Security

National women’s commission

by

National women’s commission

It is said that the best way to know about society, a civilization and a culture, try to know as much possible about the women. In India, women have come a long way from the rare women scholars and sages of the Vedic age to the women in different sectors of society and civilization today, such as the armed forces, arts, information technology, politics and a number of similar sectors which have traditionally been male dominated, while simultaneously balancing the roles of wife, mother and daughter. While Indian women have fought against the patriarchal Indian society and triumphed at many levels, cases of rape, dowry deaths, female infanticide, sexual harassment at workplaces, female illiteracy, and similar problems are still rampant in Indian society. It was in this backdrop that the Committee on the Status of Women in India (CSWI) the establishment of the National Commission for Women to fulfill the surveillance functions and to facilitate redressal of grievances and to accelerate the socio-economic development of women.

The National Commission for Women was set up as statutory body in January 1992 under the National Commission for Women Act, 1990 ( Act No. 20 of 1990 of Govt.of India)  to review the Constitutional and legal safeguards for women; recommend remedial legislative measures, facilitate redressal of grievances and advise the Government on all policy matters affecting women.

Importance of The Commission

Women as a class neither belong to a minority group nor are they regarded as a backward class. India has traditionally been a patriarchal society and therefore women have always suffered from social handicaps and disabilities. It thus became necessary to take certain ameliorative steps in order to improve the condition of women in the traditionally male dominated society.The Constitution does not contain any provision specifically made to favor women as such. Though Art. 15 (3), Art. 21 and Art. 14 are in favor of women; they are more general in nature and provide for making any special provisions for women, while they are not in themselves such provisions. The Supreme Court through interpretive processes has tried to extend some safeguards to women. Through judgments in cases such as Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subra Chakraborty . and the Chairman Rly Board v. Chandrima Das case, where rape was declared a heinous crime, as well as the landmark judgment in Visakha v. State of Rajasthan. the courts have tried to improve the social conditions of Indian women. But these have hardly sufficed to improve the position of women in India. Thus, in light of these conditions, the Committee on the Status of Woman (India) as well as a number of NGOs, social workers and experts, who were consulted by the Government in 1990, recommended the establishment of a apex body for woman.

The Mandate of the Commission

Broadly speaking the Commission’s mandate can be divided under four heads:

  • safeguard of rights of women granted by the constitution and laws,
  • study problems faced by women in the current day and make recommendations to eradicate these problems,
  • evaluating the status of Indian women from time to time and
  • funding and fighting cases related to women’s rights violations.

Functions of commission

Complaint And Counseling Functions: The “core” unit of the Commission is considered to be the Complaint and Counseling Cell and it processes the complaints received oral, written or suo moto under Section 10 of the NCW Act. The complaints received relate to domestic violence, harassment, dowry, torture, desertion, bigamy, rape and refusal to register FIR, cruelty by husband, derivation, gender discrimination and sexual harassment at work place. During 1999, the Commission received 4329 complaints related to the above types of crimes against women.

Legal functions: A large part of the Commission’s mandate is related to legal research for safeguards of women, legal interventions, recommendations on bills and similar matters relating to the legal system of India. The legal cell of the Commission was set up in order to deal with these functions. The activities of this cell can be divided into three categories: (a) legal amendments proposed (b) new laws and bills proposed and (c) court interventions.

Research Functions: The research cell of the Commission is that organ of the Commission that looks into the emerging problems of Indian women due to discrimination and gender bias. This cell is also responsible for educating women about their rights through a variety of seminars, workshops, conferences and public hearings. This cell has also organized various special studies and set up expert committees to look into and suggest remedies for problems, which have evolved recently. Currently the cell is dealing with issues related to Gender and Law Enforcement, Impact of Displacement of Women, Sexual Harassment at Workplace, Issues concerning Prostitution and Political Empowerment of Women.

 

Controversies: Critical analysis

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code

In December 2006 and January 2007, the NCW found itself at the center of a minor controversy over its insistence that Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code not be changed to make adulterous wives equally prosecutable by their husbands.  But the grounds on which Chairperson of commission resists the logic of making this a criminal offence — particularly for women, as often recommended — are not as encouraging. She is averse to holding the adulterous woman equally culpable as the adulterous man because women, she believes, are never offenders. They are always the victims. The NCW has demanded that women should not be punished for adultery, as a woman is “the victim and not an offender” in such cases. They have also advocated the amendment of Section 198 of the CrPC to allow women to file complaints against unfaithful husbands and prosecute them for their promiscuous behaviour. This was in response to “loopholes” in the Indian Penal Code that allowed men to file adultery charges against other men who have engaged in illicit relations but did not allow women to file charges against their husbands.

 

Mangalore pub attack controversy

The NCW came under sharp criticism for their response to the attack by forty male members of the Hindu right-wing Sri Ram Sena on eight women in a bar in Mangalore in late January 2009. Video from the attack shows the women were punched, pulled by their hair, and thrown out of the pub.  NCW member Smt Nirmala Venkatesh was sent to assess the situation, and said in an interview that the pub did not have adequate security and that the women should have protected themselves. Venkatesh said, “If the girls feel they were not doing anything wrong why are they afraid to come forward and give a statement?” On 6 February, the NCW said they decided not to accept Venkatesh’s report but would not be sending a new team to Mangalore. On 27 February, the Prime Minister’s Office approved the removal of Nirmala Venkatesh on disciplinary grounds.

 

Reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights and right to property

by

Reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights and right to property

Fundamental Rights are the basic rights of the people and the charter of rights contained in Part III of Constitution of India. It guarantees civil liberties such that all Indians can lead their lives in peace and harmony as citizens of India. These include individual rights common to most liberal democracies, such as equality before law, freedom of speech and expression, religious and cultural freedom and peaceful assembly, freedom to practice religion, and the right to constitutional remedies for the protection of civil rights by means of writs such as habeas corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari and Quo Warranto.

Though the Constitution of India guarantees all these Fundamental rights for the citizen, yet there are some limitation and exceptions of these rights also. A citizen can not enjoy Fundamental Rights absolutely or at will.

Reasonable’ means that which is in accordance with reason, and which is associated with logic and not arbitrariness. It implies intelligent care and deliberation that which reason dictates. The expression “reasonable restriction” signifies that the limitation imposed on a person in the enjoyment of the right should not be arbitrary or of an excessive nature beyond what is required in the interest of the public.

Within some Constitutional limitation citizen can enjoy their Rights. The Constitution of India imposes some reasonable restrictions upon enjoyment of these Rights so, that public order, morality and health remain intact . The Constitution always aims at restoration of collective interest along with individual interest .For example, right to religion is subject to restrictions imposed by the state in the interest of public order, morality and health so, that the freedom of religion may not be abused to committee crimes or anti-social activities . Similarly Rights guaranteed by article-19 does not mean absolute liberty . Absolute individual rights can not be guaranteed by any modern state . There fore our Constitution also empowered the state to impose reasonable restrictions as may be necessary in the larger interest of the community . our Constitution always attempts “ to strike a balance between individual liberty and social control .” and to establish a welfare state where collective interest got prominence over individual interest .Freedom of speech and expression (Art.19-1-A) is also subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the state relating to defamation, contempt of court, decency or morality, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states , incitement to an offence, public order, maintenance of the sovereignty and integrity of India . Freedom of assembly (Art.19-1-B) is also subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the state that the assembly must be peaceful and without arms in the interest of public order. Freedom of press which is included in the wider freedom of expression is also subject to reasonable limitations and the state can impose restriction upon freedom of press in the larger interest of the state or for the prevention of contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.

Right to property

Property, as a legal and social institution, has different forms in different cultures and legal systems. However, only a definition of Constitutional property is common in all democratic countries. Since state exercises eminent domain power against private property, it is pertinent to discuss the concept of private property in brief. The institution of private property has been a controversial issue with conflicting views, one completely denying the right to own private property and the other supports the holding of the private property. However, the right to property is a natural and inherent right of an individual.

After independence, no Fundamental right has caused so much trouble and has given so much of litigation between the government and citizens as the property right. The reason is that the central and state governments have enacted massive hysteron of laws to regulate property rights. First, the government undertook to reconstruct the agrarian economy, interalia, by trying to confer right to property on tillers, abolition of zamindaris, giving security of tenure to tenants, fixing a ceiling limit on personal holding of agricultural land and redistributing the surplus land among the landless. Secondly, in the area of urban property, measures have been taken to provide housing to the people, clearance of slums and planning, control rents, acquire property and impose a ceiling on urban land ownership etc., Thirdly, government has undertaken to regulate private enterprises and nationalization of some commercial undertakings. These various legislative measures have been undertaken to effectuate accepted goal of establishing a socialistic pattern of society. Hence Articles 31 and 19(1)(f)  were repealed. Historical evolution and demise of repealed Articles 31 and 19(1)(f) are still relevant for the understanding of constitutional developments of property right. Since the commencement of the Constitution fundamental right conferred by Article 31 and Article 19(1)(f) has been modified by six times by the constitutional amendments. The first amendment added two explanatory Articles 31-A & 31-B to the Constitution; the fourth amendment amended clause (2) of Article 31, added clause (2A) to the same Article, inserted new provisions in Article 31-A and enlarged the ninth schedule; the seventeenth amendment further elaborated the definition of ‘estate’ in clause (2) of Article 31-A; and the twenty fifth amendment amended Article 31(2), added clause (2-B) and added a new Article 31-C. In the forty second amendment Article 31-C was substituted by the words “ the principles specified in clause (b) or clause (c) of the Article 39” for the words “all or any of the principles laid down in part IV of the Constitution”.

finally forty fourth amendment repealed the entire Article 31 and Article 19(1)(f) & inserted Article 300A.

Ninth Schedule – A Protective Umbrella

Article 31-B, does not by itself give any fundamental right. The Acts and regulations placed under ninth schedule shall not be deemed to be void or ever to have become void on the ground of its inconsistency with any fundamental right. In Kameshwar Singh 80 case, the Supreme Court said that no Act brought under the ninth schedule could be invalidated on the ground of violation of any fundamental rights.

With the introduction of the above amendment, it became very easy for the Government to acquire property and to carryout different agrarian reforms. Firstly the acquisition laws under the fear of being challenged were inserted in the ninth schedule by the constitutional amendments and thereby the concerned laws were made immune from challenge against any of the fundamental rights guaranteed under part III of the Constitution.

So for now right to property in india is a statutory right under the article 300A of Indian constitution.