Why is it in the news?

• The under-representation of women in the judicial system is a significant issue that is widely discussed, often focusing on entry-level measures designed to increase female representation among lawyers and judges.
• While these measures are necessary, they are not enough to ensure ongoing support, encouragement, and retention of women in the judiciary.

An Analysis

Current Representation Statistics

• The Supreme Court of India’s “State of the Judiciary” report (2023) reveals that women make up 36.3% of the district judiciary, which is a positive development. In 14 states, over 50% of candidates successfully recruited into the civil judge (junior) division were women.
• However, representation declines at higher levels: as of January 2024, only 13.4% of judges in the High Court and 9.3% in the Supreme Court are women.
• Additionally, representation varies significantly across High Courts, with states like Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Manipur, Meghalaya, Odisha, Tripura, and Uttarakhand having no women judges or only one.

Challenges in the Bar

• The situation within the Bar is similarly concerning. Data from the Department of Legal Affairs in 2022 show that only about 15.31% of all enrolled advocates are women.
• Although not all State Bar Councils have released comprehensive data, women are greatly under-represented as senior advocates, advocates-on-record, and Bar Council representatives.
• This creates a funnel effect, resulting in a smaller pool of candidates able to establish themselves in the system and be considered for elevation.

Policy Gaps

• The under-representation of women in the judiciary reflects a vicious cycle. Women face exclusion, and even those who enter the system struggle to rise to positions of power that could address these issues. Access for women in the judiciary is obstructed at two levels: entry and retention.
• While several states have made commendable efforts to ensure women enter the lower levels of the judiciary, direct recruitment continues to pose challenges for female aspirants.
• Many states’ Judicial Service Rules require advocates to have a minimum period of ‘continuous’ practice for elevation to the Bench, which can be difficult for women juggling family responsibilities without maternity benefits or minimum stipends.
• Even when women successfully enter the system, career growth is often stymied by an unsupportive environment that neglects their specific needs. The pool of women judges eligible for elevation to the High Court and Supreme Court continues to shrink.
• This reverse funnel effect is exacerbated by stringent transfer policies that offer little room for negotiation or consideration of women’s roles as primary caretakers.

Infrastructure Challenges

• Daily interactions within courts pose challenges for women lawyers, judges, and staff due to a lack of basic infrastructure.
• A 2019 survey by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy found that nearly 100 district courts lack dedicated washrooms for women. Several courts, including prominent High Courts, do not have adequate facilities for women judges, staff, lawyers, or litigants. The scarcity of sanitary facilities and ineffective waste disposal systems further complicate these issues.
• As women are often expected to be primary caretakers, courts should provide family-friendly amenities, such as feeding rooms and crèches.
• While some courts have made strides in this direction, resource limitations often render these initiatives ineffective. For instance, the Delhi High Court’s crèche caters only to children under six years old.

Need for Course Correction

• To effectively address the entry and retention of women in the judiciary, a holistic approach is essential. This strategy will help tackle the persistent under-representation of women in higher judicial roles and the lack of amenities that facilitate their access to court complexes.
• This situation illustrates the public-private divide, wherein women have increasingly entered traditionally male-dominated public spheres while legal frameworks lag behind. This divide is a significant reason the public sphere fails to meet the specific needs of women transitioning from private to public roles.
• As more women enter courts that have historically been male-dominated, applying a female gaze in policy implementation is crucial.
• This approach involves employing a feminist lens to acknowledge the diverse needs of women and correct the unintended consequences of neutral, yet indirectly discriminatory, policies and infrastructure.

Prioritizing Women’s Needs

• To enhance women’s participation in the judiciary, it is vital to adopt women-centric perspectives that identify the specific challenges hindering their career growth.
• Former Supreme Court judge Justice Hima Kohli has highlighted the unconscious gender bias that often sidelines women judges in administrative roles. Currently, none of the High Court Building Committees—except those in Delhi, Allahabad, and Himachal Pradesh—include even a single woman judge.
• Consequently, the infrastructure needs of women are often deprioritized, leading to inadequate solutions like a single toilet block.
• Moreover, the lack of adequate representation in High Court Registries and judicial academies results in women’s perspectives and experiences being overlooked in policy-making and gender-sensitization training.
• A female-centric approach would prioritize women’s needs and foster greater support within the judiciary. By considering the lived experiences and realities of women, the judiciary can ensure that their needs are not rendered invisible during policy-making.
• Implementing necessary infrastructural amenities, gender-sensitive recruitment and transfer policies, and providing adequate training and support are essential for the judiciary to fulfill its promise of empowering women.