For a Safer Future: Interview with Elsa Marie D'Silva, Founder & CEO of Safecity.in

  ElsaMarie D’Silva is currently the Founder & CEO of Red Dot Foundation (Safecity) which is a platform that crowdsources personal experiences of sexual violence and abuse in public spaces. Since Safecity started in Dec 2012, it has become the largest crowd map on the issue in India, Kenya, Cameroon and Nepal. Elsa is also currently a mentee of the US State Department’s Fortune Program and a fellow with Rotary Peace, Aspen New Voices and Vital Voices. She is listed as one of BBC Hindi’s 100 Women and has won Female Entrepreneur of the Year Award by Dusan Stojanovic (European Angel Investor of the Year 2013) and The Digital Woman Award in Social Impact by She The People.  She has penned articles that have appeared in CNN, Huffington Post, WIP amongst others. She has spoken about her work at the Aspen Ideas Festival and at TEDx MidAtlantic. Prior to Safecity, Elsa was in the aviation industry for 20 years where she worked with Jet Airways and Kingfisher Airlines. Her last portfolio was Vice President Network Planning & Charters where she oversaw the planning and implementation of 500 daily flights.

     Arguendo is honored to be featuring her interview.

Sourya (S): Could you give us a glace as to how your college days were like?

Elsa (E): My college days were quite boring. I was the model student who attended all her lectures, therefore nothing extraordinary stands out because I was quite studious. I chose to graduate in English Literature because I loved reading and understanding cultures, contexts and perspectives.

S: Was the aviation sector always something which had fascinated you as a child?

E: Aviation allowed and facilitated travel which always fascinated me as a child. I wanted to visit different countries, meet different people, and experience different things including food, history, architecture, museums, and nature. I wanted to travel the world and my conduit was the aviation industry.

S: You were the Vice President Network Planning & Charters, for Kingfisher airlines. What were the different challenges you faced breaking so many glass ceilings and how did you overcome them?

E: As you are aware, I started my career as a flight attendant and thereafter was selected to become a Flight Safety Instructor teaching pilots and cabin crew safety and emergency procedures. I was then selected for a fast track program that resulted in a job at strategy. I worked in Revenue Management, Pricing and finally Network Planning. At the time, I didn't think I was breaking any ceilings but just wanted to explore my own potential. I have always been open to opportunities believing that change is constant in life and one must meet it head on, taking on challenges with positivity. I upskilled myself along the way, constantly equipping myself with knowledge and skills needed to do my job effectively and efficiently. I am a quick learner, a team player and a great communicator which has helped me achieve my goals.

S: As the VP, did you ever face instances of mansplaining or instances where you were not taken seriously because of your gender, despite your obvious expertise in the matter?

E: Yes, of course, but at that time I didn't know the meaning of mansplaining. I had to work harder than my male colleagues to prove myself, along with getting my work recognized. But I persevered and persisted and the rest is history. I like to collaborate and am willing to work with people to find common ground.

S: What led you to start the Red Dot Foundation?

E: In December 2012, a young woman named Jyoti Singh was gang raped on a bus in Delhi. That incident was horrific and brutal and opened up the conversations on sexual violence in India. At the time, I was looking to make a switch to the social sector and looking to find a cause that I believed in. Many things lined up including meeting my co-founders, finding collaborators and having the time to take Safecity forward, as Kingfisher had just shut down and I had time to experiment with the idea. I believe that the safety of women and girls is paramount and safe public spaces are essential to one finding one’s potential. 

Safecity Gender sanitization workshops.

S: What was your initial vision and objective behind Safecity?

E: The initial vision and objective were to provide an online platform to document sexual violence in public spaces. But this was further refined to help people understand what amounts to sexual violence, how it impacts our lives and the use of crowdsourced data to find individual and local solutions and drive institutional accountability.

S: Please explain for our readers as to how does Safecity work? Is the identity of the victims’ safe when they report?

E: Safecity is a platform that crowdsources personal stories of sexual harassment and abuse in public spaces. This data which maybe anonymous gets aggregated as hot spots on a map indicating trends at a local level. The idea is to make this data useful for individuals, local communities and local administration to identify factors that cause behaviour that lead to violence and work on strategies for solutions.

Safecity consists of several ways that women/girls can connect with each other on the issue.

We are creating a new data set which does not exist currently. Perception of the police's insensitivity, as well as cultural backlash, deters people from reporting. They feel more comfortable using our platform and this is seen by reports from over 20 years ago.

By representing the information thus collected on a map as hotspots, we are moving the focus away from the "victim" to the location and people can view the issue through a different lens.Today we make choices for pretty much everything based on reviews - books, movies, restaurants, hotels, but we have nothing for personal safety. We are creating this database which can be used in several ways.

1.      Crowdmap - Sharing of stories anonymously, aggregation of trends, notifications and alerts and offering solidarity through the comments section allows people to understand the "safety" landscape of an area and make the most informed decision for themselves. e.g. They can decide on the time of visit, a method of transport to use, if they need to be accompanied by someone or even what clothes to wear.

2.      Social media - We have a robust social media presence on Facebook and Twitter. Discussions and advocacy through tweet chats are held regularly by our volunteers. We also have a Writers Movement where bloggers contribute their posts.

3.      Data from our site - We send regular dashboards and monthly trends to partner NGOs in India and abroad and the police in Delhi, Mumbai and Goa.

4.      Missed call for those with no internet access. They can give a missed call on +91 9015 510 510 and our team calls them back for their story.

S: What kind of support/help does Safecity provide to victims who come forward?

E: We work on general trends and patterns which we help communities/NGOs understand to drive solutions. For individual assistance, we direct them to other organizations who provide legal and/or counseling help.

S: When you started it in 2012, would you have believed that in less than three years Safecity would become the largest crowd map on the issue in India, Kenya, Cameroon and Nepal?

E: No, we didn't, but it is not surprising given that sexual violence is a global pandemic. UN Women states that 1 in 3 women face some kind of sexual assault at least once in their lifetime. But in our experience, the statistic in India seems to be extremely high. A rape occurs every 20 minutes in India.
Yet most women and girls do not talk about this abuse for a multiple of reasons - fear of society, culture, victim blaming, fear of police, tedious formal procedures etc. As a result, women keep silent and this data is not captured anywhere but the perpetrator gets bolder over time and we accept it as part of our daily routine. This leads to under communication and under-reporting of the issue. If there are poor official statistics, the problem is not visible and is not a true representation of the actual problem. Therefore we need to break our silence and document every instance of harassment and abuse in public spaces so that we can find the most effective solutions at the neighborhood level.

S: What has been your proudest moment with respect to Safecity?

Elsa with Secretary Clintor

E: We have several proud moments. Especially when we do workshops and campaigns, women and girls share how our work has helped them return to school, confidently access public spaces, confidently interact with male members in society and confidently stand up for themselves. We have several stories that can be found in the Safecity blog section. 

My personal moment of glory was when I recently received the Vital Voices Global Leadership Award in the presence of my hero, Secretary Hillary Clinton.

S: At times, do you still miss the skies and your old job in the Aviation Sector?

E: No, I don't miss my previous job. I am on a plane often enough even in my current role. I do believe there is a time and place for everything and I had a great time in my previous career but my current one drives me at the moment. It is meaningful and satisfying.

S: What word of advice would you give to all those young women (and men) who are forced to curb their entrepreneurial spirit due to family pressure, society etc and are told that there are things that they cannot do because of their gender roles? 

E: My mantra is - Difficult is easy, Impossible just takes longer.

If you want to do something, work on it, plan for it, ask for help, be willing to learn and open to change and go for it. Sometimes, the journey is easy and often, it is not. Sometimes you take off very easily and often there are many barriers. But if your personal vision is clear, keep at it. 

Read more »

Finance Bill 2017: What the Public needs to know about Aadhaar & Political Donations.

Sri. Arun Jaitley’s amendments to the Finance Bill, 2017 has been passed in Lok Sabha on the 22nd of March, 2017. A “money bill”, it will not be sent to Rajya Sabha for discussion, but only for their recommendations, which can be rejected by Lok Sabha, and then will be sent to the President of India for his assent.

Apart from introducing 40 amendments to different laws, Finance Bill, 2017 has a string of amendments that will impact a variety of existing taxation laws involving funding of political parties, use of Aadhaar, income tax returns and raids, caps in cash transaction, and a host of other issues.

There are two major worrying things in this Finance Bill, 2017. 

1) The amendments to the Finance Bill, 2017 propose to remove: 
(i) the limit of 7.5% of net profit of the last three financial years, for contributions that a company may make to political parties, 
(ii) the requirement of a company to disclose the name of the political parties to which a contribution has been made. 

In short, keeping in mind that Political Parties are exempted from RTI, a company can literally buy out an entire party and the public would be no wiser!

A token 'good', is that the Finance Bill also makes all contributions being made to the Political parties to be made electronically.

2) It has been mandatory for every person to quote their Aadhaar number after July 1, 2017, when:
(i) applying for a Permanent Account Number (PAN), or 
(ii) filing their Income Tax returns. In case a person does not have an Aadhaar, he will be required to quote their Aadhaar enrolment number, indicating that an application to obtain Aadhaar has been filed. 

Every person holding a PAN on July 1, 2017, and who is eligible to hold an Aadhaar, will be required to provide the authorities his Aadhaar number, by a date and in a manner notified by the central government. A failure to provide this number would result in the PAN number being invalidated, and the person would be treated at par with anyone who has not applied for a PAN. The government may exempt persons from this provision through a notification. 

What is the fuss with the Government asking us to get Aadhar cards you say? The Supreme Court in the case of Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr vs the Union Of India and Or [(2015)8 SCC735], via its interim order dated 11th August, 2015 clearly stated that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory for all Government services till a Constitutional Bench decided on whether Aadhar violated the right to privacy.

The Ratio (applicable portion) of the Order is reproduced below;

"Having considered the matter, we are of the view that the balance of interest would be best served, till the matter is finally decided by a larger Bench if the Union of India or the UIDA proceed in the following manner:-

1. The Union of India shall give wide publicity in the electronic and print media including radio and television networks that it is not mandatory for a citizen to obtain an Aadhaar card;

2. The production of an Aadhaar card will not be condition for obtaining any benefits otherwise due to a citizen;

3. The Unique Identification Number or the Aadhaar card will not be used by the respondents for any purpose other than the PDS Scheme and in particular for the purpose of distribution of foodgrains, etc. and cooking fuel, such as kerosene. The Aadhaar card may also be used for the purpose of the LPG Distribution Scheme;

4. The information about an individual obtained by the Unique Identification Authority of India while issuing an Aadhaar card shall not be used for any other purpose, save as above, except as may be directed by a Court for the purpose of criminal investigation."

It is important to note that the Government of India had filed a petition to amend this order, in front of a 5 judge Bench in the case of Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr vs the Union Of India and Or [ (2015) 10 SCC 92], and even there the Hon'ble 5 judge bench of the SC, by its order dated 15 October 2015, had reiterated that the Aadhaar scheme "is purely voluntary and cannot be made mandatory" till the Supreme Court ruled on the issue in its finality.

Despite this, in clear violation (and alleged contempt) of the Supreme Court's order, not only has the Finance Ministry decided to make Aadhar compulsory by what could only be termed as colourable exercise, but also the Telecom Department has issued a circular dated 23/03/2017, calling for 100% Aadhaar linked KYC within the next one year. 

It is interesting to note that the Telecom Department has issued to circular in apparent compliance with another Supreme Court order, dated 06/02/2017, in the case of Lokniti Foundation vs the Union of India (WP 607 of 2016), the Order of the Court in Lokniti Foundation, being that of a smaller Bench (2 judge) cannot be deemed to have overruled the Order of the SC in the 5 judge bench stated above. 

Finance Bill 2017 (without latest amendment suggested by Sri. Jaitley)

[Article last updated: 24/03/2017]

Read more »

The SPB-Ilayaraja Copyright Tussle Explained

There have been many assumptions and interpretations (most of them completely flawed) put forward by multiple newspapers (Yes, looking at you Outlook India) about the law regarding the recent copyright tussle between music director and singer S P Balasubrahmanyamand and composer Ilayaraja issue, so Harshavardhan Gaanesan, Foreign Associate at a leading Law Firm in the US, was gracious enough to throw a bit of legal clarity on the issue:

1. Ilayaraja is 100% right in law. The Copyright Act protects musical works and grants the composer the sole right to musical works, and if it has been registered, the Lyricist, rights in the lyrics of the song. And of course, the producer's rights in the sound recording.

Ilayaraja

The difference in copyright law between a musical work and a sound recording is of paramount importance.

A musical work refers to the composition, the arrangements of instruments and lyrics too.

The sound recording refers to the actual recording with singing, recordings of the artists, of the instruments mixed with the lyrics etc.

So the division arises in a situation when for example a restaurant plays Mental Manadhil, without permission. They are actually violating 2 copyrights. One of the composer (AR Rahman) in the musical work and second, of the producer( here is where the divvying up comes into play) in the sound recording.

Here Ilayaraja argues that by singing the songs, it violated his musical work copyright (Obviously not the sound recording copyright). Legally what ilayaraja did is completely justified.

2. My grouse, however, and the grouse of many fans is on 2 accounts, primarily, the timing of the legal notice and second, the use of a legal notice as a means towards achieving these ends. I think something needs to be said for issuing a notice when you've already known that the concerts are going to take place. Further, SPB has said that had he sent him a mail or a call, the outcome might have become very different. Hypothetical, sure, but nonetheless justified.

Second, anyone with knowledge of SPB and his history of venerating his Music directors know that he constantly performs musical tributes for his favorite musical directors. In fact, he's gone as far to say he wouldn't be the same without Ilayaraja. To interject something as cold as a legal notice when there's such an effusive feeling of warmth is malicious. Even in the absence of positive feelings between SPB and raja, the mode and means of doing it leave a lot to be said.

Some arguments that people have raised:

1. "AR Rahman has been doing for years now". Arguendo, if he has, the point once again isn't Ilayaraja asking for royalties. In fact, he went as far to say he would share the money he gets from royalties with producer, singers, and lyricists. ( For some reason he seems to believe that the sound recording right also exists in the tracks and therefore the lyricists, producers and singers will get paid. I disagree, however that is an argument for another time). It's the mode and method I disagree with.

2. "SPB is making lakhs through his concerts" I'm grossly unaware of the amounts that go to the

Ilayaraja and SPB

singers of concerts, and the amount doled out to orchestra musicians, technicians etc. If he is making lakhs, that's mostly because the problem is systemic. The day to day administration of IPRS and PPL shows how corrupt the system is from the top down, where performers never seem to be able to receive their proceeds from licenses, even after the 2012 amendment. While these singers are painted as pop culture icons, and that's how we see them, that's certainly not a depiction of their financial situation. The most famous example is of course how Ustad Bismillah Khan was piss poor and Kapil Sibal wrote him a cheque. This was a watershed moment for Indian Copyright law ( At least in my head).

3. "I have an idea da, Why does he even have to sing, what if the orchestra just played the music"? That would still be a violation of Ilayaraja's copyright over the Musical Work.

4. "Dai what about in these random events, and these marriages when people sing these songs, they can be sued too a?" Well, the question depends on whether the situation falls under one of the fair use principles enumerated in the Copyright Act, examples include performances not done for profit, or those for educational purposes. Arguendo, assuming that no fair use exception exists, most producers/composers do not have the time, and neither the inclination to sue random stray occurrences like these. That would be akin to committing PR harakiri that even Jerry McGuire and CJ Cregg would be unable to do.

5. "Wait a minute, then all Thyagaraja's and Dikshitar songs can't be sung by anyone, how are they allowing that?"

Not true. Copyright lapses into the public domain ( Anyone is free to use it) after a period of 60 years after the death of the author. Given that Thyagaraja passed away in 1847, I would think the OS Aruns and Bombay Jayashris of the world don't have to fear a copyright infringement suit anytime soon.

I think finally, there is something to be said about excessive protection of IP as a whole. (I for one disagree with a utilitarian justification for Intellectual Property). To ground it in reality: Imagine if every single time there was a cover of 'Why this Kolaveri di', money was owed to Anirudh, and the producers, and if not paid, the videos were taken down on Youtube. It might not be a far cry to say that the song wouldn't have been the viral sensation it was without covers. I'll leave this discussion at that.

About the Author: 

Harshavardhan Ganesan holds an LLM from the University of Law Berkeley and is a current Foreign Associate at a leading Law firm  Washinton, US. Harsha has been an avid debater, Munner, orator, actor and basically someone who loves the sound of his own voice and wants others to do the same as well.

Read more »