Gender Parity In Indian Army

In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court recently supported a 2010 Delhi High Court directive, ensuring that women officers receive permanent commission on par with their male counterparts. This not only opens up combat roles for women but also underscores the need for equal opportunities for their advancement in existing positions. This case is part of a series of Supreme Court judgments addressing gender discrimination in Indian society and reaffirming the Right to Equality, as seen in cases like Sabarimala and the decriminalization of homosexuality.

Facts

Countries that allow women in Close combat: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, North Korea etc.
Countries in which women allowed in combat, not necessarily close combat: USA, UK, Pakistan, South Korea etc.
Count of women in the Indian army is significantly low i.e. 3% as compared to 6% in the US, 15% in France, and 10% in both Russia and the UK.

Highlights of the Judgment

Supreme Court has directed that women officers should have the same options as male short service commission officers when choosing specializations for permanent commission.
The Court acknowledged that the involvement of women in Combat Arms is a government policy decision, deferring to the Delhi High Court’s judgment where the matter wasn’t contested.
Importantly, the Supreme Court clarified that women officers are eligible for command postings, which involve leading a battalion or carrying out independent tasks typically done by a Colonel in the Army.
Command posting, a significant responsibility, allows women officers to head operational units and make strategic decisions.
The Supreme Court has given the government a three-month period to implement its order, and the ruling will apply retrospectively, impacting past cases as well.

Impact of the Judgment

Women now have the same terms of employment as men. No longer will women be forced to retire after 14 years in service, irrespective of their record.
They will also have full pension and other financial benefits. The SC clarified that the policy decision will apply to all women SSC officers who are currently in service. It opens command appointments to women officers in 10 streams where the Army has agreed they can serve as permanently commissioned officers.
The Army will be compelled to change its rules not only for promotion to command appointments, it will also have to instill widespread changes in the pathways for the women officers to do training courses and hold appointments which have so far been the sole preserves of men.
The decision will encourage more women to think of a career in the military. This may begin a process of correcting the gender imbalance in India’s forces.

Significance of the Judgment

Supreme Court strongly criticized stereotypes about women and their physical characteristics, rejecting the idea that women are the weaker sex as constitutionally flawed.
Over time, the government argued that inherent physiological differences barred women from commanding and combat roles. However, the court found such arguments, including those related to pregnancy and motherhood, to be based on unfair “sex stereotypes.”

The judgment emphasizes the constitutional right to equality, asserting that a professional force should not discriminate based on gender but instead operate through training, norms, and culture.
The order underscores the principle of non-discrimination, stating that gender alone cannot justify inequitable treatment in any sphere, including the defense forces, as per Article 16.The court also highlighted that the right to equality under Article 14 should be guided by a commitment to rationality, preventing any “blanket” and “absolute” prohibitions.

Way Forward

In countries like Israel, Germany, the US, and Australia, we see women serving as soldiers in combat roles. It’s time for the Indian armed forces to take inspiration from these examples and work towards making gender equality a reality. This means setting up fair and professional standards and making sure they are applied without any bias. But it’s not just about rules; there also needs to be a shift in how people think. Some male officers still see women as better suited for supporting roles rather than as equals, and that mindset needs to change for true gender equality to take root.