Ameer Shahul
Following the release of the Hema Committee report, the rising sexual harassment complaints, the government’s announcement of an investigation, and media trials remind one of the old Smarthavicharam. ( inquiry into the conduct ) There is no comparison between workplace sexual harassment complaints and Smarthavicharam. However, one can only hope that the recent special investigation announced by the government will not face the same fate as the trial of Thathrikutty.
Smarthavicharam was a traditional ritualistic trial prevalent among the upper-caste Namboothiri community in Kerala to investigate charges of adultery or sexual misconduct involving a Nambudiri woman (Antharjanam). The process typically involved a formal inquiry by a council of learned Brahmins, known as Bhattathiris, who would examine the accused woman and any implicated men, referred to as jaran (Adulterer). If found guilty, the woman would be excommunicated from society, a process known as ‘Brahmadandam,’ as would the implicated men.
The process has roots in the Smartha tradition of Hinduism that follows the Smriti scriptures, and Vicharam is the formal inquiry and trial. It was a severe form of social punishment that reinforced strict moral codes and was prevalent until about a century ago. The investigation and trial consisted of six stages, starting from examining the maidservant. Once the accused woman accepted the allegations in the third stage, she would lose her identity and would only be referred to as ‘sadhanam’ (object). The process would end with the excommunication of the woman and the accused men.
The last well-documented Smarthavicharam was the trial of Kuriyedathu Thathri (Savithri), also known as ‘Thathrikutty,’ in 1905. During the trial, Thathri named 65 prominent men as her jāranmar, leading to a significant scandal. The list included 30 Nambudiris, 10 Iyers, 13 Ambalavasis, and 11 Nairs. What was surprising was that Thathri could name her visitors with absolute clarity and substantiate her claims by describing their body marks.
Historical records indicate that the then King of Cochin, under whose jurisdiction Thathri’s area fell, had some interest in the Smarthavicharam of Thathri. Despite finding her guilty in the first trial, she was moved from Irinjalakkuda to Cochin and housed at the Hill Palace in Tripunithura, apparently fearing her kidnapping or murder. She was first brought to Irinjalakkuda for the initial trial from her place in Thrissur.
A twist occurred when she was about to name the 65th accused in detail. At that moment, the Raja of Cochin ordered the trial to be halted. It was rumored that his name was next on the list.
The ongoing media trials following the release of the Hema Committee report bear a striking resemblance to Thathri’s trial 120 years ago, presenting a modern-day version of Smarthavicharam. Many men in high places in society may be pulled out of their glass mansions and exposed before the public.
Given that many of the alleged offenses—such as rape, molestation, and harassment—occurred years or even decades ago, the likelihood of these accusations leading to successful prosecutions is slim. Even if some cases do make it to court, the chances of a favorable outcome for the victims remain uncertain, given the burden of proof and the influence often held by the accused.
However, a powerful form of punishment for these celebrities lies in the social humiliation they face through public and media scrutiny. Stripping them of their revered status and exposing their actions to their families, friends, and fans serves as a significant consequence. The loss of their honor and the destruction of their carefully crafted public image can be a punishment in itself.
As one accuser poignantly expressed in the media, “I wanted to give him (the accused) one more sleepless night.” This underscores that while public shame is a form of retribution, it is not a substitute for formal justice. The accused should still face the full weight of legal consequences for violating another person’s body and mind, deserving the harshest penalties available under the law.
The government’s decision to form a special investigation team (SIT) is a positive step. But the concern is that, as in the Smarthavicharam of Kuriyedathu Thathri, where the trial was halted when the king’s name was about to be revealed, will the government disband the team if it begins to uncover the involvement of influential figures?
Remember, the king always protects his queen.
