With due respect, gender justice isn’t ‘Harvard-oriented’, Pg10

Key Highlights:

• CJI Surya Kant discarded the gender glossary issued during DY Chandrachud's tenure.
• The gender glossary aimed to eliminate stereotyping and victim blaming in court proceedings.
• The glossary was intended as a guide for using gender-sensitive language for judges, lawyers, victims, and the public.
• Concerns arise regarding the reasons for discarding the glossary, citing it as "too technical" and "Harvard-oriented".

Detailed Insights:

• The discarding of the gender glossary raises concerns about undermining institutional identity and consensus on vital issues within the Supreme Court.
• The glossary was an attempt to address historical injustices, such as the Mathura case, by promoting gender justice and eliminating discriminatory language.
• Practice guidelines and restatements of laws are essential for providing institutional memory and judicial policy within the Supreme Court.
• The decision to discard the glossary may be linked to a broader narrative of decolonizing laws and language, potentially replacing "Harvard" with "Swadeshi".
• Maintaining institutional integrity and predictability requires an exchange of ideas between outgoing and incoming Chief Justices.
• A judicial conclave or town hall with the bar and concerned citizens could provide valuable inputs for stable gender justice guidelines and a gender audit of the courts.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Gender Justice: Fairness and equity in the treatment of individuals regardless of their gender.
• Institutional Memory: The collective knowledge and experience accumulated within an organization over time.
• Decolonization: The process of undoing the effects of colonialism on laws, language, and culture.