Fair enough, that’s part of being an international celebrity — the sycophancy, the obsequiousness, the hangers-on — and any person who’s properly grounded will know better than to let it sway her too much. But there’s a darker side of success: some will attempt to gain financially by their connection to the celebrity, especially if large sums of money are involved in that success. And that’s exactly what’s happened now, with one of the women featured in the documentary, Rukhsana, claiming that Obaid-Chinoy promised her three million rupees and a house, but never delivered.
For those of you who haven’t seen the documentary, Rukhsana was the woman who had acid thrown on her face by her husband, but instead of leaving him like Zakia did, Rukhsana stayed with both him and his family because they told her that if she walked out, she’d never see her young daughter again. Rukhsana also had to postpone her surgery with Dr Mohammed Jawad because she fell pregnant and the doctor told her it was unsafe to carry on with their plans to rebuild her face in those circumstances. Although the doctor returned to Pakistan in April of this year and offered to perform the surgery on her at this time, she refused for reasons which are unclear.
At the time of filming, Rukhsana signed a consent form to appear in the documentary, but it’s obvious that she and her husband’s family were expecting that there would be financial benefits to the participation. However, documentary subjects are usually not paid for their appearing in these films. Obaid-Chinoy says that a donor promised to buy Rukhsana a house, but that Rukhsana’s family viewed some houses and then refused to buy any, hoping to hold out for more money instead. Since then, she has gone to the media with her allegations against Obaid-Chinoy and says she will sue the film-maker for compensation.
Obaid-Chinoy had promised that any profits from airing the documentary in Pakistan would go to the victims of acid throwing featured in the movie and to the Acid Survivors Foundation (ASF). But Rukhsana and the ASF filed a civil suit, which stopped the airing of the movie in the country, citing concerns for their safety, with which Obaid-Chinoy duly obliged. Yet, Obaid-Chinoy stands firm that no wrongdoing has occurred in her dealings with Rukhsana. “In my 11 years as a documentary maker, 16 films across 10 countries, this has never happened before,” she said in a series of tweets on social media site Twitter. “She has been coerced into this by her family. She needs psychological and medical help.”
What’s astonishing is that with this latest controversy, Obaid-Chinoy is now being attacked by people on both the right and left wing of the political spectrum. Abdul Nishapuri of the Let Us Build Pakistan website that raises awareness about the killings of Shias and Baloch minorities, says rather ridiculously that the controversy “highlights the selective morality and urban elitist bias of the Pakistani elite”. Equally ridiculously, conservatives are blaming Obaid-Chinoy for making Pakistan “look bad” in the eyes of the world. But Haroon Riaz, another blogger and amateur photographer, perhaps, describes it best when he says, “The fact that Chinoy won the Oscar will always hurt the wounded pride of acid-throwing Pakistani males”.
What’s important to remember, in the end, is that the very man who threw acid on Rukhsana’s face is now demanding money from Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy; this boils down to him wanting financial compensation for having disfigured his own wife. I can’t help being reminded of the countless beggar children on the streets of Karachi with their limbs twisted and amputated, hands stretched out for money day after day between the lines of traffic. The people who send them out to beg know that there’s more money in remaining a victim than becoming a survivor. If being embroiled in this kind of diabolical business is the price of fame, I certainly don’t envy Obaid-Chinoy or her Oscar one bit. Do you?
Published in The Express Tribune, June 30th, 2012.
COMMENTS (50)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Sharmeen should pay some compensation to the victims as they have come forward and took the immense risk to promote awareness in others - it's not as simple in Pakistan as you describing!!! Abdul Nishapuri, could be bit harsh but, showing the reality!
Saving Face is a documentary that brought to light the plight of poor women in our country and the fact is that the educated are risking their lives to bring out this tabooed issue so that the establishment is then forced to make/change laws to help these women. I respect and am proud of SOC's work and films....unfortunately this is the only way these social issues are taken heed off and the country jolted to help. Well done SOC!
I never praised the documentary than and even now!
I have read all the comments and I feel amazed at some of the views expressed! But lets look at this logically. Firstly, Ruksana took part in a documentary and signed a release. Now that release would have said standard things like "if you sign this, your image will be used". Now no one on this thread has seen whether there was a clause in the release saying that Ruksana will be paid any money. Usually, people that participate in documentaries do not get money for it. This point should have been explained to her, but we do not know if it was. Secondly, Ruksana went back to her husband and in laws because they made threats that she will never see her daughter again. Thirdly, in the film, Ruksana was offered surgery which she refused. Fourthly, she was offered a house but she refused. Now I don't know if Ruksana is being coerced by her husband and in laws, but what more can Ms Obaid-Chinoy give her? She has been given the opportunity to have a new face AND a new house, but she has refused. In my opinion, Ms Obaid-Chinoy has offered to do a lot for her already, much more then the government has. And to all those people who are saying that Ms Obaid-Chinoy should do something else, why don't they dig into their own pockets and help their sister out? Then we will see who on this thread is actually concerned for Ruksana's fate and who just wants to complain for complaining sake.
Before the movie was shown i had a lot of apprehension. I think it did show a negative image for Pakistan with a positive story line the same month it aired there were 2 cases of acid throwing in the United States. The documentary could have ended saying the acid throwing is a horrific crime with stats from all over the world it should have ended as a global awareness campaign. Who knows what the intentions of the film maker were ? But what would be noble is to use that awareness and money that was made to help future victims make charitable burn units etc then the outcome of the whole project in my eyes is a positive one. Rather the money go to ruksana it should be used to set up burn institution and for lobbying to make this crime harsher and also to NGO etc go to villages and educate men on how Un-Islamic it is and women for there right this brings change in society.
We all know that majority of NGOs are frauds, and their purpose is only to get donations from Western countries, and then build houses in Defence. I knew Shermeen Ahmed Chinoy was a fraud from day one. PS: And this comes from a moderate
i am amused by the comments. so not only Rukhsana but his husband also is entitled for the money, because if he had not thrown acid on Rukhsana's face she couldn't have appeared in this documentry.
So how Islamic Help's HELP makes Sharmeen innocent? Are you guys blind or just trying to save Sharmeen by any means? No where in that document it has been debunked Rukhsana claim.
As someone suggested, there was something OFFERED by Sharmeen et all that made Rukhsana to convince for surgery. Women like Sharmeen of NGOs always greedy to find a subject for their fame and earning. They found Rukhsana, convinced her for surgery for sake of money, maybe they convinced her hubby too. Now the movie is over and Sharmeen got oscar, Sharmeen backed off.
It is irony that in our country we embrace Mukhtaran Mai when needed and rejects Rukhsana when not required. The dark side of NGOs
@ gp65
The article says: “Obaid-Chinoy says that a donor promised to buy Rukhsana a house” An oral promise is also a contract according to law.
I think the documentary IS about a doctor who performs FREE surgeries! Isn’t it ironic that in order to get a free surgery, the victim had to participate in a documentary about a doctor who performs free surgery?
it is interesting that the issue of acid throwing is being highlighted but i am sorry to see that the vocies are against Ms Chinoy who has ventured to raise the voices of acid victim on intertantional fora. let us not be mistaken by the fact that the conservative elements will always oppose such filmmakers. She should continue even with more vigor. And the acid victim should remain content with the fact that her issue has been highlighted and she has collected sympathies. A documentary film maker can not be bound to pay, as participants are never paid actors . Raza
Read this all and weep: https://twitter.com/sharmeenochinoy/status/219006738844758016/photo/1 Islamic Help in support of what Sharmeen has been saying
Also to Anon, u are delusional- Watch Saving faCE its funded by HBO and Channel 4- Man there are some serious conspiracy theorists out there- So what if coke is showing her films, doesnt it invest in music? applaud it not condemn it- always looking for bad things never good-
Islamic help, an org working out of England, has issued a public statement about this issue. From the looks of it, there is definitely something strange about the claims made by Rukhsana and what actually transpired. The good news is that they are still offering to get her surgery done for her, if she chooses to accept this time. Out of all of us, finally someone got up and offered to help and be a part of the solution.
https://twitter.com/sharmeenochinoy/status/219006738844758016/photo/1
S.O. chinoy should pay the victim if she promised to pay.....
@expat
Zaid hamid makes kind of movies you are interested in. so my suggestion would be to ditch sharmeen and watch zaid hamid.
"What’s important to remember, in the end, is that the very man who threw acid on Rukhsana’s face is now demanding money from Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy"....
Let's not forget this is NOT hte first instance of these acid-burn victims have being used. Remember Musarrat Misbah of Depilex fame has been using them for years through her SmileAgain Foundation. The scam was big news a couple of years ago when it was discovered she had been just pocketing donations received on their behalf while their treatments were being paid by an Italian Smile Again when then cut it's funding for Misbah's NGO. Of course no surprise then that Misbah was rewarded wait a President’s Pride of Performance Award ;-)
Sharmeen has always had problems with her documentaries in the past and funding sources are always sketchy. First she gets a State Dept money for her Saving Face project (not a conspiracy theorist you can go to the website to view receipts) then she get her funding for her so called social awareness campaign of Ho Yaqeen heaviliy sponsored by Coca Cola while peddling its products. Seriously not only does Coca COla not only have a shady Corporate Social Responsibility reputation in the West but is widely loathed as a corrosive symbol of globalization that is anthetical to local busienss and culture. And then she calls herself an independent filmaker and expects to not be criticises? Woman needs to get her principles sorted.
For all those who are speaking so eloquently and brazenly about Sharmeen not fulfilling her promises, for their information documentaries are made to create awareness among the masses of what happens in not only Pakistan but anywhere in the world. This does not mean you can go ahead and blackmail the very people who have the decency to look into your problems and to provide support. This documentary was not about one Rukhsana but thousand others. What Sharmeen did is commendable and she should not only be praised for it but be supported through it all.
Yes Sharmeen Chinoy wins an Oscar so she is free of all defects and shortcomings, and is above criticism. Care to shed light on her 2004 interview to rediff where she praises Musharraf as a model for secularism, and calls Benazir Bhutto (the now worshipped by liberals leader) a bad politician hence justifying Musharrafs dictatorship? http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/feb/09inter.htm
Why does sharmeen always make films around subjects whose narrative and definitions have completely defined by the Western media, and those token Third World countries issues like oppression of Muslim women under veil (Lifting of the veil), Muslim terrorism (Children of the Taliban), abuse of Muslim women (Saving Face) Her documentary list reads like something that would be on the playlist of Glenn Beck or Fox News trying to warn and scare its viewers about the barbarian culture that exists on the other side of the Atlantic in the hinterlands of the Muslim World. Just wondering, would she ever do a documentary on the costs and consequences of drone warfare a much needed area that needs to be explored and broadcast in a documentary about the human, military, economic and political costs of drone warfare in Pak. Or will this subject scare away her Western donors and not bring in that much favourable coverage in the Western media?
I assisted the BBC on a documentary on honour killings/acid victims, back in 1999. NO money changed hands. The objective of a documentary is to tell someone's story, not to turn them into paid actors. Sharmeen should stand her ground, else all future documentaries made in this country will be compromised.
The same thing happened in India when the oscar winning movie slumdog millionaire was made. The poor kids families started asking for money that wasn't promised but was made by the movie. The indian NGOs got together and decided to put the kids from the slums who acted in the movie into schools. They didnt think it would be fair to throw them back to slums. Yes, Shirmeen may and should utilize the aid that she may get if she gets it but if she didnt promise any money, then this woman might as well blackmail her into getting houses and cars. Sadly, She has an unfortunate life and I think someone or some organization should help her see a doctor for her surgery etc and maybe collect some money for her but the fact is that Shirmeen is not legally binded to do so. DR, Jawad is promising philanthropy by doing free surgeries, Shirmeen is not. She made the movie; did not promise houses.
@Arsalan: That's a load off my mind. Here I've been thinking that the writers in this section were all black and white monsters with no bodies. No more nightmares!
Just tell me one thing. Sharmeen got to parade on red carpet with Hollywood celebrities, got numerous paid invitations for talks and tons of business for her company because of this documentary. What did the three victims got? Still claiming to have no elitist entitlement, you ladies Bena? What is the difference between you and male chauvinists who claim to have no male privilege.Tell me what was wrong in Abdul Neshapuri's comment.
@faraz: "If participating in documentary was the only way to get a plastic surgery, then it’s blackmailing: no documentary, no surgery" It is FREE SURGERY that they would get in return for participating in the documentary. I do not think free surgery is an entitlement that people can claim. It is a kind of compensation. It is not as though Rukhsar bibi said I am here to pay for plastic surgery and they said we wil not operate on you unless you agree to featured in the documentary even though you are a paying patient. That would have been blackmail but that's not what happened.
Secondly if she signed a consent form that did not reference compensation then all your issues about them deserving compensation because there is a 'cost to be paid' is irrelevant. They had a choice to be or not be in the documentary. When they signed the consent form they chose to participate. They are not entitled to anything that the consent form did not agree to.
It is not just documentaries - magazines too do not pay for photo shoots of actors and models. at least that is how it is in India and US.
Really disappointed in Bena. You didn't have to stoop so low just to protect a friend. The elitist entitled mindset is oozing in every line of this article. BTW, it is really pathetic to assume that Rukhsana needs psychological treatment and/or is dancing to the tunes of a male, just because she happens to be a woman.
@Salman: "Well if she promised the victims money, then the purpose of documentary is compromised as the victims then become her paid employe and their actions and reactions will be biased"
But that's the point . She Did Not promise any money to the victims, she promised surgery to recover from the acid burns. The surgery was rejected by Ruksar Bibi. Any profits frm the releasing the documentary were promied to the foundation that helps these victims and not to the victims themselves. But the documentary was not allowed to be released n Pakistan ergo no profits.
Many people forget that there is a risk professionals take before doing some work, specially telling the truth. Sharmeen is just a person who spent her time, and production's money, and other resources needed to make this work done. She didn't do it for oscar or I'm sure Oscar just happend out of the no-where.
People who are questioning her integrity, should see their faces in mirror. And ask themslves if they have ever done any little good for the society. I'm proud of her not because she won Oscar, but that she spoke the truth out loud. We need more work done.
@faraz: "What price of fame? If Sharmeen had promised compensation, then she should fulfill her promise."
YEs but it looks like the consent forms were signed and the consent forms did not reference any compennsation. IF what was said is that she would share profits from Pakistan viewing of documentary and refused to do that, she would be in breach of contract. But it looks ike she was not even allowed to distribute her documentary in Pakistan.
Shirmeen picked up a topic we all may know off but we would rather sweep it under the carpet than openly claiming it as part of our society. Documentries are based on facts. There is an amazing documentry called 'corporations' that highlights the amount of control millionaire companies in america have over its citizens and how they often manipulate it to sell products that may cause serious health injuries. But this documentary is applauded by the people because it creates awareness. In fact its used in Universities as part of courses for business management and ethics. Why cant we applaud Shirmeen for creating awareness? When will we stop being so defensive about our image that we would rather be blind and let these things happen? Make sure no one in Pakistan makes documentries about beggars, poverty, animal rights, rights of human beings, sexual assaults, rapes, child labour because YES we all know it happens and is getting worse but NO we have an image to show off. and who cares about awareness?
@Author:
Perhaps a few sober voices are still left in the country otherwise it is a cacophony of nonsense.
is this really tribune? people are actually making sense in the comments section?
and the article incriminates obaid-chinoy more tbh.
azer and adnan have hit the nail on the head.
Why does sharmeen always make films around subjects whose narrative and definitions have completely defined by the Western media, and those token Third World countries issues like oppression of Muslim women under veil (Lifting of the veil), Muslim terrorism (Children of the Taliban), abuse of Muslim women (Saving Face) Her documentary list reads like something that would be on the playlist of Glenn Beck or Fox News trying to warn and scare its viewers about the barbarian culture that exists on the other side of the Atlantic in the hinterlands of the Muslim World. Just wondering, would she ever do a documentary on the costs and consequences of drone warfare a much needed area that needs to be explored and broadcast in a documentary about the human, military, economic and political costs of drone warfare in Pak. Or will this subject scare away her Western donors and not bring in that much favourable coverage in the Western media?
The writers picture is photoshopped.
And to those who blames Chinoy and Shoaib Mansoor for presenting negative image of Pakistan... IT IS YOUR FACE AND YOU DONT HAVE COURAGE TO OWN IT...!!
@ Author, Madam, with due respect, we Pakistanis have a very cheap nature, when one of us gets fame outside our country and gives us a better identity in fields of art/science.. We start defaming them with so-called and self-created controversies. Sharmeen didnt get OSCAR for Rukhsana or any other victim.. Bt she got it for her artistic talent in its presentation. You cant get its credit from her for some greedy peoples. There are thousands of acid victims take them make a film and then try to get even a NIGAAR AWARD for it.. U'll knws wts price of an oscar
“The fact that Chinoy won the Oscar will always hurt the wounded pride of acid-throwing Pakistani males”. This is totally unjustified. Though I agree with most of what has been written by the author.
I'm not going to make point-blank judgments here, but given the education levels of the women who were documented in "Saving Face", it's very likely that they didn't fully understand what terms they agreed to during filming. Although it's the producers' responsibility to make sure that the participants fully understand what they're signing up for, I think that Rukhsana should be more pleased about the awareness it brought to her cause than the financial benefits of it.
Also curious as to why didn't the filmmakers try to convince her to leave her husband and his family, or help her file a case against him. But giving credit where it's due, bringing these poor women's plight of misery to attention is above any 'ghairat' or financial gain, and hats off to Sharmeen for that.
@ Naila How is that not clear? Its common sense; documentaries on controversial subjects can earn a severe backlash from the family, society and state. There is a cost one has to pay for participating in it. If participating in documentary was the only way to get a plastic surgery, then it’s blackmailing: no documentary, no surgery. If participating in controversial documentaries is such fun then why did Acid Survivor Foundation prevent Sharmeen from filming the documentary inside Pakistan? Further, she lives with the same person who threw acid on her; this means she did it for money.
Well if she promised the victims money, then the purpose of documentary is compromised as the victims then become her paid employe and their actions and reactions will be biased. You can promise poor people money and they will burn their faces to get a house. In USA domestic violence is very common and women are most likely victims. Some studies suggest upto 20% of women in US has been assaulted at some point. Why don't I see Oscar winning documentaries on their domestic abuse? You say a word to question the intention or motivation of documentary maker and they call you supporter or even perpetrator of the acid crime.
Excellent analysis Bina Shah. My heart actually bleeds for Rukhsana bibi - to have to live with the person who threw acid on her face just makes me cringe. I had a few interactions on twitter regarding this and it seems that people tend to confuse a documentary with a movie. They think that Rukhsana bibi starred in that movie hence she should be compensated. Sharmeen should remain steadfast and not give a rupee!
@faraz Rukhsana did the documentary for surgery, not money. It was after it's success that someone has coerced her that she should ask for money. NO filmmaker would EVER promise money- how is that not clear? @village idiot There is proof that Rukhsana rejected houses and surgery, you want to avoid that reality and continue perpetuating lies?
What price of fame? If Sharmeen had promised compensation, then she should fulfill her promise. Your child beggar comparison doesn’t make sense; Rukhsana herself is demanding compensation from Sharmeen. Common sense suggests that the victim participated in the documentary for some benefit. Rukhsana is still living with her husband, it means that she definitely did this documentary for money, and not to inspire others or highlight the issue.
The question is that weather Obaid Chinoy did earn anything from that Documentary and if she did then obviously in my view it is a theft as victim was the subject and victim is clearly exploited for personal gains. Miss Obaid travel worldwide on the basis of this movie and won awards and even she won Grants to help the women and empower women in Pakistan and she never bothered to pay a penny to the Victim show us the real picture . The donors of Sharmeen should ask where that money is Gone as now Shirmeen is claiming she is a Movie Producer rather than a Philanthropist.