GS Paper 2: Judiciary
Gender Diversity Gap: India’s judiciary suffers from a lack of gender diversity, impacting the fairness and inclusivity of the justice system.
Limited Progress in Higher Judiciary: Despite efforts to increase female participation at entry levels, the representation of women in higher judicial ranks remains significantly low.
Need for Comprehensive Analysis: Addressing this gender gap requires understanding issues of entry, retention, structural limitations, and policy inadequacies.
Analyzing Gender Disparity in Judicial Representation
- Entry-Level Improvement: Although entry-level roles have seen some progress, gender disparity persists.
-
- Statistics: As of 2023, women comprise 36.3% of the district judiciary, with over half of new civil judges (junior division) in 14 states being women.
- Higher Judiciary Gaps: Female representation declines sharply at higher judicial levels.
- Current Representation: Only 13.4% of High Court judges and 9.3% of Supreme Court judges are women (as of January 2024).
- State Variations: States like Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Tripura show minimal or no representation of women in the judiciary.
- Funnel Effect: This imbalance at entry levels restricts the advancement of women to higher courts, intensifying the gender gap.
Reasons for Gender Imbalance in the Judiciary
- Entry-Level Barriers
- Continuous Practice Requirement: Judicial Service Rules in several states require continuous practice for advocates aspiring to join the judiciary, disproportionately impacting women who may take career breaks for family obligations.
- Lack of Support for Family Responsibilities: Women often struggle to meet continuous practice requirements due to inadequate support for balancing family and career.
- Absence of Maternity Benefits and Minimum Stipends
- Maternity Leave and Financial Support: Maternity benefits and minimum stipends are lacking, pushing women to choose between career and family.
- Resulting Drop-Off: Many female advocates unable to maintain continuous practice or financial stability find judicial roles inaccessible.
- Work Culture and Social Expectations
- Male-Dominated Culture: The legal field, traditionally male-dominated, harbors biases and cultural norms unfavorable to women.
- Discrimination and Bias: Women in judicial roles frequently encounter subtle biases and discrimination, challenging their authority and equality among peers.
Retention Challenges for Women in Judiciary
- Unsupportive Policies
Transfer Policies: Rigid transfer requirements, without flexibility for family obligations, pose challenges for women, particularly those with caregiving responsibilities.
- Lack of Supportive Infrastructure
- Basic Amenities: Many court complexes lack essentials such as women’s washrooms and sanitary disposal facilities.
- Impact on Women’s Comfort: Lack of female-friendly infrastructure communicates a lack of consideration for women’s needs, reinforcing their marginalization.
- Absence of Family-Friendly Amenities
Feeding Rooms and Crèches: Limited facilities like crèches and feeding rooms restrict women’s ability to balance work and family.
For instance, the Delhi High Court has a crèche, but it serves only children under six, limiting its usefulness.
Steps to Address Underrepresentation of Women in Judiciary
- Adoption of ‘Female Gaze’ in Policies
- Gendered Policy Lens: Applying a female perspective to policies could bridge the gap, ensuring women’s unique needs are acknowledged.
- Feminist Policy Review: Reviewing judiciary policies through a feminist lens can address how seemingly neutral policies may inadvertently disadvantage women.
- Inclusive Policies to Prioritize Women’s Needs
- Women-Centric Perspective: Policies should recognize the specific barriers women face in judicial careers.
- Representation in Decision-Making: Analyzing infrastructure committees shows limited female membership; only three High Courts (Delhi, Allahabad, and Himachal Pradesh) have female members on their building committees.
- Increased Female Representation in Judicial Administration
- Broader Representation Needed: Lack of female representation in high-level registries and judicial academies hampers the integration of gender-sensitive policies.
- Policies Reflecting Lived Experiences: Implementing policies informed by women’s experiences—such as gender-sensitive recruitment, transfer protocols, and support for family care—could prevent further marginalization.
Conclusion
The underrepresentation of women in India’s judiciary points to deep-rooted systemic issues. Bridging this gender gap requires overhauling judiciary policies, infrastructure, and culture to be more inclusive and gender-sensitive. Addressing women’s specific needs through a “female gaze” could mitigate unintended consequences of neutral policies and cultivate a more equitable work environment in the judiciary.
Explore our Books: https://apnipathshala.com/product-category/books/
Explore Our test Series: https://tests.apnipathshala.com/
