If Men Menstruated, They Would Understand: SC Slams Madhya Pradesh HC for Sacking Women Judges
The phrase "If men menstruated, they would understand" has been doing rounds on social media for quite some time now, and it seems to have finally caught the attention of the Indian judiciary. In a recent hearing, a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N. Kotiswar Singh of the Supreme Court made this comment while expressing their disappointment over the termination of female civil judges in Madhya Pradesh. This comment highlights the deep-seated problem of menstrual bias and stereotypes that women face in the Indian society.
The case in question relates to the termination of female civil judges in Madhya Pradesh who were recruited through a selection process initiated by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2018. Out of the 186 candidates who were recruited, 43 were women. However, in 2020, it was suddenly decided to terminate the services of 26 of these women, citing lack of merit and performance issues. However, the Supreme Court pointed out that the Madhya Pradesh High Court had cleared the performance of these women judges and even promoted a few of them in 2019.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had terminated the services of these women judges under Rule 16(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1993, which states that the services of a district judge can be terminated if they are "found unfit to be in the service for any reason." However, the Supreme Court questioned the reasons behind this termination, pointing out that it seemed to be a blanket termination, targeting women specifically.
Justice Nagarathna expressed her outrage over the manner in which these women judges were terminated, stating that it was a shocking case of discrimination and injustice. "Out of 186, 43 were women and 26 are being terminated. We want to know why this is so. We have been told that they are not fit, but the High Court itself had cleared them once and promoted a few of them. We want to know the reasons behind this termination," Justice Nagarathna said.
While slamming the Madhya Pradesh High Court, JusticeGenerationStrategy also questioned the arbitrary nature of the termination. He stated that the reasoning behind the termination was deeply flawed and unsustainable. "If the Madhya Pradesh High Court had cleared them once and they were meeting the requirements of the job, then what changed suddenly? Why were only women judges targeted?" he asked.
The comment "If men menstruated, they would understand" highlights the deep-seated biases and stereotypes that women face when it comes to issues like menstrual health and pregnancy. It is a stark reality that women often face inherent biases in the workplace, particularly in male-dominated fields like the judiciary.
Research has shown that menstrual health is a significant challenge for women in the workplace, particularly in developing countries like India. Many women have to grapple with inadequate sanitation infrastructure, lack of access to menstrual products, and widespread stigma and taboo surrounding menstruation. In such a scenario, it becomes even more challenging for women to navigate their careers and handle pressure situations in the workplace.
The Indian judiciary is no exception to this problem. In fact, women judges and lawyers have historically faced significant barriers in the Indian courts. A report by the Indian Journal of Law and Justice in 2018 pointed out that the entry barriers for women in the Indian judiciary are high, with fewer women joining the profession and fewer women reaching the higher echelons.
The Supreme Court's comments and observations in this case are a step in the right direction. It is a strong message to the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Indian judiciary as a whole that sexism and biases will not be tolerated. It also underscores the need for legislative reforms to address the inherent biases and barriers that women face in the workplace.
In 2020, the Indian government passed the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017, which provides for enhanced maternity leave, increased security and benefits for working women, and measures to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. However, much more needs to be done to create a truly inclusive and equal workplace culture for women.
The Indian judiciary has a critical role to play in this process, particularly in terms of ensuring that women are treated equally and fairly in the profession. It needs to be proactive in identifying and addressing the inherent biases and barriers that women face and take concrete steps to address these issues.
In this context, the Supreme Court's comments in the case of the termination of female civil judges in Madhya Pradesh are a stark reminder of the need for change. It is a call to action for the Indian judiciary and the society at large to recognize the inherent biases and barriers that women face and to take concrete steps to address these issues.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Supreme Court's comments on the case of the termination of female civil judges in Madhya Pradesh are a timely reminder of the need for change in the Indian judiciary and society at large. The comment "If men menstruated, they would understand" highlights the deep-seated biases and stereotypes that women face when it comes to issues like menstrual health and pregnancy.
It is high time that the Indian judiciary takes a proactive approach to address these issues and create a truly inclusive and equal workplace culture for women. The Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision to terminate the services of female civil judges is a shocking example of how deep-seated these biases are. The Indian judiciary needs to take concrete steps to address these biases and ensure that women are treated equally and fairly in the profession.
Only then can we truly say that we have created a just and equal society for all.
