Women should rethink their inheritance | Leila Seth | TEDxGatewayWomen

“As I’ve got older, I have begun to realize that women have been put down for so long that reservation is absolutely essential.”
- Leila Seth

Leila Seth was the first woman to top the bar examinations in London, in 1957. Thereafter, she practiced in Patna, Calcutta (now Kolkata) and Delhi. She was the first woman judge of the Delhi High Court and the first woman to become chief justice of a state in India. She was appointed as a judge in 1978 and retired as chief justice of Himachal Pradesh in 1992. She is involved in pro bono work pertaining to health, human rights, women and children’s rights, education, environment and ethics.

This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at http://ted.com/tedx

The month of September 1942
is etched in my memory.

It was a few weeks
before my twelfth birthday,

and my father had just died.

My mother, who had
no professional training,

found it very hard to spend
the fees for our school fees.

And my three brothers and me,

she took the help of friends
and scholarships

in order to educate us.

She didn't make a difference
between my brothers and me.

All she wanted was that
all of us should excel.

When I was 20, I had
a semi-arranged marriage,

and my husband was posted,
in 1954, to England,

and I went with him.

And I took advantage of being there
for three years and studied law.

When I returned to India,

I was required to train with a senior
before I could practice law.

So I decided I should get the best lawyer,

join the best lawyer,

and I zeroed down on someone
called Sachin Chaudhary.

But it was extremely difficult
to get an appointment with him.

After great difficulty, I did,

and I was full of trepidation
when I went to meet him.

But I put on a brave front,
just as I am doing now.

(Laughter)

(Applause)

He had some idea why I had come,

but he wanted to be completely clear.

So I told him that I wanted
to practice law

and I wanted to join his chambers.

He was not in favor
of women joining the law,

so he tried to dissuade me.

He said,

"Young woman, instead of joining
the legal profession,

go and get married."

(Laughter)

So I said to him,

"Sir, I am already married."

(Laughter)

"Then go and have a child," he advised.

"I already have a child."

(Laughter)

"It's not fair to the child to be alone,

so you should have a second child."

(Laughter)

I said, "Mr. Chaudhary,
I have two children."

(Laughter)

So, taken aback
for the third time, he said,

"Come and join my chambers.

You're a persistent young woman,
and you will do well at the bar."

After about 20 years of practice,

I was appointed a judge
at the Delhi High Court,

and in 1991,

I was the first woman to be chief justice
of a state high court.

(Applause)

As I mentioned earlier,

I was 20 when I got married,

and my fiancee and his family
never demanded a dowry or anything else.

We had a simple celebration.

We served vanilla ice cream
and salted cashew nuts.

But we still had fun,
and we enjoyed ourselves.

So, you can see, that you
don't need anything extra.

But I, now, I'm happily married
for the last 64 years.

(Applause)

Every woman, every mother,
wants her daughter to be married.

And when she meets a young man,

she tries to size him up
to find out if he's a suitable boy.

But at the back of her mind is worry.

Does he want a dowry?

If so, how much?

In fact, it's the curse of dowry

that makes parents not want to have girls.

In the old days, when girls and boys
didn't have equal inheritance,

a young girl was given stridhan,
which is bride's wealth,

at the time of her marriage.

It was something that was passed
from a mother to her daughter

and consisted of jewelry.

It was her personal property.

But even that was often taken away
by the bride-groom's parents

and given to the groom's sister
when she was getting married.

So the bride had nothing.

Slowly, the prevalence of dowries started.

This meant gifts were given

not only to the bride

but to the bride-groom and to his family.

And demands, dowry demands,

were negotiated at the time
of an arranged marriage.

Parents were worried as to how
they would meet these demands,

which sometimes increased
from day to day and from hour to hour

as the wedding date approached.

Sometimes, just as the wedding ceremony
was about to take place,

a fresh demand would be made.

It was a great trauma for parents,

especially those who had
more than one daughter.

They were bankrupt,
spent more than they had,

and the extortion sometimes
continued even after the wedding.

So instead of loving their daughters
and wanting to have them,

they considered them a curse.

And they resorted to something
like female feticide

or female infanticide.

In order to prevent this evil of dowry,

an act was passed.

It was called the Dowry Prohibition Act,

1961.

Before the act,
dowries were displayed openly.

After the act, the displays stopped.

But the giving and taking
of dowry continued,

and the demand for ostentatious
functions and feasts

by the bride-groom's family,

to be paid for by the bride's family,

continued.

This was really terrible.

And very few parents

would reject a young man

if he or his family demanded a dowry.

Most would not,

even though they knew
it was illegal to give or take a dowry.

Let me give you an example.

The year was 1991.

A very senior Supreme Court of India judge

had arranged his daughter's wedding.

I asked him,

"Are you going to give a dowry?"

Remember,

this was 30 years after the passing
of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

He was quiet.

And then he said,

"I'll tell you the honest truth.

I will indeed give a dowry for my daughter

because I cannot sacrifice
her happiness and her life.

In my community, she cannot
get married without a dowry.

But I promise you,
I will not take a dowry for my son."

This is not what I wanted to hear,

but at least it was half a step forward.

So what do you think?

Can the passing of laws change attitudes?

In India, with a very patriarchal society,

changing attitudes and changing
mindsets is extremely difficult,

and it's a slow process,
but we need to fast-forward it.

I had hoped

that with the succession laws
being changed

and daughters getting
some inheritance rights,

the law would have had
some effect on the evil of dowry.

In 1956,

the Hindu Succession Act was passed,

and in that year,

it was provided in the act
that daughters and sons

would get equally

from their father's property
which was self-acquired.

This, of course,
should have made a difference.

But it didn't seem to have done that.

In fact, women
were not willing to assert.

Let me tell you of an incident.

I was a judge at the Delhi High Court.

Three young men
came for me and wanted -

their father had died,

he hadn't left a will,

and they wanted their property
to be divided into three parts.

I found they had three sisters.

So I said to them,

"I will divide it into six parts
because that's what the law says,

and each sibling should get one share."

They protested.

They said,

"Our sisters are married,

our sisters have got dowries,

and they have given us
relinquishment deeds."

I was not happy, so I insisted
they bring the sisters to court

because I was not sure

whether the sisters had been coerced
into giving their relinquishment deeds

or they didn't know the law.

When the women came, I asked them,

"Do you know the law?"

And they said, "Yes."

"So then why are you
giving up your share?"

And this is what they said:

"We do not want to have
any problems with our brothers

or spoil our relationships
with our brothers

because if in the future
we need anything of any sort,

to whom shall we turn
except our brothers, our natal family?"

So they knew what was happening.

And I said to the young men,

"If you were six brothers,

you would have happily shared
and got one-sixth each,

so why are you depriving your sisters?"

But they were adamant,

and their sisters also were not willing
to withdraw their relinquishment deeds.

So, though they were aware,
they were not willing to assert.

Many people are not aware
that since 2005 -

that's almost 10 years ago -

the daughters' rights of inheritance
have been widened

and now include not only
the self-acquired property of the father

but also the ancestral property -

unless, of course, the father
wills away the property to someone else.

So fathers, we tell you,

do not will the property away
to your sons or daughters.

Make sure your daughters
get their legitimate share.

(Applause)

You know, it reminds me
of the story of Sudha Goel

because daughters need
to have control of their property,

they need to feel secure,

and Sudha Goel had been given a dowry.

One December night,
the neighbors heard her screaming:

"Bachao! Bachao! Save me! Save me!"

So they rushed and forced
their way into the flat

and found her in flames.

Her mother-in-law and her husband
were simply sitting there.

She said, "These people have killed me.

They have taken my gold and everything."

There are hundreds of such cases
in India every year.

How do we do it?

How do we take steps to stop this?

I think that I can
summarize it in four words.

First, awareness.

Second, assertion.

Third, attitude change.

And fourth, action.

So, sisters,

don't be blackmailed by -
emotionally blackmailed by your brothers.

Don't take dowries;
don't take after dowries.

Demand your inheritance.

Brothers, husbands, and fathers,

make sure that your daughter
gets her legitimate share.

And make sure that she has
that confidence that is important for her.

Do the legal thing, not the illegal.

So when you look forward,

make sure your daughters get
what they deserve.

You should not let your daughters down,

and they will not let you down.

(Applause)

So this is the mantra:

Inheritance, not dowry.

Inheritance, not dowry.

Repeat it, act upon it,
and get others to act upon it as well.

I'd like to end with an appeal
by a daughter to her parents.

"Father, why do you
discriminate against me

when I can be as good as my brother?

Mother, nurture, nourish, and educate me,

and you will see
that I will not be a burden

but will control my own destiny.

And you will have nothing to fear
when Brother is not there.

I will look after both of you
in your old age.

I ask only to be treated equally.

Will you not dare?

So that I have the freedom to choose
and the right to care

and am no longer
the prisoner of my own gender,

unable to resist or retaliate
against injustice.

Oh Father, give me a chance.

Just give me a chance.

Oh Mother, break the bonds of tradition

and let me into the sunlight
to dance, to dance, to dance."

(Applause)