Context:
Despite progress at entry levels, women remain significantly under-represented in higher judiciary roles, highlighting systemic barriers and a persistent “funnel effect” that hinders advancement.
Relevance: GS 2 (Indian Judiciary, Social Justice )
Practice Question: Discuss the major challenges contributing to the under-representation of women in the Indian judiciary and suggest measures that could improve female representation.(250 words)
Current Situation of Women in Judiciary:
According to the Supreme Court of India’s “State of the Judiciary” report (2023),
- District Judiciary: 36.3% women (2023) – strong representation at entry levels.
- High Courts: Only 13.4% of women judges; Supreme Court: 9.3% (as of Jan 2024) – shows a sharp decline at higher levels.
- State Disparities: Some states (e.g., Bihar, Jharkhand, Manipur) have no women or just one woman judge in High Courts.
Challenges in Entry and Retention :
Entry-Level Barriers:
- Practice Requirements: Judicial Service Rules demand continuous practice, which makes it tough for women to balance family roles.
- Bar Representation:according to the Department of Legal Affairs, in 2022, Women are only 15.31% of enrolled advocates, with fewer as senior advocates or in key roles.
Retention Issues:
- Workplace Environment: Inadequate basic facilities (e.g., washrooms, child care) in many courts.
- For example, According to a study by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy in 2019, nearly 100 district courts have no dedicated washrooms for women.
- Transfer Policies: Often ignore women’s caregiving responsibilities, adding stress.
- For example, the Delhi High Court’s crèche only caters to children younger than six years.
Policy Gaps and ‘Funnel Effect’
- Cycle of Under-Representation: Limited female representation at higher levels leads to policies that lack gender sensitivity, perpetuating barriers.
- ‘Funnel Effect’: Fewer women advance to senior judiciary roles, shrinking the pool of eligible women for top positions.
Public-Private Divide Theory
- Gender Bias in Judiciary: As per Carole Pateman’s theory, male-dominated public spaces like courts lag in catering to women’s needs.
- Male Perspective in Policy: Most administrative committees lack female representation, leading to insufficient female-centered policies.
Importance of a ‘Female Gaze’
- Definition: Using a feminist lens in policy-making to address women’s unique needs in traditionally male spaces.
- Goal: Reframe court policies on recruitment, promotion, and infrastructure with a women-centric approach.
Institutional Bias & Women-Centric Needs
- Gender Bias in Roles: Justice Hima Kohli notes gender bias sidelining women in court administration.
- Infrastructure: Few courts provide adequate washrooms, crèches, or family facilities, making daily work challenging for women judges, lawyers, and staff.
- Need for Gender Sensitization: Training and inclusive policies can reduce bias and support women’s long-term retention.
Policy Recommendations
- Infrastructural Upgrades: Ensure basic amenities like washrooms, feeding rooms, and crèches in courts.
- Family-Friendly Policies: Adjust transfer policies to consider caregiving roles, easing career progression for women.
- Representation in Committees: Include women in key decision-making bodies within courts to prioritize female-centric needs.
- Flexible Promotion Criteria: Adapt criteria to support career breaks, making judiciary careers sustainable for women.
Conclusion :
Strengthening gender-sensitive policies and infrastructure is essential to creating a judiciary that reflects diversity, inclusivity, and equity across all levels.
