The headline that stopped me
I read, with a mix of relief and concern, reports that the Supreme Court’s gender handbook was described from the bench as “too Harvard-oriented” and “very technical.” The remark from the Chief Justice — questioning whether a primer prepared during the previous Chief Justice’s tenure was practical for everyday users — cut to the heart of a problem I keep returning to: good intentions can fall short when form overwhelms function.
What the remark meant — in plain language
When the Chief Justice called the handbook “too Harvard-oriented,” he was pointing to an academic register: long explanations, doctrinal citations, and a tone suited to law schools and specialized seminars. Saying it was “very technical” underlined the same worry: the primer leans heavily on legal definitions, fine-grained doctrinal categories, and formal reasoning that may not translate easily into courtroom practice or public understanding.
Put simply:
- "Harvard-oriented" = academic framing, international scholarship, and conceptual richness.
- "Very technical" = dense legalese, forensic distinctions, and layered doctrine.
Both descriptions are not moral condemnations. They are observations about audience and utility.
Context: what the handbook is and what it aimed to do
The handbook — a compact primer produced by the Supreme Court to combat gender stereotypes in judicial language — assembled a glossary of prejudicial terms, suggested alternatives, and flagged patterns of reasoning that perpetuate bias. Its goal was laudable: to encourage judges and lawyers to avoid language and assumptions that distort accountability and dignity in cases involving gender and sexual violence.
That intent is necessary. Language shapes outcomes. As I’ve argued before in my own writing about women’s rights, words matter because they carry social norms into legal reasoning and everyday life (WOMEN AND THEIR RIGHTS).
Why the bench’s critique matters
The Chief Justice’s observation is a useful reality check. A handbook that sits on the Supreme Court website but isn’t read, understood, or used by trial judges, victims, lawyers, or court staff will have limited effect. The critique suggests the need to bridge two worlds that matter equally: rigorous doctrinal framing and plain-language, practice-oriented guidance.
Potential consequences if nothing changes:
- Lower courts may ignore the primer because it feels alien or irrelevant.
- Survivors and litigants will not benefit from improvements in judicial rhetoric or sensitivity.
- Training efforts may stall if materials aren’t adapted to actual courtroom workflows.
How imagined reactions might sound
Some legal scholars might say: “The handbook is an important doctrinal anchor; it records progressive reasoning and should be defended as a touchstone of jurisprudential clarity.” A rights activist might reply: “Doctrine is vital, but survivors need judges to say the right thing in court, in plain language they understand.” A judicial trainer could add: “Both are true — we must translate scholarship into practice.”
These are hypothetical but plausible responses. They reveal a shared starting point: consensus on the aim, disagreement on the route.
Practical ways forward — making handbooks usable
If I were advising the court or a judicial academy, I would propose a layered, audience-sensitive approach:
- Create a two-tier publication: (a) a short "quick guide" (2–4 pages) for judges and court staff with checklists and sample phrasing; (b) the full technical handbook for reference and training.
- Produce survivor-facing materials: plain-language leaflets (multiple local languages) explaining what to expect in court and how non-stereotyped language helps justice.
- Develop courtroom scripts and model orders that judges can adapt — concrete examples are more useful than exhortation.
- Integrate the handbook into mandatory continuing-judicial-education modules, with role-plays and case simulations led by judicial academies.
- Encourage feedback loops: pilot the revised materials with a sample of High Court benches and trial court judges, collect feedback, and iterate.
- Localize and translate: make regional adaptations so the guidance resonates culturally without diluting core principles.
- Bring lived experience into training: survivors’ perspectives and practitioners’ stories are powerful teachers for judges and lawyers.
A final thought from my vantage point
I welcome the criticism the bench levelled: it’s an opportunity, not a setback. Good policy evolves through critique and iteration. The handbook’s doctrinal richness is an asset; the job now is to make that asset portable — to turn authoritative ideas into courtroom practice, to connect scholarship with sensitivity, and to ensure that language reform reaches the people it is meant to serve.
At its best, a judicial handbook should be both principled and practical. If we can rework the primer into a set of layered tools — doctrinal reference plus practical guides — we will have moved closer to a judiciary that not only thinks better about gender, but speaks and acts better as well.
Regards,
Hemen Parekh
Any questions / doubts / clarifications regarding this blog? Just ask (by typing or talking) my Virtual Avatar on the website embedded below. Then "Share" that to your friend on WhatsApp.
Get correct answer to any question asked by Shri Amitabh Bachchan on Kaun Banega Crorepati, faster than any contestant
Hello Candidates :
- For UPSC – IAS – IPS – IFS etc., exams, you must prepare to answer, essay type questions which test your General Knowledge / Sensitivity of current events
- If you have read this blog carefully , you should be able to answer the following question:
- Need help ? No problem . Following are two AI AGENTS where we have PRE-LOADED this question in their respective Question Boxes . All that you have to do is just click SUBMIT
- www.HemenParekh.ai { a SLM , powered by my own Digital Content of more than 50,000 + documents, written by me over past 60 years of my professional career }
- www.IndiaAGI.ai { a consortium of 3 LLMs which debate and deliver a CONSENSUS answer – and each gives its own answer as well ! }
- It is up to you to decide which answer is more comprehensive / nuanced ( For sheer amazement, click both SUBMIT buttons quickly, one after another ) Then share any answer with yourself / your friends ( using WhatsApp / Email ). Nothing stops you from submitting ( just copy / paste from your resource ), all those questions from last year’s UPSC exam paper as well !
- May be there are other online resources which too provide you answers to UPSC “ General Knowledge “ questions but only I provide you in 26 languages !
No comments:
Post a Comment