| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 01-Nov-02 02:56 AM
What follows was published in today's (Friday's) The Nepali Times.
****************
An editor at large
Manjushree Thapa
Of course there’s politics in the Shrisha Karki case, but there’s also the question of journalistic ethics.
Three weeks after actress Shrisha Karki’s suicide, Jana Aastha's editor Kishore Shrestha is still at large. He has been charged with murder for causing her death by publishing a nude photograph of her in his paper on 9 October.
Shrestha claims, now, that he is suffering political persecution in this case. Speaking from an unknown location to a radio station in Pokhara on October 25, he accused the film artists leading the campaign against him of trying to frame him, just as in Panchayat times, Narayan Man Bijukchhe was framed for the death of Karna Hyoju. He said that he did not blackmail Karki and he regretted her death.
But exposing a fundamental lack of compunction, he went on to say that he had similar pictures of other film artists, and he conveyed a veiled threat to them: “A few actors and actresses are engaging in a politics of crowds because they are afraid that pictures of themselves might be printed as well.”
None of this will serve him well in his trial. Or trials. In addition to the murder charge, film artists have filed a public offence case against him, and are proceeding with defamation charges for the story that accompanied Karki’s photograph. Noted women's rights advocate Shanta Thapaliya is representing these cases.
No doubt, there is politics involved in this matter. Shrestha is a left-leaning journalist who in Panchayat times wrote on the murders of two girls in what was known as the ‘Namita and Sunita’ scandal: he won no favour from royalist cliques accused in these murders. More recently, he publicised Maoist politburo member Krishna Sen’s death in police custody. He surely earned powerful enemies in doing so.
Speaking informally about the Karki case, journalists have voiced misgivings about the film artists’ motives: why, ask journalists, are these film artists so upset at Karki’s death when they refused to join the widespread protest against singer Praveen Gurung’s death in a car accident, allegedly by Prince Paras, in August 2000? Are royalist film artists using this opportunity to punish Shrestha for his anti-royalist politics? Are they supporting a ‘grand design’ to curtail democratic liberties?
Such mistrust made it difficult for even those who strongly condemn Shrestha’s action to join hands with the film artists. Progressive and centrist women’s groups have spoken out against Shrestha, although their delay in responding says much. Media organisations have struck a cautious balance. The Nepal Press Council has condemned the editor for breaching journalistic ethics, and has demanded an apology and explanation.
But, apparently dissatisfied with existing legal avenues, Chairperson Harihar Birahi has asked for a special commission to be formed on the matter. The Federation of Nepalese journalists has similarly asked Shrestha to offer a public clarification, and has said it will take action him and other journalists involved in this case. Yet the Federation has also come down against the film artists for attacking Jana Aastha’s office, for opting for unlawful means of protest when lawful means were available, and for trying to discredit the entire media. Speaking at the Reporter’s Club, the Federation’s President Taranath Dahal has said that no one should support a conspiracy to use one journalist's mistake to curtail press freedom.
The film artists’ decision to appeal directly to the king in this case has not allayed widespread suspicions of their political motives.
For their part, the film artists have dismissed accusations of their political motives, and they have expressed dissatisfaction at the police’s slowness to act on this case. Former Sub-Inspector of Police Uddav Bhandari has admitted to shooting Karki’s nude photograph to the BBC Nepal Service from London. Taking a high moral tone, he claimed to have paid a film industry go-between eight thousand rupees to bring Karki to his house for sex; once the actress was there, he forcibly took her nude pictures in order to scare her into stopping prostitution. He did not blackmail the actress; it was his intention, he said, to clean up the film industry.
Speaking to Kantipur, Kathmandu’s DIG Amar Singh Shah dismissed Bhandari’s claims: “This is the product of a criminal mind-frame, which Bhandari is trying to conceal by talking big.”
Yet the fact remains that that neither Bhandari nor Shrestha have been apprehended.
Is there politics involved in this case?
Isn’t there always?
Still, the central issue is not politics, it is journalistic ethics. Shrestha is masquerading as a political martyr when he is accused of having hounded a woman to death. As journalist Gunaraj Luitel has written, he has now sullied his earlier admirable contributions. His politics cannot exonerate the criminality of his actions now.
Speaking to a radio station in Pokhara, Shrestha stated, “I will not come out to normalise and irregular process. I will remain underground for a few days yet.”
He is, of course, not underground. Underground is what political activists can be. Shrestha is what accused criminals are: he is at large.
.
|
| Biruwa |
Posted
on 01-Nov-02 09:48 AM
Thanks ashu for bringing this to my notice.
It appears from the above article that Former Sub-Inspector of Police Uddav Bhandari was the one who took the picture and then sold it to the journalist who published it.
Even then both are still at large :(
Can't our police do anything right, atleast for once!!
|
| rabi |
Posted
on 08-Nov-02 09:37 PM
I am little late to catch up on this, but I have to write this. I haven't had my blood boil like this for a long time, not even through endless series of tragic headlines emnating from Nepalin the past two years. There is a tragic human dimension in this episode that is looking you right in your eyes.
Take a look at the photograph published in "Jan Astha" that killed Shrisha (Nepali Times has a dignified version of this photo at http://www.nepalnews.com.np/ntimes/issue116/comment.htm ) . My heart ached. Her face tells you all the story--that this picture was taken without her consent and that she was mortified to see this picture being taken. The look on her face tells you all you need to know about this heinous crime--that she had been the victim and that her taking her own life was only the last attempt on her part to escape this victimization.
They either tricked her into this photograph or threatened her into it. That's all that matters. They photographed her without her clothes against her will, used that photograph to blackmail her for a long time, and finally had the good sense to publish the photograph to one last time squeeze a penny out of her by selling a few more copies of their newspaper. If they contend she was up for grabs for money, so what? How's that relevant? How's that an excuse to invade her privacy, blackmail her and then lead her to suicide?
The whores are the editors and writers of Jan Astha. These are the kind of journaliststic scums who feed on the most basal insticnts of sex-starved Nepali minds, but have such a lack of courage, honesty, and ingenuity that the only way they can gratify the hordes of craving Nepali minds is by pretending to write about how they lament the puritan Nepali culture being soiled by the alleged excesses. These people, in fact went beyond hypocritical writing and abused Shrisha, extorted god knows what favors from her, and finally killed her.
If Shrisha traded sex for money (remember she is not here to tell her side of the story), for me that does not make her less of a human being, or make her death any more justifiable. Instead, it tells us about how perverts like Kishor Shrestha and Uddhav Bhandari make sure that women continue to trade in sex in Nepal and that there may me countless more women like Shrisha in Nepal daily being raped, threatened, abused and may be pushed into suicide.
May Shrisha live in peace, wherever she is.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 09-Nov-02 01:55 AM
Her face, looks like a kid scared of PITNE teacher or in front of deadly souteni ama. The picture was taken to black mail her. Kishore Shrestha has no justification that the picture was taken by her volunteer interests. If she was really a prostitute, they could have taken her picture or video where she might have tried to seduced her clients. As usual nepali press tried to black mail her, black mailing in nepali press or media is regular event.
|
| Jame Bonds |
Posted
on 09-Nov-02 08:49 AM
So an actress had to commit because her nude photo was published in a newspaper.
People have accused people taking the pictures, people publishing as the killers, but we are all missing a very important fact that this episode brings out. It's our society that is to blame. It was the society that drove her to commit suicide. Can we file a lawsuit againt our society?
Who's gonna win? Suppressed Sexuality VS Nepali Society
In other countries, if something like that happened, the victim could file lawsuits and hope to get a fair trial, and even get the sympathy of the public. But, in Nepal, how could she hope for any fair trial - the photographer himself being a policeman. And the public have too much time in their hand and are too nosey and bent on showing others down. Khutta taan attidude is very prevalent. How could she hope for some sympathy?
Someone sue the bad government, that is driving innocent people to commit suicide.
|
| rabi |
Posted
on 09-Nov-02 01:29 PM
James Bond:
Your strike at the heart of the problem: that Shrisha is not alive today, because after her clothless photo was published with the denigrating article, she felt (or knew) that puerile Nepali society was going to sacrifice her on some vague moral/social/religious stands and make the rest of her life a living hell. That it did not matter that the purported proof of her "guilt" (who are these people to try or judge her anyway, morally or legally?) in fact was the proof of her innocence (the photo makes it obvious she did not want to be photographed nude and certainly did not want to be splashed in a junk newspaper).
However, Shrisha's final decision to escapae the oppressive and hypocritical persecution of Nepali societiy's self-righteous, ignorant and anachronistic stewards of morality and order was only her last desperate response to a series of injustice against her. Until our society wakes up to the realities of the 21st century and stops regarding women as a bundle of "family pride" to be safely locked away in a dark vault, are you saying that there is nothing we can do to prevent other Nepal women to fall prey to the vultures like Uddav Bhandari and Kishor Shrestha? What about invasion of privacy ? Corrupt policemen breaking the law themselves? Extortion? Blackmail? Sexual abuse? Journalistic ethics and responsibility? The nexus between rotten politicians and low-life journalists (communist sponsors of Jan Astha)? If the utopian Nepali society you allude to (where a woman has her nude photo published, and try to explain it, fight it, and still hope to live a livable life) does come to life tomorrow, are these other issues not going to matter?
-rabi
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 09-Nov-02 08:33 PM
I don't think you can blame Nepali society for this.
The only person to be blamed directly is: Kishore Shrestha, the editor who's been
hiding from the Police.
My puzzle: why can't the police issue an arrest warrant?
Others to be blamed are: The Nepal police.
When SK filed a complaint against one of the policemen Uddhav Bhandari about two years ago, the Police themselves refused to register her complaint.
What SK did or did not do in her personal life was her business and her business alone.
She did NOT deserve to die because of doing what she did or of not doing what she did.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 09-Nov-02 09:20 PM
Point to be noted:
Others to be blamed are: The Nepal police.
When SK filed a complaint against one of the policemen Uddhav Bhandari about two years ago, the Police themselves refused to register her complaint.
|
