Women in military must get a fair deal
March 15 : In India, women suffer enough in the home, in their workplaces, and in public spaces outside the home. For all the enlightenment that modern education is supposed to bring, the socially-dominant men are still quite far from according equality to
women when it comes to habits of mind and the basic way of doing things, though lip-service is routinely paid to the idea of equality before the law. But it is hard to believe that the government — not an individual — should be in violation of this precept and not even perceive that it is in serious error. No other inference is possible in the light of the recent Delhi high court judgment directing the government to offer permanent commissions to women officers of a certain category in the Air Force and the Army, and the initial reaction of the two defence services which are said to be contemplating an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Women officers who entered service in the Short Service Commission (SSC) category were assured at the time of recruitment that they would be eligible for Permanent Commission (PC) after five years provided there were vacancies and their ability was not in doubt. The same stipulation held for men. However, the official promise was not kept in respect of women while it was for the men. Male officers thus moved from SSC to PC if they met the requirements and desired to move, but in the case of women their SSC tenure was extended and they were refused PC. A clutch of such women officers went to court charging the military with gender discrimination. They have won their point. The high court has ordered their placement as PC officers with full financial and other benefits with retrospective effect. Odd as this may seem, the reaction of the counsel for the defence forces suggests that they do not really understand the reasoning of the court. Perhaps they should be asked to ponder what might have happened if it is the women who had been made PC officers on meeting the eligibility and vacancy criteria, and the men asked to take a hike. Since all women officers aspiring to earn a PC were treated in the same manner and differently from the men, the fact of gender discrimination is clear enough. But the point needs to be made that some of the women officers in question faced double discrimination. They were denied PC and the men competing against them received it even when the latter were found inferior in work performance. There is an aspect to this other than that of discrimination, namely, that disservice was done to the Air Force and the Army by choosing an officer of inferior ability over one with a superior record. It should be clearly understood that the entire discussion is in respect of non-combatant duties in the officer cadre in the military. (So far the armed forces in India do not offer service in combat arms for women.)
From what has been put out in the media by the two services, there appears to be no vacancy at the middle level in the PC category. Giving effect to the judgment of the high court is thus being made out to be a difficult task. The Air Force and the Army should have expressed this difficulty before the bench in the hope that a practical solution would emerge without sacrificing gender justice. But they chose to argue something else. Confounding common sense, the point they made was that the women officers had no case as they had been sent packing under an executive decision. This is laughable as it implies that the government can take any decision it likes, and that government decisions cannot be wrong.
women when it comes to habits of mind and the basic way of doing things, though lip-service is routinely paid to the idea of equality before the law. But it is hard to believe that the government — not an individual — should be in violation of this precept and not even perceive that it is in serious error. No other inference is possible in the light of the recent Delhi high court judgment directing the government to offer permanent commissions to women officers of a certain category in the Air Force and the Army, and the initial reaction of the two defence services which are said to be contemplating an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Women officers who entered service in the Short Service Commission (SSC) category were assured at the time of recruitment that they would be eligible for Permanent Commission (PC) after five years provided there were vacancies and their ability was not in doubt. The same stipulation held for men. However, the official promise was not kept in respect of women while it was for the men. Male officers thus moved from SSC to PC if they met the requirements and desired to move, but in the case of women their SSC tenure was extended and they were refused PC. A clutch of such women officers went to court charging the military with gender discrimination. They have won their point. The high court has ordered their placement as PC officers with full financial and other benefits with retrospective effect. Odd as this may seem, the reaction of the counsel for the defence forces suggests that they do not really understand the reasoning of the court. Perhaps they should be asked to ponder what might have happened if it is the women who had been made PC officers on meeting the eligibility and vacancy criteria, and the men asked to take a hike. Since all women officers aspiring to earn a PC were treated in the same manner and differently from the men, the fact of gender discrimination is clear enough. But the point needs to be made that some of the women officers in question faced double discrimination. They were denied PC and the men competing against them received it even when the latter were found inferior in work performance. There is an aspect to this other than that of discrimination, namely, that disservice was done to the Air Force and the Army by choosing an officer of inferior ability over one with a superior record. It should be clearly understood that the entire discussion is in respect of non-combatant duties in the officer cadre in the military. (So far the armed forces in India do not offer service in combat arms for women.)
From what has been put out in the media by the two services, there appears to be no vacancy at the middle level in the PC category. Giving effect to the judgment of the high court is thus being made out to be a difficult task. The Air Force and the Army should have expressed this difficulty before the bench in the hope that a practical solution would emerge without sacrificing gender justice. But they chose to argue something else. Confounding common sense, the point they made was that the women officers had no case as they had been sent packing under an executive decision. This is laughable as it implies that the government can take any decision it likes, and that government decisions cannot be wrong.
