence on transgender and intersex people by requiring proof of the intention of the assailant/perpetrator. Also since suicide rates are very high in the transgender community it is worrying that self harm is also treated on the same footing as other forms of violence – this would effectively make most transgender people targets of this bill and make people’s lives even more miserable when they act on suicidal feelings. We welcome the revision of the IPC to protect transgender and intersex people from sexual assault which is a frighteningly regular source of violence, and this should be implemented for all transgender and intersex people regardless of the physical/surgical state of their bodies. Section 377 of the IPC should be changed so that when transgender or intersex people are sexually assaulted only the rapist is punishable but not the victim/survivor regardless of their body and chosen gender, and consensual sex between any two people should not be criminalized. This bill also does not take emotional or verbal violence against transgender and intersex people seriously, nor does it take adequate measures to guard against major perpetrators of violence against transgender and intersex people: police, partners/clients, and the family. The police are treated as protectors of transgender and intersex people and there are sections of the proposed bill guarding against police inaction if crimes occur on transgender people, but nothing to guard against or effectively punish atrocities by police. Also, transgender and intersex people who are often survivors of police repression, atrocities, entrapment and corruption, should be able to directly approach the Executive Magistrate on cases of violence, if they are not comfortable approaching the police, as per chapter II, Section 10 of the Rights of Transgender Persons Bill 2014 Bill No. XLIX of 2014 passed by the Rajya Sabha. Specific groups also must have protection mechanisms for the specific kinds of atrocities and violence they face: for Jogappas protection from temple authorities, for transmen who are forcibly married it is the husband and in-laws, for hijras in sex work protection from police and clients, and for many transgender and intersex people, especially in childhood, it is the family and school that becomes their source of violence.
6. EMPLOYMENT: Employment is a major problem faced by transgender and intersex people and the proposed government bill has ended up de-incentivizing employers in the private and government sector from considering transgender and intersex people for employment by altogether deleting sections 22, 23 and 24 of the Rights of Transgender Persons Bill No. XLIX of 2014. As per that Section 22 of that bill, we demand a clear demarcation of 2% reservations in every government or government aided establishment. With transgender and intersex people being such a stigmatised minority within the proposed OBC category, and SC/ST transgender and intersex people also being a stigmatised minority within the SC/ST category, we fear that mere inclusion in those categories would not suffice to produce even a single jobs for any transgender or intersex individuals. When it comes to the issue of reservations, we as a community would like a clearly demarcated internal reservation quota based on gender – within the SC/ST or OBC categories depending on whether the transgender/intersex individual is born SC/ST or not, respectively. As per the former Section 23 of the Rights of Transgender Persons Bill No. XLIX of 2014, we also ask that the employers in the private sector with transgender/intersex employees comprising 2% of their overall workforce in India be incentivized with special benefits or tax exemptions, and with a monitoring mechanism for oversight. Across public and private sector, transgender/intersex employees must be have a protected class status as in many other developed democracies. Section 24 of that bill also provided for a Special Employment Exchange for employers to furnish information on such vacancies for transgender people, and section 17 provided for an unemployment allowance to unemployed transgender people registered with special employment exchange for more than 2 years – we ask for these sections to be reinstated and to include intersex people. Without all of these provision, no real employment opportunities will arise for transgender and intersex In that context, already after the NALSA judgment, we have seen society and the police intensify the criminalization of sex work and begging, on the assumption that other jobs are available. We demand the decriminalisation of these forms of work and the implementation of all the proactive measures listed above to provide other forms of livelihood to transgender and intersex people.
7. EDUCATION: We demand the clear demarcation of reservations of 2% in education in the government owned and funded institutions as laid out in Chapter V, Section 21 of the private member’s Rights of Transgender Persons Bill 2014 Bill No. XLIX of 2014 as passed by the Rajya Sabha. Also, Chapter IV on education only safeguards the rights of transgender students in government and government aided educational institutions and keeps the large private sector in education exempt from safeguarding the rights of transgender students. This chapter must apply to the entire educational sector regardless of whether the institution is government owned, government funded or private, and it must include intersex students.
8. COMMISSIONS AND COURTS: The bill also removes some crucial provisions from the Rights of Transgender Persons Bill No. XLIX of 2014 as passed by the Rajya Sabha, such as National and State Commissions for Transgender Persons, special transgender courts, and access to free legal services under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Many transgender people feel these would be essential to strengthen the struggle for transgender dignity, and necessary for the enforcement of this bill, although whether they empower transgender people would depend on the details of the proposed structure. For example, it is important that these structures function with sensitivity, and speed, that any decision making process should have a majority representation by diverse members of our community, and the structure should be accessible to all community members.
9. IMPLEMENTING NON-GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES: This bill, along with previous bills, has described in Chapter VI a process of ‘rehabilitation’ for transgender people to be formulated in consultation with, and with financial assistance to the “non-governmental organizations” working for the cause of transgender persons. We do not agree that we need to be‘rescued’ or ‘rehabilitated’ since nothing is wrong with us; instead there are problems with societal respect for us – hence we would prefer support for more education and livelihood opportunities. To do so, for the government to rely only on registered non-governmental organizations is deeply problematic and systemically flawed as there are many leakages and instances of corruption in the NGOs that receive large sums of money to “work for the cause of transgender person”. We would prefer that the appropriate government and local authorities have broad based consultations with the transgender and intersex community at large, with unfunded and unregistered informal community collectives, and with individual transgender and intersex individuals unaffiliated to NGOs. If the government directly administers and implemented programmes and policy for our community, operating out of a transgender/intersex welfare centre or community hall in each district, we believe that would be more effective in implementing schemes for the welfare and support of the community.
10. MARRIAGE, INHERITANCE, ADOPTION: Several aspects of the right to life and liberty of transgender and intersex people to function equally to all people in society, such as equal access to marriage, access to all marriage-like benefits between transgender and intersex people sharing a home who might not be coupled/partnered or want to get married, but who are otherwise each other’s primary caregivers, the right to inheritance and adoption by trans people are not included in this bill. These should be incorporated to provide true equality to transgender and intersex people.
11. CHILDREN: Children who are intersex should not be subjected to “corrective” medical surgeries that modify their bodies to fit conventional ideas of the bodies of male or female children. We recommend that the bill cover the rights of “transgender, intersex and gender non conforming” children, since not all children who identify as transgender as adults, will identify that way as children. However, any children who do not conform to gender stereotypes can be targeted for ridicule and the bill should protect all of them. Furthermore, the state should explicity ‘provide them appropriate support for the exercise of the rights’ of transgender children, as mandated in Chapter II, Section 5 of the Rights of Transgender Persons Bill No. XLIX of 2014, because without family support, transgender and intersex children may not in fact be able to exercise these rights.
12. HEALTH: We welcome warmly the provision of free sex reassignment surgery and ask that this include free hormone replacement therapy (HRT). All medical insurance providers must cover HIV and AIDS patients, and instead of separate HIV sero-surveillance centres for transgender people mentioned in Chapter VI, which further segregates an already vulnerable population of transgender people living with HIV and AIDS, we ask for complete access to existing medical care systems.
13. INFRASTRUCTURAL LOGISTICS: Hijras, intersex people and transgenders routinely face daily trouble in accessing bathrooms and public transport. One source of medical problems for the transgender community is access to bathrooms. More single-stall bathrooms like the bathrooms found in trains should be set up in public areas without any gendered signs, so that we can go in and out without harassment or trouble. In public transport, we should be able to avail bus seats or coaches reserved for people with disabilities as we face intense sexual assault and harassment in general coaches. Transgender and intersex people who do not get government jobs with proper pension benefits should also get access to pension schemes like Asara pension scheme, medical insurance/arogyashri cards, white ration cards, DWACRA self help groups, etc.

Community members felt that while the Bill takes an important step forward, it does not go far enough. Though this Bill is a long pending and much required measure, the time allotted for consultation is and feedback is limited. Ultimately, the point is reiterated -the Government needs to extend the deadline for comments on the Bill, and to carry out effective consultations with the masses of the community instead of a selected set of representatives.

We, the members of the Transgender and Intersex community in Telangana along with people from the communities in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala acknowledge the efforts of the government and judiciary to affirm the rights of Transgender persons. For the past year we have been analysing the NALSA judgement and the Transgender Rights Bill, 2014 (Bill) as it was introduced in the Rajya Sabha and the form in which it has been introduced in the Lok Sabha. With slight variations they all seem to acknowledge the need to address Transgender rights through a new law and focused effort at the national, state and district level. Our process of consultations have been rigorous within the community, ranging from one to one, group meetings at the districts, state and regional levels. We hope our feedback is taken seriously so that the provisions of the Bill that can support us in exercising our constitutional rights and living a life of dignity.

CONTACT:

For Telangana Hijra Transgender Samiti:

Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli

E mail: vyjayanti.vasanta.mogli@gmail.com, vyjayanti.vasanta.mogli@telanganahijratrasngendersamiti.org

Mobile: (91) 988 556 7958

Bittu Karthik Kondiah

E mail: bittu.kondaiah@gmail.com, bittu.karthik.kondaiah@telanganahijratransgendersamiti.org

Mobile (91) 817 954 2651

For A.P.: Rachana 8019378266

For Karnataka: Kumar B 9481148916

For Tamil Nadu: Sankari 9551837719

For Kerala: Sonu 08129193225

Telangana Hijra Intersex Transgender Samiti

Contact:
Rachana Mudraboyina 9866177712
Bittu 8179542651
Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli 9885567958

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

City: Hyderabad | Date: February 21, 2015 | Time: 12:30 pm

Telangana Hijra Transgender Samiti acknowledges the Cyberabad police leadership taking departmental action against the policemen who denuded our Hijra sister, and for solving the Pravallika murder case and taking action against Mr. Venkat who had perpetrated several brutal attacks upon the transgender community over the last several months. The Samiti warns that any future transphobic attacks on the community will be similarly protested with our full energy until action is taken, and we call for action for the speedy implementation of the NALSA vs. UOI judgment of the honorable Supreme Court.

We, the members of the Telangana Hijra Transgender Samiti, after several months of relentless struggle, with support from the media, announce that

1. The Cyberabad Police Commissioner’s Office has investigated and taken action against the policemen who sexually assaulted our Hijra sister S (name withheld) by denuding her for four hours in the KPHB police station on 20^th January 2015 on the pretext of Pravallika murder investigation and jeopardizing her health as an HIV+ person. We hope that policemen and other transphobic people across the state will take note and treat all hijras and transgenders with dignity and respect, as we will rigourously protest any assault on transgender people and ensure that action is taken against any assaulter. We acknowledge the efforts of the Cyberabad and KPHB police leadership for taking internal action against these policemen and the effort of Mr. Kartikeya, DCP for making it clear that the Telangana police will not tolerate transphobia from anyone including its own ranks. We hope they will continue to take a stand against transphobia and also the sexism, casteism, classism and communalism displayed by the police and state towards citizens on a regular basis. THITS has an understanding of the sexist, casteist, classist and communal nature of the state.

2. The KPHB police also solved the Pravallika murder case and arrested the prime accused viz. Kurma Venkateshulu alias Venkat Yadav, Rayapati Rajashekhar Reddy and Kakarla Tirumaleshwar Reddy. We are very hopeful that the fourth accused viz. Ramudu who is absconding will soon be arrested and urge the Cyberabad and KPHB police to arrest him at the earliest. The arrest of Venkat comes after several nights when the transgender community struggled on the street to collectively fend off attacks by Venkat Yadav.

3. We appeal to the media not to refer and/ publish the names assigned at birth to Hijra & Transgender people, and to instead address them by the names of their chosen gender. For example, some newspapers referred Pravallika by the name assigned to her at her time of birth, which was clearly not her chosen identity.   This is important to ensure compliance to the NALSA vs. UOI judgment of the honorable Supreme court and would also ensure responsible and ethical reporting of the incidents involving Hijra and Transgender people.

We appeal to the Government of Telangana and all state agencies to speedily implement the NALSA vs. Union of India judgment of the honorable Supreme court and take concrete steps to help us reclaim our dignity and rightful place in society that is continually under assault by the cultures of silence, invisibilisation, prejudice and violence. We draw attention to our collective struggle to survive in a society that shuns difference, stifles free expression and violently rejects the existence of sexualities and gender identities that differ from the norm.

Our demands include the following:

1. Immediate implementation of the NALSA vs. Union of India judgment of the honorable Supreme Court by the central and state governments, in terms of

a. provision of reservation in jobs and education
b. the framing and implementation of equitable and inclusive laws for the prevention of atrocities, violence, sexual assault and preventing any form of discrimination of sexual and gender minorities
c. to ensure access to jobs, education, housing, bathrooms, public transport, legal recognition in the chosen gender, marriage, adoption, etc.

1. Establishment of a statutory National Transgender Commission on the lines of the National Women’s Commission, as well as a state welfare board run by direct democratic vote by all transgender identified people. This Board should be empowered to facilitate co-ordination among various government departments allowing access of Hijra and transgender women into the existing government welfare schemes. Especially for access to free gender transition medical care, housing, jobs and education.
2. Sensitization of all government organizations, educational institutions, places of work, health care establishments, and private organizations and all other places of day to day life to facilitate acceptance and inclusion of all gender and sexual minorities

Thanking you,

Telangana Hijra Transgender Samiti

I thought immediately of a transgender friend of mine who suffered a major loss late last year. Her Nani, a close relative within the trans community, was stabbed to death in her own home. Her savings, amounting to a few lakhs, and jewellery, had been stolen. The police refused to investigate the case. She had been living with a man that she considered her partner, whom she cared for and gave much of her money to. My friend was certain that this man was involved in the murder. Finally, after a struggle on the part of local activists, the man was questioned. He accused her Nani of “sexually torturing” him. This “sexual torture”- whatever that means!- must have been so unbearable, my friend remarked sarcastically, that he had no choice but to murder her and take all her money! Despite all this evidence, in the minds of the police and the public, the heterosexual man was blameless and the murdered person was the villain.

Even after her demise, my friend’s Nani was suspected of having abetted her own murder. This incredible reversal was achieved by invoking the image of the deceptive, sly, oversexed transwoman, who turns cruel when refused. Transgender people endure horrific kinds of bodily violation everyday because of this image, and they are repeatedly held to blame for this same horrific suffering. This is the image that Shankar has exploited in this film, to the great enjoyment of the audience.

A few days ago, on January 17, 2015, Pravallika, a hijra sex worker in Hyderabad, was murdered [1]. The police refused to investigate the case. The murder was the culmination of a steadily rising tide of transphobic violence. Activists had repeatedly told police how hijra sex workers were pelted with large stones, thrashed on their heads with beer bottles, slit with sharp knives on their limbs, faces and genitalia, and robbed of their income and savings [2]. On Jan 20, the police finally decided to intervene, by interrogating Pravallika’s friend, another hijra sex worker. They confiscated her cell phone and locked her in the police station for 4-5 hours. They made her strip naked and manhandled her body, claiming to “check if she was really a transwoman”. She had not had a penectomy, but cited the recent NALSA judgment by the Supreme Court, asserting the right of a person to claim trans identity independent of surgical status [3]. The police did not stop manhandling her. She was eventually forced to admit that she was HIV positive and that she could not bear the cold for so long. Their only response to this was to cover their face and mouth when they came near her; they did not return her clothes. They have now accused the community of conspiring to kill Pravallika.

The same week, on January 22, a transgender sex worker was picked up for questioning regarding a murder case in Pulianthope police station, Chennai. Police suspended her by her legs from the ceiling and inserted a lathi into her post-operative genital opening. They left her hanging and bleeding for hours. The next day, they arrested someone else and let her go. She is currently receiving treatment at Stanley Medical College Hospital. Some activists associated with Nirangal are trying to file a human rights violation report against the police.

In 2008-2009 there were multiple cases in Chennai and Bangalore, accusing transgender women of “deceiving” innocent men. With minor variations, news reports claimed that transwomen lured these innocent heterosexual men into their dark lair, castrated them, and forced them into prostitution. Following these cases, the Bangalore police raided hundreds of hijras’ homes in the neighborhood of Dasarahalli, leaving many homeless and bereft of all their belongings. These raids have increasingly become a common occurrence, along with other kinds of violence on trans bodies, perpetrated by police, rowdies, family members, and the general public.

Some people still obstinately argue that these are “stereotypes” that don’t reside in real life. “I mean come on yaar, Bollywood stereotypes everyone! Look at “Chennai Express”!”. These people miss the fact that the image of the deceptive, cruel transgender woman is much more than a harmless stereotype. It is a construct of our criminal justice system, dating back to the 19th century.

In 2009, the Karnataka Government amended The Police Act to include a clause permitting “the registration and surveillance of all eunuchs reasonably suspected of kidnapping and emasculating young boys” [4]. The wording of the act borrows almost verbatim from The Criminal Tribes Act of 1871, a colonial-era legislation premised on the notion that certain communities “breed” criminal tendencies. The law holds that in the case of such “innately criminal” communities, suspicion of committing a crime, or of planning to commit a crime, is enough reason to detain an individual without trial for up to one year. In Tamil Nadu this lives on in the form of “The Goondas Act”, under which Section 377 was recently brought [5].

The “deceptive cruel transgender woman” is an image into which real police conduct real investigations that cost real money, for which real people are jailed and really killed, for which real newspaper reporters are sent to cover real cases that happen in real courts. Try laughingly telling the person suspended from the ceiling of Pulianthope police station, bleeding for hours: “Lighten up, yaar! It is just a stereotype! Over time, we will educate the police! For now, its just a movie!”

The suffering of transgender people has been extensively documented. There is ample evidence to show that it happens everyday, everyday, everyday [6]. Yet the transgender person emerges as the sick monster that is responsible for their own suffering. Something about the laughter in the theatre today seemed to indicate how this reversal happens. Witnessing and documenting trans suffering doesn’t provoke outrage: instead it becomes a kind of pornography, a fodder for deep and genuine enjoyment. When witnessed, for some it leaves no impact; they feel a sense of unruffled calm no matter how loud the noise. For others, it even provokes a real sense of pleasure: smiles, big belly laughs, thundering applause. The pain turns into a kind of tragicomedy, a lilting music.

References

[1] https://new2.orinam.net/statement-telangana-hijra-transgender-samiti-to-condemn-police-brutality/

[2] https://www.facebook.com/telanganahijratrans

[3] http://www.lawyerscollective.org/updates/supreme-court-recognises-the-right-to-determine-and-express-ones-gender-grants-legal-status-to-third-gender.html

[4] http://infochangeindia.org/agenda/access-to-justice/policing-hijras.html

[5] http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/goondas-act-preventive-detention-law-in-tamil-nadu-amendments-a-threat-to-personal-liberty/article6332457.ece

[6] http://www.pucl.org/Topics/Gender/2004/transgender.htm

More articles on “I” on Orinam and mainstream media

Smiley’s letter to Director Shankar: https://new2.orinam.net/ta/open-letter-to-director-shankar-i-ta/

News coverage of protests against “I”: http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/transgenders-speak-out-at-second-protest-against-i/article6817247.ece

We, the members of Telangana Intersex Hijra Transgender Samiti of Hyderabad, request your solidarity in our fight for justice in this transphobic world.  After forty brutal attacks with knives and rocks on almost sixty transgender women in Hyderabad in the last year, our sister Pravallika was murdered in one such attack.  In the midst of our outrage over police inaction and complicity in her murder, another Hijra sister was picked up by the same KPHB station police claiming to investigate the murder and was stripped and tortured for hours.  This police brutality must be fought.

Join us in Hyderabad at Sundarayya Park, Baghlingampally at 5 pm, 24 January 2015, to protest and fight for justice. Please note change of venue from the previously proposed OU.

If you live outside Hyderabad, please organise solidarity demonstrations in your city.

Only a multitude of voices can combat the transphobic brutality faced by working class trans people on a daily basis.

Below are our statements on the murder of Pravallika and the sexual assault of the other Hijra sister.

JUSTICE FOR PRAVALLIKA

We, the members of the Telangana Intersex Hijra Transgender Samiti, denounce the dastardly acts of transphobic violence that led to the gruesome murder of Pravallika, our sister transgender in the wee hours of Saturday, 17th January 2015.

Transphobic violence has been on a steady rise in the recent past.  We, the Transgenders and Hijras, who are largely shunned by mainstream society, have no source of employment and livelihood.  We don’t get jobs even if they were to try hard and the fact is that NO ONE gives us jobs.  This fact is abundantly acknowledged by the apex court of the land in its NALSA Vs. UOI judgement.  We are consequently forced to live off beggary and sex work.  Despite the recent NALSA judgement of the Supreme court of India on 15th April 2014, the living conditions of Transgenders remain deplorable and sub-human.  No steps were taken to ameliorate the lives of Hijras and Transgenders despite the judgement of the honourable Supreme court.  Time and again, transgenders have been violently attacked in both Cyberabad and Hyderabad across police stations.  Despite our complaints across these police stations, action wasn’t taken till date to bring the perpetrators of violence to justice.

Over the past few quarters, Hijra sex workers have bled having been pelted with sharp and large stones, thrashed on their heads with beer bottles, stabbed and slit with sharp knives on their limbs, faces and genitalia and have been robbed of their hard earned income and savings.  Our homes were ransacked and our hard earned savings and valuables stolen.  We were harassed and publicly humiliated in our homes and neighbourhoods till extortionists obtained money from us.

Pravallika was born in a remote village of Telangana from a very poor back ground.  She always identified herself as a transgender and faced an enormous amount of stigma in throughout her lifetime.  She was a confident graduate with no opportunities and was constrained to eke a living out of beggary and sex work.  Despite all such odds, Pravillika was known by her friends as cheerful, positive and a vibrant transwoman.  Her life would not have been cut short if only the state and the police had acted on the complaints of Hijra and Transgender people and in time.

This case of ghastly gruesome murder of Pravallika is the culmination of the callousness and apathy of the state and the police.  We demand that the following at the earliest:

1. Fair and transparent investigation of Pravallika’s murder
2. Release of the post mortem report and FIR
3. Implementation of the NALSA judgement to provide education, employment and welfare schemes for Hijra and Transgender people

SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A HIJRA SISTER:

On the evening of Tuesday, 20th January 2015 i.e. yesterday, our friend, a Hijra sex worker was taken away for interrogation to the KPHB police station.  She is a colleague and friend of the late Pravallika and is also our friend.  On the pretext of interrogation, the police blamed her for conspiring to murder Pravallika and resorted to sub-human methods.  The police caught her while she was returning home from her hot spot and confiscated her mobile first to ensure that she couldn’t contact anyone for help.

Barely three days before this incident, the police had themselves urged her in our presence at the Gandhi hospital mortuary to continue going to the hot spot.  We were a minimum of twenty people who witnessed this request from the police.  They said that they suspected that Pravallika may have been murdered by her clients and hence wanted to use our Hijra friend as a bait and a decoy.  Despite this, she was treated like a criminal, DENUDED by policemen with the alleged reason of “checking whether or not she was really a transwoman”.  She had to remain nude for 4-5 hours as they manhandled and tortured her, questioning her transidentity all through, as she was uncastrated.  She told them that transidentity cannot and should not be restricted to a person body or be reduced to one’s anatomy as enshrined in the NALSA judgement but the police demonstrated total disregard for the NALSA Vs. UOI judgement of the Supreme court.

Naked as she was in the biting cold of a wintry night, she pleaded for her clothes but they couldn’t care.  Finally, with no other option left, she was constrained to reveal her HIV+ve status and explain that she is highly vulnerable to infections and that she can’t afford to be nude for so long in such cold weather.  Sadly, that too fell on deaf ears.  This only resulted in them keeping a safe distance from her having masked their noses and mouths but they didn’t return her clothes to her.  Our sister transgender is very ill now and struggling with the consequences of this torture.

Pravallika’s mobile is now on surveillance after her death.  Preliminary investigations revealed that some police personnel were in touch with her before her murder.   They claimed to be “just her friends”.  It is nothing new that the policemen who harass and torture Hijra people often seek free sexual favors from them and call themselves “just friends” when found in such compromising situations.   With this coming to light and the unusual urgency shown by the police to paint this case as an “intra-hijra feud leading to Pravallika’s murder”, the very role of the police appears suspect and perhaps complicit in this crime.

In addition, police have called other members of our Samiti, asked for sexual favours and asked intrusive questions about our genitals amounting to sexual harassment. 

As much as we would like to and wish to, we ARE NOT ABLE TO TRUST the police anymore and demand that the following at the earliest:

1. Immediate action be taken against the police personnel who sexual assaulted our Hijra sister by forcibly stripping her
2. Judicial enquiry for a free, fair and transparent investigation of Pravallika’s murder
3. Any investigation of Hijra/Trans women be done only by the ACP and in the ACP’s office, in the presence of a Samiti member and a lady police person and only during day time
4. Speedy implementation of the spirit of the NALSA judgement

Below is the copy of the complaint filed to Deputy Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, by S, the hijra woman who was assaulted by the police. Click to enlarge.

Bangalore, Nov 26, 2014: Over the past two days, approximately 167 members of the transgender community have been taken away by the police and kept at the Beggars’ colony. These detentions have been entirely arbitrary, and we are apprehending more detentions in the coming days. We are greatly concerned by this mass detention and violations of human rights.

Most detenues were not on the streets begging or doing any act that is prohibited under the Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975. Most of them were going about their daily chores when they were arbitrarily picked up by police officers and taken away to the Beggar’s colony in Hoysalas. The police even walked into the homes of the hijras and dragged them out. It is to be noted that even those hijras who went to the police station because they were called by other arrested hijras were also arrested. Clearly the objective of the police was not merely to pick up those who were begging, but in effect all persons who answered to the description of being hijra.

The reason for this mass detention is unknown to us but there is information suggesting that this is retaliation for the misbehaviour of one of the members of the community. Even if this were true, collective punishment inflicted on the entire hijra community for the wrongdoing of just one person is not appropriate. It is unconscionable that the entire transgender women community should be punished for the alleged wrongs of some members of the community

The detainees were not released even on an undertaking given by organizations working on sexuality rights. This is tantamount to arbitrary detention as the majority of those arrested have not committed any offence under the Beggary Act. This is violative of the fundamental freedom of movement which all citizens enjoy under Article 19 of the Constitution. This state action has taken on the character of a purge of hijras from the city of Bangalore violating guaranteed constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court of India in the judgment of National Legal Services Authority v Union of India has upheld the rights of the transgender community. The apex court has held that, “We, therefore, conclude that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity includes any discrimination, exclusion, restriction or preference, which has the effect of nullifying or transposing equality by the law or the equal protection of laws guaranteed under our Constitution, and hence we are inclined to give various directions to safeguard the constitutional rights of the members of the TG community. Hijras, Eunuchs, apart from binary gender, be treated as ‘third gender’ for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of our Constitution and the laws made by the Parliament and the State Legislature.”

In furtherance of the said judgment, the Karnataka State Government has formulated a policy for Transgenders in Karnataka. The Preamble to the policy states that “steps to create public awareness should be taken so that TGs feel that they are also part of the society, regain their respect and are not to be treated as untouchables. The solution to their problems requires concerted efforts to mainstream them and adoption of an inclusive approach in all spheres of life.” The policy then goes on to provide for a range of measures to create an enabling environment for the transgender community, amongst which include protection from harassment and abuse at multiple levels. The arbitrary mass detention of members of the transgender community is in violation of the Supreme Court’s judgment and the policy by the Karnataka State Government.

Therefore, we demand the State Government immediately fulfill the following demands:

1. Direct the release of the members of transgender community immediately;

2. Direct that there be no further detention of members of the transgender community;

3. Initiate departmental inquiry into this arbitrary detention by police officers under whose direction the purge of hijras from the city was carried out.

4. Compensation for the wrongful arrest and consequent mental trauma suffered by those arrested.

Please attend the protest today, the 26th of November, at Town Hall, from 4 pm, against the illegality of police action against transgenders.

Supported by : Karnataka Sexual Minorities Forum, Alternative Law Forum, People’s Union for Civil Liberties,Karnataka Janshakthi

Coverage by the Bangalore Mirror is here.

The text of the application made by the Government of India, downloadable here, appears less alarming than the IE headline. The application, which seems to have been filed at the instance of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, seeks clarification on the NALSA judgement of April 15, 2014.

1. In our reading, some of the points raised in the application that are not a cause for concern, or a step in the right direction, are as follows:

• The  application points out that the term ‘eunuch’ is not an equivalent of ‘transgender’ or a variant of the latter and hence it has to be left out. => This is true, and many in the transgender community have pointed out that we consider the term derogatory.
• “…They will include trans-men and trans-women (whether or not they have undergone sex re-assignment surgery or hormonal treatment or laser therapy etc)… and a number of socio-cultural identities, such as kinnars, hijras, aravanis, jogtas, etc.” => This is a welcome point, and bears repeating because some groups, media and government departments around the country have narrowly interpreted the NALSA judgement (particularly Justice Sikri’s section) as being purely concerned with hijras, kinnars and others of transfeminine gender experience.

2. We are ambivalent on the following point:

• TG should not include cisgender lesbian, gay and bisexual people => SC has, in one place (page 93, pt. 107) in the NALSA petition, mentioned that occasionally T is used to refer to LGBT spectrum and GoI wants to ensure NALSA ruling does not apply to LGB. The ruling actually made it clear they were proceeding with the narrow (minus LGB) definition, while acknowledging that sexual orientation a separate issue from gender identity and that some trans people may be LGB. This is thus a non-issue. We fail to understand why GoI seeks a clarification on this matter, unless it seeks to emphasise to its more conservative supporters that it remains opposed to reconsideration of Section 377, an issue that discussion of same-sex orientations among cisgender people may bring up.

3. Two issues that may be a matter of concern:

• The statement that six months (as stipulated by the Supreme Court) is not enough to implement all the changes mandated by the Supreme Court, and the recommendations made by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment need to be rolled out in a phased manner => We hope this does not lead to indefinite delays or any backtracking on the promises of the NALSA judgment.
• The application’s point that the categorisation of transgender people as OBC is a determination that would have to be made by the National Commission for Backward Classes => this could, again, result in indefinite delays until such time as the National Commission considers the issue.

4. While we appreciate the effort the application makes to clarify terminology by eschewing the term ‘eunuch’ we note that the definitions of male-to-female and female-to-male transgender people have been interchanged in the application.

5. Finally we urge the government and Supreme Court to expedite action towards justice, equality and full citizenship for transgender people. If the recent developments in the Ajmer, Rajasthan, case of policy brutality and sexual assault of a hijra are any indication, we remain far from this goal.

Update Sept 12:

An MSJE official has explained that the application was initiated in response to

– representations from community members who had expressed concern that most states preparing to establish transgender welfare boards were interpreting the NALSA judgement to include only hijras, and not considering other trans people

– confusion resulting from a line in the NALSA ruling about ‘transgender’ occasionally used as an umbrella term that includes lesbian, gay and bi people. This has, apparently, led to concerns that cisgender LGB people would use this definition to claim OBC status for themselves.

– concerns raised that SC/ST transpeople may be forced to identify as OBC

– procedural issues regarding who makes the determination of OBC

– the need to let the SC know that the term ‘eunuch’ is neither acceptable nor accurate as a synonym for TG. The NALSA judgement uses ‘eunuch’, ‘third-gender’ and ‘transgender’ synonymously in some portions of the text. Many members of the diverse trans* communities have objected to use of the term eunuch.

Background Reading:

• NALSA judgement
• Government of India application
• Recommendations of the Experts Committee, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
• Read more on the NALSA ruling including summaries and analyses from legal and community perspectives here.

a) It is good that the judgment recognizes ‘transgender’ broadly to encompass various prominent regional and trans-regional communities/identities like Hijras, Kothis, Aravanis, Jogappas, Shiv Shaktis, etc., (pgs. 11, 56, 109, 110), and also at least *tries* to recognize the diversity and variety in these communities, which may not conform to a singular pre-set idea of what being ‘transgender’ means. This means that potentially it could serve as a strategic tool to advocate legal rights for and counteract gender/sexuality-based discrimination against a range of persons and communities, including gender variant LGB people. However, as several people have already pointed out, trans men and trans masculine spectrum people are mentioned far less (only on pgs. 35 and 61 so far as I could find), and one wonders whether the benefits of the judgment will reach out to them as much. Already in the media coverage, one can see how it has been largely taken to pertain to Hijras and their recognition as a ‘third gender’; and at several points the judgment almost conflates ‘transgender’ with ‘hijra’, e.g. the repeated use of the phrase ‘hijra/transgender’ (pg. 128).

b) That brings me to the question of gender identity and recognition. The judgment has been much lauded for upholding “transgender persons’ right to decide their self- identified gender”, whether as male, female or third gender/transgender, and for asking states to grant such legal recognition (pg. 128) – without mentioning a requirement for surgery or hormones at least at that precise part of the judgment. However, the judgment is very unclear, confused and even conflicted on the procedures for granting such recognition, and contradictorily veers between gender self-determination and biological essentialism. At one point it cites the Argentina model which allows for self-identification without requiring medical certification, a model which has been lauded by many trans* activists. Yet at other points it seems to suggest that ‘psychological tests’ would be necessary (pgs. 45, pg 84), which is potentially very problematic given the constraints of how diagnosis of gender dysphoria works in psychiatry and medicine, as it is often based on binary and linear models of identification, which works for some but not other trans/gender variant people. At one point it even seems to stipulate the biologically essentialist requirement that surgery to change ‘physical form’ would be necessary for recognition as (trans) male or female, even if not for ‘third gender’ (pg. 108, “we are of the opinion that… a person has a constitutional right to get the recognition as male or female *after SRS*, which was not only his/her gender characteristic but has become his/her physical form as well”, my emphasis.) Since it passes the onus for legal identity recognition on to central and state governments, it seems likely that different states will interpret it in their own ways and will fix the procedures that they deem fit, which probably means that procedures will be haphazard, will vary between states, and that there will probably be quite a bit of gender policing by state bureaucratic mechanisms (determining who can be third gender, who can be recognized as transitioned male or female, etc.) – and requirements like surgery and hormones might well come back (which are unavailable to many trans* people, and many don’t want them). This also means that trans*/gender variant people will have to negotiate various bureaucratic mechanisms and arbitrary rules regarding gender recognition in order to get the legal i.ds they would likely need to access welfare measures like reservations in jobs or education.

c) Lastly, continuing on the topic of procedure, on page 129 the judgment defers to the Expert Committee constituted by MOSJE (Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment) for suggesting measures and recommendations, which probably means that the MSJE report  will provide the concrete procedural guidelines that are missing in the SC judgment. Now, the MOSJE recommends on pg. 34 of its report that ‘Certificate that a person is a transgender person should be issued by a state level authority duly designated or constituted by respective the State/UT’, and these state-appointed committees will comprise a psychiatrist, social worker, two transgender representatives, etc. Again, this suggests that the “transgender persons’ right to decide their self- identified gender” as male/female/third will not be accessible easily after all, and will be subject to the requirement to ‘prove’ one’s gender identity to the bureaucracy as per its rules – the MOSJE rejects the simpler option that one could just submit affidavits by oneself and one’s friends as proof of one’s sincerity and honesty in declaring their gender. Again, this suggests there will be quite a bit of identity policing, and requirements like surgery/hormones may return especially if one wants legal recognition as the ‘opposite’ gender. Also, as my friend and sister Sumi (secretary, Moitrisanjog Society Coochbehar) pointed out, there will probably be a lot of petty politics and cut-throat competition regarding which transgender people get to be on these certifying committees, and people will probably accuse each other of being ‘fake hijras’ or ‘part-time TG’ and thus not really transgender, and so on, just like what has already happened in the case of TG funding in HIV-AIDS. But these are some inevitable perils of the biopolitical recognition of identity as the basis for rights and citizenship; one can only hope that the political horizon of trans*/hijra/kothi/FTM/butch (etc.) communities will hopefully go beyond such biopolitics, even as we stake our rightful claim to identity-based rights and recognition.

For more analyses of the NALSA vs. Union of India 2014 judgement, visit https://new2.orinam.net/resources-for/law-and-enforcement/nalsa-petition-tg-rights-india/

“We are looking for actors from within the LGBT community and those outside of it, who are willing to engage with the proposed theme of this production in a sensitive, thoughtful manner. If this is the opportunity that you have been waiting for, we welcome you to participate in auditions led by YosupBae, Artistic Director, Performance Group Tuida and his team in Chennai and Bangalore.”

The producers have asked Orinam if they could help identify people interested in auditioning for the following play. If you are, please email orinamwebber@gmail.com (or use the online form) sending us your
– name
– phone number
– email (if available) and
– nature of experience in theatre (if any)
by July 31, 2013

Please write ‘Bahuchara Mata auditions’ in the subject line. We will compile and share a consolidated list with the producers at InkoCentre by Aug 2.

Bahuchara Mata: The Third Box is a commissioned Indo-Korean theatre collaboration that explores a story (or stories) of sexual identity inspired by Indian mythology. The production aims to be a journey of discovery, linking traditional and contemporary performance traditions. Through strong physicality the performers explore the dynamic relationship between dance and theatrical movement with live Korean and Indian traditional music. The production aims to examine how sexual identity is collectively created, defined, reiterated and very often restrained by social, religious, historical, legal and political contexts. What happens then to the individual within this collective definition? And what are those individual stories that converge to create a collective identity that will defy the stereotype handed down from generation to generation? When and why and how will their stories be told? And by whom?For whom? When can the ticking of that third box become a joyful assertion of free will?

Bahuchara Mata: The Third Box is directed by YosupBae, Artistic Director of Performance Group Tuida, South Korea and is co- produced by AsiaNow Productions and InKo Centre. The production will premiere in Korea in 2014 and will be presented in India in the same year. We are hopeful that this production will subsequently travel to relevant Theatre Festivals around the world.

We are looking for actors from within the LGBT community and those outside of it, who are willing to engage with the proposed theme of this production in a sensitive, thoughtful manner. If this is the opportunity that you have been waiting for, we welcome you to participate in auditions led by YosupBae, Artistic Director, Performance Group Tuida and his team in Chennai or Bangalore.

Venue: in Chennai – to be confirmed
Date: 9 and 10 August 2013

Venue in Bangalore – – to be confirmed
Date: 18 and 19 August 2013