India is rather
startling. The system that upholds gender equality may display imbalance
in the same sphere. The attorney general, K.K. Venugopal, recently
spoke up strongly about the paucity of girls judges within the Indian judiciary , saying that there have been only two women judges within the
Supreme Court among 34 and that no woman had ever been made Chief
Justice of India. Women comprised only 7.2 per cent of judges in the
Supreme Court and high courts, while the percentage of women among
designated senior counsel was low too. Data were lacking on the number
of women judges in tribunals and lower courts. Mr Venugopal urged the
Supreme Court to ensure that the percentage of women in the higher
judiciary rose to 50 per cent, since the Supreme Court collegium was the
most powerful appointing authority. Surely this imbalance should have
been emphasized earlier?
The occasion for the attorney general’s
comments was a plea against the conditions for bail imposed on a sexual
offender by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The accused was to ask the
complainant to tie a rakhi on him, giving her a ‘brother’s’ gift of Rs
11,000 and another Rs 5,000 for her child. These conditions diminished
the offence and trivialized the woman’s trauma. Nine lawyers had
petitioned the Supreme Court, saying that such directions normalize a
crime. In his response, the attorney general said that the conditions
were unacceptable and will
cause grave harm to the victim and society, that judicial orders should
conform to judicial standards and such things should not recur.
According to Mr Venugopal, the presence of girls
judges would ensure balance and empathy in cases of sexual violence.
This view prompted his detailed statement about the sparseness of women
in the judicial system. While the importance of Mr Venugopal’s
insistence on gender balance within the judiciary can't be overestimated, his comment that ladies
would have more empathy in matters of sexual violence seems to suffer
from a gendered assumption too. Following the law without bias, together
with rules such as excluding comments on the plaintiff’s character,
dress or livelihood, should go a long way towards delivering justice
irrespective of the judge’s gender. Executing Mr Venugopal’s other
recommendation that each one lawyers be sensitized, however, would be a meaningful breakthrough
{With input from news agency language) If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure.
0 Comments