Uttar Pradesh’s New Policy on Women Safety Disagrees

Newsreel Asia Insight #56
Nov. 27, 2023

In Uttar Pradesh, an intriguing twist unfolds under the Safe City Project. The new policy introduces a unique restriction: private coaching centres are now barred from conducting late evening classes specifically for female students. And the controversial “anti-Romeo squads” will do the rest. This decision, allegedly for safety, ends up penalising the very group it intends to safeguard – the women and girls of the state. Moreover, it also impacts boys and men who enjoy socialising.

The state government plans to enhance surveillance through CCTV at key points in 17 municipal corporations, covering educational institutions, as reported by The Times of India. However, a contentious aspect of this project is the specific directive that coaching classes for girls must end by 8 pm. Institutes that fail to comply with this rule face the threat of punitive actions.

Boys and men, however, face no such restrictions. Some of them might actually join the state government’s controversial “anti-Romeo squads,” which will be strengthened under the new policy. It’s a sure recipe for an increased moral policing, potentially fostering a more regressive environment within the state.

Anti-Romeo squads were formed in the state in 2017, allegedly aimed at tackling the persistent issue of eve-teasing. These squads, a blend of plainclothes and uniformed police officers, patrol public spaces like parks, colleges and markets. However, their approach extends beyond traditional policing methods.

These squads incorporate police-sanctioned vigilante groups, known for their direct and often controversial tactics. According to an earlier report in Reuters, these groups actively target and publicly shame young men and couples suspected of “inappropriate” behaviour. This method of public admonishment has sparked debates about its effectiveness and the implications for privacy and personal freedom.

What could be the rationale behind this approach to women’s safety? We don’t have a clear answer, but let’s envision a scenario. Picture a roundtable discussion on women’s safety, contemplating the presence of girls and women on the streets after dark. An official points out that many are students, diligently preparing for competitive exams like the Union Public Service Commission and the Indian Administrative Services. Concerned about their safety, the official proposes a seemingly straightforward solution: limit the operating hours of coaching centres.

But why were alternative solutions not considered? Imagine if the conversation had veered in another direction. Suppose the official had focused on the behaviour of the boys and men who harass these aspiring women. The official could have suggested a police-run campaign in communities near coaching centers, aimed at transforming the attitudes and behaviours of boys and men. This approach could have opened up a different pathway to ensuring women’s safety, without restricting their educational opportunities.

But why should the focus be solely on coaching centres and educational institutes? Girls and women have the right to move freely, whether it’s in markets, parks, malls or pubs. The problem isn’t just about where women are; it’s about how society perceives and treats them in these spaces.

A 20-year-old woman from Mamura village in Noida expressed her dismay while speaking to the TOI: “The term ‘safe city’ indicates a place where I have the liberty to move around as I wish, feel safe and go anywhere, any time. Caging girls or women at home after sundown won’t make any city safer.” Her words resonate with the core issue: safety measures should not infringe on freedom.

Meeta Sengupta, an educationist, asserts, told the newspaper, “Women deserve safe streets and workplaces at all times, and before that, they deserve an equal chance to occupy both.”

Coaching institute owners also disagree with the government’s policy. They say that late evening classes cater to working professionals and should be a matter of personal choice. Imposing a blanket restriction disregards the needs and agency of these women.

Women’s rights activists advocate for more effective measures. Kavita Krishnan told the TOI there’s a need for well-lit streets, police patrolling, late-night transport and affordable buses and auto services for women. She emphasised the need for sexual harassment complaint committees in every institute. These suggestions point towards a more holistic approach to safety, one that doesn’t confine women but empowers them to navigate public spaces securely.

The policy reflects a societal mindset that views women’s freedom as negotiable. It implies a lack of trust in law enforcement’s capacity to ensure safety. It’s also an admission of the government’s inability to enforce law and order effectively.

Women’s safety should not be a zero-sum game where their freedom is the price paid for security. A truly safe city is one that doesn’t confine half its population under the guise of protection but empowers them to live freely and fearlessly.