#Me-Too movement

Thanks to # Me Too movement, incidences of sexual harassment and assault on women by men are being increasingly brought to light by women themselves. Earlier women perhaps felt shy of making public the sexual misdemeanour meted out to them for fear of social stigma. Time has changed; now women come forward to speak their mind openly if they are sexually abused, no matter how influential the perpetrator of the offence may be. What’s more, our society takes such matters seriously and mobilise their opinion to bring the accused to book.

# Me-Too movement originated abroad to highlight allegedly wide spread  men’s  sexual misconduct with women ,particularly in work place, more often than not taking positional advantage in their professional  domain. Now in India #Me Too movement has gained sufficient strength with more and more victims venturing to tell their stories of sexual abuse and as a result many accused, mainly celebrities, have already been caught in #Me Too net. However, in most of the instances both the accused and the victims go to court to seek justice. In such cases we should wait till court pronounces its final verdict but nevertheless, in the mean time, admittedly, the stories of inappropriate sexual conduct made public is enough to do immense damage to the social status and professional careers of the victims.

In fine, the probability can’t be ruled out that in some instances of #Me Too allegations of sexual harassment might have been  slapped on the victim for some malicious intent or an episode of consensual sex  projected as sexual misbehaviour either. So each incident of sexual misconduct needs to be thoroughly probed without any preconceived opinion. However, it’s likely the #Me Too movement would help lessen the incidences of sexual harassment of women at work place or elsewhere.

SC's Sabarimala temple verdict!

In Sabarimala temple in Kerala entry of women of ‘menstrual age’ (10 to 50yrs) was banned since long. Supreme Court in its recent majority (4-1) historic verdict lifted this age-old ban to allow women of all ages to enter the shrine. However, one of the judges, who is incidentally a woman judge, opposed the majority view and opined SC shouldn’t interfere in the religious practice of the temple and ban should be allowed to continue. In fact, menstruation is only a natural physiological phenomenon like many other biological processes in human body. So menstrual age shouldn’t  stand as a hindrance in the entry to a shrine and offering worship to the deity. The ban infringes on the constitutional right to equality of women either.

The SC verdict, however, triggered mixed reactions among people. Most of the people have welcomed this judgement whole heartedly including Kerala govt. But a section of people vehemently protested against this verdict. They consider it an unwelcome and unnecessary intervention of judiciary in the age-old religious tradition of Sabarimal temple, although they have no logical or scientific standing either. It is purely based on faith and unwavering adherence to age-old tradition. What’s most interesting, almost 5000 women devotees of the temple participated in the protest rally against SC verdict. Even a review petition has been filed against this judgement at the Apex court. Incidentally, it’s nothing new that SC has stepped in to alter the traditional practice being followed by temple management in the greater interest of people at large. For instance, SC has asked to allow non Hindus to enter Shri Jagannath temple at Puri where only Hindus are eligible to enter the shrine. Interestingly, traditionalists everywhere oppose such a move and tussle between tradition and rationality  continues.

SC's Aaadhaar Verdict

A 5-judge bench of Supreme Court  heard the Aadhaar case and 4 judges were unananimous so far as the final verdict is concerned and the 5^th judge C.K.Chandachud differed altogether in his opinion. While majority view considers  Aaadhaar  constutionally valid and validates the Money bill passed by the Central govt in Lok Sobha,Mr. Chandrachur,  treats  Aadhaar constutinally not valid and  terms Money Bill  a ‘fraud  on constitution’ as govt bypassed Rajya Sabha while passing the bill.Mr.Chandachur further adds Aadhaar is an attempt by the govt for ‘State surveillance’ on people. However, majority view is considered a balanced judgment by most of the people.          

To begin with,Aadhaar was conceptualised to allay misuse in public distribution system , govt subsidies and other benefits offered to people. Introduction of Aadhaar served these purposes to a large extent, though in some instances needy and marginalised people were denied such benefits for lack of  Aadhaar or mismatch of their biometrics, particularly finger prints with centrally based data base for no fault of their own.                                                        

However,  in course of time, Aadhaar was made mandatory in umpteen  fields including banks, telecom services, UGC fellowships,CBSE board exams and many more. At times leakage of Aadhaar data was alleged and need to protect them was urged upon.                                                                                                         

A host of public interest litigations were filed against Aadhaar challenging its constitutional validity in Supreme Court as it is supposed to infringe on right to privacy which the Apex court had already accepted as a fundamental right. As many as 38 hearings were held on Aadhaar issue  and it was perhaps the longest run litigation against a particular issue of public interest. However, verdict on Aadhaar was kept on hold for couple of months until recently it was made public.

In it’s  majority verdict  SC cut the applications of Aadhaar  to size scrapping its necessity in many a field like bank, telcom services and private sectors etc.But Aadhaar was made mandatory in public distribution systems,  issuance of  all govt  benefits , and for filing of income tax returns etc.