This article explores the scope and justification of Article 15(3)1 of the Indian Constitution alongside Article 142, focusing on its impact and efficacy. Article 15(3)3, a provision centered on women and children, offers protective discrimination and affirmative actions to uplift these groups, empowering the state to enact laws aimed at their advancement. The historical context of special provisions for women is examined, including the challenges they face. Additionally, the article delves into lesser-known aspects of affirmative laws for women, discussing real-life incidents highlighting discrepancies between societal attitudes and legal frameworks. The conclusion offers recommendations for enhancing the application of such laws.
Women epitomize diverse and significant roles in society. Revered as goddesses yet subjected to severe atrocities, women have been the focus of numerous initiatives aimed at addressing injustice. While women have undoubtedly benefited from these measures, there have also been instances of misuse. Are we at a stage where gender equality is achieved, or do we require more gender-neutral laws to ensure parity? Central to contemporary women-centric legislation are Article 15(3)4 and Article 145, which uphold equality and protection of the law regardless of caste, race, gender, or religion. Yet, the integration of these provisions has not been without criticism.
Understanding Article 15(3)10 necessitates familiarity with Article 1411 and Article 1512 of the Indian Constitution. Article 1413 guarantees equality before the law, prohibiting discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Despite this constitutional safeguard, discrimination persists even seven decades after independence. Article 1515 reinforces these principles, specifically prohibiting discrimination and enabling special provisions for women, children, and socially backward classes. However, such provisions have not been without controversy, often criticized for creating unequal treatment or opportunities.
The genesis of special provisions for women predates independence, driven by a desire to eliminate gender-based discrimination. Early organizations like the Women's Indian Association advocated for equality without special privileges, highlighting societal attitudes towards women's empowerment. The inclusion of Article 15(3)26 aimed to rectify structural inequalities through legislative measures, leading to various women-centric schemes and enhanced political representation. However, these provisions have also perpetuated stereotypes and occasionally resulted in unintended consequences.
Article 15(3)27 seeks to uplift women through protective discrimination but should not shield them from legal consequences or abuse of power. Instances of misused provisions, such as false accusations under laws meant for women's protection, undermine their intended purpose. The debate surrounding these laws often pits gender equality against protective discrimination, raising questions about fairness and accountability.
Societal perceptions, such as stereotypes about women's driving abilities, illustrate the practical challenges of implementing Article 15(3)37. Despite evidence contradicting such stereotypes, public attitudes often influence legal interpretations and enforcement. A personal anecdote underscores the inconsistency between societal beliefs and legal protections, highlighting the need for balanced perspectives in law enforcement and public discourse.
Leave a comment