140 likes | 256 Views
Gender specific laws in India:. A story of celebration or dismay? Rajashri Dasgupta. Status of women in India. Women bear burden of patriarchy in son preference society Patriarchal norms operate through family & community with State concurrence Vulnerable to discrimination and violence
E N D
Gender specific laws in India: A story of celebration or dismay? Rajashri Dasgupta
Status of women in India • Women bear burden of patriarchy in son preference society • Patriarchal norms operate throughfamily & community with State concurrence • Vulnerable to discrimination and violence • State fails to provide minimum welfare: education, health, child & old age support
Indian women: harsh facts • Decliningchild sex ratio over decades • Rising incidence of violence– in family and community • 50,000 women die every year during child birth & pregnancy related incidents • Despite decadal increase in literacy by 49 %, every third woman is illiterate
Late ’70s: Women unite for change • Rape and incidences of violence galvanise contemporary women’s movement • Autonomous, reject male leadership and male bastion of political parties • Articulate, educated, urban activists • Some rooted in radical politics & protests • Emphasize gender equity & rights as pivotal to change, transformation of society
Antiquated laws, judicial bias • Rape law: no amendments since 1860 • Judiciary Bias: • Mathura is “habituated” to sex, must have given “consent”; • Rameeza Bee is a “prostitute”; • “How can an upper caste man touch or rape Bhanwari?” • Campaign Issues: Law reform • “Consent”, sexual history of rape victim, • Definition of rape &, marital rape, • judicial bias
“Golden era” of rape legislations • 1983: first revision in rape law since 1860 • burdenof proof in custodial rape on accused • minimum punishment for various types of rape stepped up 7-10 years • In-camera rape trials • 2003 cross-examination of victim’s sexual history not allowed • 2006 Sexual Assault Bill
New law, banning sex selection • New reproductive technologies for sex determination of foetus in 1980s • Approx 50 million girls, women “missing”, in India’s population :Unicef • 1994 Government passes Prohibition of Sex- Selection Act, to prevent sex selection • 2002 Act amended to outlaw pre-conception sex selection • Regulation tightened, punishment more stringent; woman no longer liable for punishment
PILs: justice limited • Unethical Net en contraceptive trials; 1987 PIL on grounds of safety & uniformed consent • Court bans Net en use in government hospitals • but private sector/ NGOs allowed use of injectables • Un authorised, illegal use of pellets for quinacrine sterislisation (QS) of women • 1998 Supreme Court bans QS • does not prosecute guilty • no health follow ups of women or compensation
PIL: “Your flirting is hurting” • 1992 Bhanwari Devi raped • PIL seeks framework to deal with sexual harassment • Court 1997: sexual harassment at workplace violates women’s rights under CEDAW • recommends complaints committees by employers to ensure conducive atmosphere • 2010 Bill against sexual harassment • Defines sexual harassment as infringement of women’s fundamental right & gender equality
Law, reforms, PILs: reality check • Rape: few trials, convictions lower than 5 % • Stricter laws did not deter crime: Crimes against women increased by 4.1% over 2008 and by 31.0% over 2005 • Child sex ratio: lowest since Independence, 914 females to every 1,000 males ( 2011), technology goes “underground” • Quinacrine sterilisation goes “underground” • Drug trials: absence of patient rights, weak monitoring-regulation • Sexual harassment : No Complaints Committee in un organised sector, rural areas
Rape laws ineffective. Why? • Law focus on stringent punishment • not on plugging procedural loopholes, guidelines for strict implementation, adequate compensation for victim, timely trials • Strict punishment deters conviction • Onus of proof on accused • Strict laws give more power to police; tardy investigation, forensic evidence • Trials - cumbersome, lengthy, lacks monitoring
PIL: experience • Sporadic; focus of campaigns on law reforms • Personal laws: “beyond realm of Court” • Risk factors: depends on judge’s orientation • activists lose control over case • depends on Court “experts” and expertise • High Courts, Supreme Court “remote” for activists • campaigns weakened, shifts energy to court • used as last resort
Campaign:Thinking Aloud • Love-hate relationship with law • Women’s issues in public discourse; political parties cannot ignore women’s problems • Enforcement elusive; monitoring weak • Each law vested more power in state enforcement machinery, stringent punishment • Can advance for women's rights be in contrast to progressive theories of civil rights? When basic attitude of State remain anti-poor, to what extent can laws bring about social justice?