SC Questions Limits on Deploying Women Officers in Counter-Terror Roles

Quick Summary

• The Supreme Court of India ruled against a policy restricting women officers in the Army to the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch.
• The judgment, delivered by Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, emphasized constitutional equality and directed the publication of a common merit list for JAG candidates.
• The court dismissed arguments that JAG roles are combatant-exclusive and noted that women have demonstrated competence in operational roles across other armed Forces like the Air Force.
• Examples cited included women serving in high-risk areas as convoy commanders, airborne medical staff, Rafale pilots, and UN Peacekeeping missions as 2004.
• Justice Manmohan emphasized that withholding opportunities from half the population weakens national security.

indian Opinion Analysis

The Supreme Court’s ruling reinforces India’s commitment to gender equality within its defense framework.By striking down discriminatory policies against female officers in critical Army branches like JAG, this decision could act as a pivotal moment for inclusivity. Women have already proven capable of excelling in both administrative and operational military roles through precedents set by their service in high-stress conditions domestically and internationally.While societal norms often resist changes to entrenched systemic biases, logical reasoning calls for respecting individual merits over outdated assumptions about gender limitations. This growth carries potential benefits not only for empowering women but also enhancing India’s defense capabilities by broadening available talent pools.

Read more at: The Hindu

—
Images:

1. !80/2020-08-18T233533Z1608204537RC2NGI909H45RTRMADP3USA-LEGAL.JPG”>Supreme Court case image used for representative purpose
2. !