Recently, the Supreme Court has taken a significant step towards change by issuing a handbook for judges and lawyers to use in court, replacing the long-standing male-dominant term with new words that are fraught with anti-feminist sentiments. This important intervention by the Supreme Court is based on an understanding of how the power of words affects society in general and in various fields, particularly in the field of law. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the foreword of this book said, “This handbook is designed to help the legal community understand and respond to gender-based misconceptions.” The Supreme Court has also directed that no harmful gender-based stereotypes should be used in judicial decisions and legislative drafts.
The handbook published by the Supreme Court contains a large collection of words and phrases currently in use and new words and phrases suggested for use. It prescribes a change in the terminology used in the judicial system and suggests the use of new terminology in drafting, court judgments and pleadings. Further, Supreme Court advises that such words should not only be avoided while passing judgment in the court, but should also be corrected in response to them. Reliance on such misconceptions will obstruct the delivery of justice. Judges should understand and try to avoid such misconceptions.
Gender-based misconceptions lead to various forms of denial of justice. The court's attempt is to create a view based on equality rather than judging facts segregated by gender differences. The same court pointed to several earlier judgments and directed that gender-based misconceptions should no longer occur.
The handbook provides two lists of words and phrases currently in use and new ones. It has been advised not to use the old ones anymore. Here is a large collection of words suggested by the Supreme Court to use new words, excluding words that are misused in the legal field that reflect male dominance and anti-women sentiments. It calls for a change in the legal sector itself.
The Supreme Court has suggested changing and recommending new language usages that portray women as second-class citizens. Historically, several factors have led to such gender-based misconceptions.
All of the following 10 words related to women previously used should be replaced with 'woman', as per the guidelines: career women, chaste woman, easy virtue, fallen woman, harlot, Indian woman / western woman, charmer, courtesan, harlot, loose morals/easy virtue woman, Licensing Girl, Unpleasant Girl etc. In addition, some new terms have also been suggested to replace the terms used in relation to children such as 'child prostitute' and 'child victim of human trafficking'. and as 'illegitimate child' instead of 'child of unmarried parents'. New terms have been suggested to replace previous misconceptions that sexualized women. Some non-masculine words, i.e. words that are only depicted as female activities, are replaced and new ones are suggested. Similarly, some words used only in masculine form have been changed and new words like entrepreneur, breadwinner, sloth, sloth have been suggested.
Misconceptions prevent individuals from being recognized as separate entities, hence misconceptions. Failure to understand things accurately clouds judgment. Many times, judges cling to such misconceptions unknowingly. Such thinking, without differential analysis, would be against the constitutional value of equality of all. Such misconceptions even affect judicial reasoning and, if it happens, it leads to perpetuation of individual liberty and discrimination.
Society realizes that women and men are given separate responsibilities which are considered as their duties. Similarly, women are considered to have diverse personality traits. For example, if judgments were made on the assumption that women would lie about rape or sexual abuse, it would be completely unfair. Some of the ideas that establish that women and men have certain inherent characteristics relate to their physical, emotional, and cognitive abilities.
The manual lists the following misconceptions as false and explains them in detail with reasons; Women are emotionally reactive, take decisions without logical thinking, physically weaker than men, passive, compassionate, unmarried women are unable to take important decisions, disadvantaged women have less skills and so on. All these are based on the social, family, genetic and occupational background of each individual. Nutrition is the foundation of physical fitness. Gender-based obligations are a social construct. The manual highlights and highlights gender-based misconceptions in Banwari Devi's case and several lower court judgments on the Visakha guidelines.
It explains various misconceptions including: (a) the misconception that sex workers cannot be raped (b) the misconception that a healthy man would not be willing to have sex with or rape a disabled woman (c) if the rapist marries the raped woman, her dignity will be restored, and Those who do not show these symptoms are lying (f) If a woman talks to her rapist, her accusation is false (g) Misconceptions of a sexually assaulted woman to report immediately, if delayed, it is false (h) Misconceptions that upper caste men do not have sex with lower caste women, Complaining like that is wrong. Incidents should be viewed differently, each incident should be understood on its own merits and judgment should be exercised, and matters should not be judged on the basis of common misconceptions. This guide dispels many more misconceptions regarding sexual assault, rape, and societal expectations of women's behavior. Emphasizes that centuries of male dominance have made women's lives miserable in many ways. Two types of moral standards have been developed, one for women and one for women. This unequal standard is used to justify and minimize the wrongdoings of men, while, in turn, punishing and punishing women.
The survivor should not be re-stressed or hurt their mental and physical dignity. Judges have a special responsibility not only to avoid such misconceptions, but also to stand against them, detect and correct them, counter wrong beliefs in the society and understand what is right and what is wrong. . Based on previous court decisions, certain types of issues are presented in detail. Male-centric issues and their distortion, examples of wrong positions taken by lower courts in common cases involving women were pointed out. In cases of rape, how to deal with the matter in the absence of physical injuries should be tailored to the specific nature of the case. The authenticity of their report should not be doubted based on false opinions. The two-finger test is illegal and unconstitutional.
Delay in registration of case, delay in registration of FIR should not be mechanically put under suspicion. Thus, the Supreme Court has presented the matter in a very thorough and precise manner.
Saji Mathew Ombudsman, MGNREGS and PMAY (G) Alappuzha & Member, Child Welfare Committee, Alappuzha, Kerala.
Brinchi Narayan B. Associate Professor (Law) Panda Xavier Law School
