New Delhi: In a big step to weed out stereotypes and perceived notions against women, the Supreme Court, in a maiden initiative, has compiled a glossary of words to be avoided by judges and lawyers in writing judgments or filing cases before courts.
The initiative, a brainchild of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, lists some of the commonly used references used in the context of women and sexual crimes in a book released on Wednesday by the CJI titled, ‘Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes’ and suggests alternate terms or sentences to be used in its place.
For instance, use of words such as slut, whore, harlot, seductress, fallen woman, a woman of easy virtue, Indian woman or western woman will now be referred to as ‘woman’. Even expressions such as chaste woman, fallen woman, career woman will be just ‘woman’ and calling wife dutiful, faithful and obedient has also been replaced with the expression ‘wife’.
Under the new handbook, terms such as housewife is to be replaced with homemaker, ‘affair’ as ‘relationship outside marriage, sex worker and not prostitute, and eve-teasing to be addressed as ‘street sexual harassment’.
The handbook, a digital copy of which is accessible on the Supreme Court website, emphasises on using the meaning of words to replace terms such as adulteress, concubine, mistress, and hooker. In case of children or juveniles, the glossary of words lists out words such as bastard, marriageable age, child prostitute that should be avoided.
In a foreword to the book, CJI Chandrachud said, “The handbook aims to assist judges and the legal community in identifying, understanding and combating stereotypes about women.” It identifies common stereotypes about women, many of which have been used by courts in the past to show why they are incorrect and how it may distort the application of the law, the CJI said.
While this handbook is not mandatory for judges and lawyers to follow, it underlined the need for having one by saying, “If harmful stereotypes are relied on by judges, it can lead to a distortion of the objective and impartial application of the law. This will perpetuate discrimination and exclusion.”
The book said, “If a judge relies on preconceived assumptions about people or groups when deciding cases or writing judgements, the harm caused can be enormous. Stereotypes impact the impartiality and the intellectual rigour of judicial decisions where they cause judges to ignore or bypass the requirements of law or distort the application of the law vis-à-vis specific persons or groups.”
CJI stated in the book: “The Handbook aims to equip judges with the knowledge and tools to critically evaluate their own reasoning, writing and to ensure that justice is served fairly and equitably…The intention is not to criticise or cast doubt on past judgments but merely to show how stereotypes may unwittingly be employed.”
A press release issued by the Supreme Court said that the “groundbreaking initiative” is aimed at fulfilling the judiciary’s goal of eradicating “preconceived gender stereotypes” from judicial discourse, especially those concerning women.
The handbook also identified common reasoning patterns that cloud judgments given by courts. It lists out stereotypes based on ‘inherent characteristics’ of women, gender roles, and those based on sex or sexual violence.
The book tries to break the jinx surrounding commonly accepted but distorted stereotypes existing in society that percolate into judgments rendered by courts. The book compiles some of those reasonings such as all women want to have children, women are overly emotional and cannot take decisions in life, women ought to be submissive or subordinate to men, wives should do all household chores and look after her husband’s parents, women who are homemakers do not contribute to household, working women are less competent at work and do not care about their children.
The list also addresses why the thinking about women’s attire, habits such as smoking or drinking, cannot become a contributing factor in sexual crimes and a defence for persons accused of such crimes. Stating the reality, the handbook explained, “The clothing or attire of a woman neither indicates that she wishes to engage in sexual relations nor is it an invitation to touch her…. their choice of clothing represents a form of self-expression that is independent of questions of sexual relations.”
The glossary also attacks similar perceptions that victims of sexual assault should cry incessantly or be suicidal, should not be seen to interact normally with the accused or else her complaint is false, delay in reporting the crime suggests the victim is lying, young people who engage in casual sex increases likelihood of sexual violence, dominant caste men cannot rape or engage in sexual relations with women from oppressed castes, and so on.
The book busts the notion that sex workers and transgenders cannot be raped and termed the thought that “good women” should prefer death over rape as “patriarchal”.
The book also condemned marriage of the victim with her rapist as a way to undo the offence of rape and said, “The marriage of the rapist to the survivor / victim does not restore honour. Rather, it intensifies the trauma faced by the survivor / victim and encourages the rapist to engage in further violence. Marriage is not a remedy to the violence of rape.”
The exhaustive compilation was possible due to the brainstorming done by a sub-committee of the Supreme Court’s e-Committee comprising two high court judges – justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and Pratibha Singh and professor Jhuma Sen who helped in preparing the initial draft. The CJI in his foreword thanked the committee and a host of other officers in the Supreme Court and his law clerks for their contributions.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.