Permanent Commission for Women

WHY IN NEWS?

Hitting out at gender stereotypes, the Supreme Court (SC) recently granted permanent commission to women officers in the Indian army.

PERMANENT VS SHORT SERVICE COMMISSION:

BACKGROUND:

• Women officers were first inducted in the military nursing service in 1927 and as medical officers in 1943.
• In 1992, women were made eligible for appointment as officers in certain specific cadres such as Judge Advocate General (JAG) and Army Education Corps (AEC). Women were initially brought in for 5 years of service, which was then converted into Short Service Commission (SSC). However, women were not given the choice to opt for permanent commission at the end of their 10-year service. 
• In 2008, permanent commission was extended to women in streams of Judge Advocate General and Army Education Corps.
• In 2019, the government decided to grant permanent commission to women in all 10 branches where they are inducted for Short Service Commission. However, the benefit was not applicable retrospectively and thus ruled out the women officers in the job now.
• In 2010, Delhi High Court granted eligibility to women officers for permanent commission in the Army. However, the central government appealed against this in the Supreme Court.

RECENT JUDGEMENT:

• Supreme Court granted permanent commission for women:
  • It rejected the government contention that women are "physiologically weak" to be granted permanent commission and command appointments.
  • It called this argument emanating from a deeply ingrained gender stereotype in the Indian society which regards a man as being dominant and women are considered weak links and caregivers only.
• Struck down distinction in granting service:
  • The central government had proposed a differentiated stand. SSC women officers with up to 14 years of service were to be considered for permanent commission. But officers with more than 14 years of service would only be allowed to serve up to 20 years without being considered for permanent commission. After that, they were to be released with retirement benefits.
  • The court held this policy to be violative of the right to equality.
• The court also ruled that there cannot be an outright prohibition on women being considered for command appointments. But women officers will be eligible for command posts in non-combat areas.
• The bench held that the judgement will not be applicable to the combat roles. It also added that if the Army does have convincing reasons for excluding women from a particular criteria or command appointment, it may provide them to the relevant authorities and, if necessary, to future courts.
• It granted the Centre three months' time to enforce its order.

IMPLICATIONS:

• The spirit of the order is the principle of equality and non-discrimination.
  • It held that right to equality under Article 14 needs to be prescribed by a right to rationality that forbids any “blanket” and “absolute” prohibition.
  • According to Article 16, Gender only cannot serve as the basis for inequitable and unequal treatment in any sphere, including in defence forces.

• The implications of the judgment will have to be borne by the human resources management department of the Army, which will need to change policy in order to comply.

• But the bigger shift will have to take place in the culture, norms, and values of the rank and file of the Army, which will be the responsibility of the senior military and political leadership.

CONCLUSION:

• There is no need to appeal to the army for a change of mind-set. Sheer logic, as well as precedent from other countries, have shown that women are equally capable as their male counterparts and should be given equal respect and treatment.
• With the development in technology, most of the modern military weapons are so light and recoil-free that they require no significant physical abilities. Hence, the oft-quoted argument of lower physical standards of women is no longer valid in modern warfare and combat.
• However, what is frightening is the government’s stand in the court. It is but a mirror reflection of the patriarchal mindset that runs deep in the society, even in the modern era.
• Women in India continue to remain largely ignored. The dismal maternal health statistics, labour force participation rates and rising atrocities against them are indications of this ignorance. Hence, the present verdict can be considered as a pivotal point in the strive towards gender equality.

Practic Question

Q. Discuss the significance of granting Permanent commission to women in Armed forces towards addressing gender inequality in India?