#LAV
Mumbai's bar dancers will only get partial relief from the Supreme Court's recent ruling.
The Supreme Court’s 16 July ruling upholding the 2006 judgment of the Bombay High Court that upturned the Maharashtra government’s ban on dance bars is, at best, a pyrrhic “victory” for the women who danced in these bars. In 2005, when the ban was instituted, an estimated 75,000 women lost their main source of livelihood. Hence, it is presumed that following the Supreme Court’s ruling these women will once again have recourse to a livelihood option. However, a closer reading of the judgment coupled with the competitive “moral” politics of Maharashtra suggests that the “victory” is only partial.
The Bombay High Court struck down the Maharashtra government’s amendment to the Bombay Police Act, 1951 banning all forms of dancing in bars that were lower than three star status, to be against the constitutional provisions in Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). By amending Section 33 (A) of the law, the Maharashtra government had created two categories for the same activities. Women could not perform in licensed bars outside hotels that were three star or higher, or in private clubs. The justification for the ban was that these performances resulted in depravity, lowering public morality and exploited the women. Yet, no such value judgment was made on the same or similar performances in the higher class establishments. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the Supreme Court has confirmed what the Bombay High Court concluded, namely, that such a law is discriminatory and goes against the Constitution.
Now that the ban has been struck down, will dance bars reopen and the women find work again? In the year following the ban, which was incidentally supported by virtually all political parties in Maharashtra, and the Bombay High Court judgment, hundreds of bars were forced to close. Apart from the women dancers, the entire industry consisting of support staff, waiters, managers, and others who provided services to these bars was put out of work. And as the Maharashtra government managed to get a stay from the Supreme Court on the Bombay High Court ruling, the ban prevailed.
Despite the Court ruling, it is unlikely that things will return to pre-ban days. Although many dance bars metamorphosed as “live music” bars, they will now have to apply for fresh licences if they want to introduce dance performances. It is unlikely that these will be granted in a hurry. The Maharashtra government has already indicated that it might go back to Court. It has to maintain the appearance of being concerned about “public morality”, the apparent reason it went in for the ban, because it cannot afford to yield this high moral ground to its competitors, especially the Shiv Sena but also its ally the Nationalist Congress Party.
The Supreme Court has asked the Maharashtra government to implement the rules formulated by its own committee prior to the ban. These rules include restrictions on what the women can wear while dancing, a fenced-off area where they dance, not more than eight women dancing at one time, not permitting the “showering” of money on dancers and registering the names and addresses of the dancers. In their anxiety to restart, bar owners are already promising to implement all this and more.
None of these so-called “rules”, however, will alter the daily reality that bar dancers have had to live with all these years. For instance, there is no guarantee that these women will work under better conditions. In the past, many did not get paid and depended entirely on the money “showered” on them by the clientele. If these tips are now to be collected by the bar’s management, it is anybody’s guess how much will finally get to the women. Even at the best of times, the bar dancers had no security and could be turned away on any given day. That insecurity will continue. And finally, only a small number of those who lost their jobs in 2005 are likely to be re-employed as they are now older and do not fit the profile of the bar dancer.
The Court’s intervention apart, what remains untouched is the “popular” conception of what is moral and immoral. The ban on dance bars exposed how lawmakers fell over each other in declaring the immorality of women dancing in bars even as they swore concern about the exploitation of women. At no point did any of them notice the hypocrisy of pushing ahead with policies that make women more vulnerable to exploitation while denying them agency and the right of choice.
Mumbai's bar dancers will only get partial relief from the Supreme Court's recent ruling.
The Supreme Court’s 16 July ruling upholding the 2006 judgment of the Bombay High Court that upturned the Maharashtra government’s ban on dance bars is, at best, a pyrrhic “victory” for the women who danced in these bars. In 2005, when the ban was instituted, an estimated 75,000 women lost their main source of livelihood. Hence, it is presumed that following the Supreme Court’s ruling these women will once again have recourse to a livelihood option. However, a closer reading of the judgment coupled with the competitive “moral” politics of Maharashtra suggests that the “victory” is only partial.
The Bombay High Court struck down the Maharashtra government’s amendment to the Bombay Police Act, 1951 banning all forms of dancing in bars that were lower than three star status, to be against the constitutional provisions in Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). By amending Section 33 (A) of the law, the Maharashtra government had created two categories for the same activities. Women could not perform in licensed bars outside hotels that were three star or higher, or in private clubs. The justification for the ban was that these performances resulted in depravity, lowering public morality and exploited the women. Yet, no such value judgment was made on the same or similar performances in the higher class establishments. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the Supreme Court has confirmed what the Bombay High Court concluded, namely, that such a law is discriminatory and goes against the Constitution.
Now that the ban has been struck down, will dance bars reopen and the women find work again? In the year following the ban, which was incidentally supported by virtually all political parties in Maharashtra, and the Bombay High Court judgment, hundreds of bars were forced to close. Apart from the women dancers, the entire industry consisting of support staff, waiters, managers, and others who provided services to these bars was put out of work. And as the Maharashtra government managed to get a stay from the Supreme Court on the Bombay High Court ruling, the ban prevailed.
Despite the Court ruling, it is unlikely that things will return to pre-ban days. Although many dance bars metamorphosed as “live music” bars, they will now have to apply for fresh licences if they want to introduce dance performances. It is unlikely that these will be granted in a hurry. The Maharashtra government has already indicated that it might go back to Court. It has to maintain the appearance of being concerned about “public morality”, the apparent reason it went in for the ban, because it cannot afford to yield this high moral ground to its competitors, especially the Shiv Sena but also its ally the Nationalist Congress Party.
The Supreme Court has asked the Maharashtra government to implement the rules formulated by its own committee prior to the ban. These rules include restrictions on what the women can wear while dancing, a fenced-off area where they dance, not more than eight women dancing at one time, not permitting the “showering” of money on dancers and registering the names and addresses of the dancers. In their anxiety to restart, bar owners are already promising to implement all this and more.
None of these so-called “rules”, however, will alter the daily reality that bar dancers have had to live with all these years. For instance, there is no guarantee that these women will work under better conditions. In the past, many did not get paid and depended entirely on the money “showered” on them by the clientele. If these tips are now to be collected by the bar’s management, it is anybody’s guess how much will finally get to the women. Even at the best of times, the bar dancers had no security and could be turned away on any given day. That insecurity will continue. And finally, only a small number of those who lost their jobs in 2005 are likely to be re-employed as they are now older and do not fit the profile of the bar dancer.
The Court’s intervention apart, what remains untouched is the “popular” conception of what is moral and immoral. The ban on dance bars exposed how lawmakers fell over each other in declaring the immorality of women dancing in bars even as they swore concern about the exploitation of women. At no point did any of them notice the hypocrisy of pushing ahead with policies that make women more vulnerable to exploitation while denying them agency and the right of choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment