By Sharanya Gopinathan
If you skim through all the major news sites today, you’re likely to see a headline on each site that talks about how 5 judges of different faiths are to commence hearing on triple talaq today. The article will also tell you that the five judges are Chief Justice JS Khehar, who is Sikh, Kurian Joseph, who is Christian, RF Nariman, Parsi, UU Lalit, a Hindu and Abdul Nazeer, a Muslim. Waow!
It’s almost boring how typical this is, no? They took care to cover all their religious bases, and completely forgot about women while they did it. It’s always annoying to know that any case is decided by primarily by a bench of exclusively men, but it’s doubly frustrating to think that there will be no women hearing such a loaded and important case that has a disproportionate impact on women as this one.
All the headlines seem very congratulatory, even (or actually especially) The Quint‘s completely unironic headline that reads 5 Men, 5 Faiths: SC Judges to Hear Pleas Challenging Triple Talaq.
That being said, maybe it’s not that surprising. Shockingly, there is only one female judge in the entire Supreme Court right now, and have been only six since 1950. So maybe Justice Banumathi was busy. Or maybe, considering how often we see the term ‘women-and-children’ in legal documents and even the Constitution, they really thought that a bench of men could just decide for women what’s best for them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
May 12, 2017 at 4:58 pm
As a member of the legal profession, I find myself quite offended by this post. However, I realize that as a lay person you may not have any idea of the niceties involved. Let me then explain to you that the “Court” has no gender. Regardless of one’s own experiences, a Judge must decide each case upon merits based on the Law and the facts everyone, without being influenced by one’s prejudices. Therefore, as the Court has no gender, the question of female Judges versus male Judges constituting the Bench is completely irrelevant. The Court shall decide. Kindly do some research before writing an opinion piece as they call it and try to be slightly more neutral. I realise that the gender question is quite a hot topic at the moment, but do not influence the readers in such an uninformed fashion.
August 22, 2017 at 4:53 pm
I agree with Anindita Ghosh… We should not bring gender everytime. The fact that women are so less on number clearly justifies why in this case there could not be a woman appointed even if they would have wanted. Now why women are in do small numbers, is a separate issue, and let’s not mix it here. This judgement seems to be a step toward bridging the Gap.. just my thoughts. 🙂
August 22, 2017 at 8:53 pm
The ‘Court’ has no gender.
Nor caste, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity. Hence all these ‘unprejudiced’ judgements spanning across the years.
August 22, 2017 at 11:25 pm
facts aside, it is quite galling to have only guys pass judgement on an issue that has plagued so many muslim women for so long. this issue has raged on for a fair few DECADES and now they suddenly sit up and talk of justice? its a bit like Aamir khan going on national tv telling women that breast milk is best for the baby..like he understands what it is to breastfeed (it can be soul shatteringly painful I WILL add). very galling coming from a guy. good on the writer for calling a spade a spade. so many judgements have been passed in our courts and are you telling me that they have been passed without the influence of the judge’s gender coming to bear on it?I think not.