On 1st Feb 2025, CLPR organised a Roundtable in Chennai with women lawyers practising in the Madras High Court both from the Madras & Madurai Bench. The Roundtable was part of CLPR’s ongoing research on the gender gap in the higher judiciary in India. The Roundtable brought together senior women lawyers including women Senior Counsels and other women advocates from the Madras High Court. In this Roundtable, CLPR presented the preliminary findings of its research on gender diversity and women’s representation in the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
The Roundtable led to some extremely useful recommendations to address the issue and some of these are as follows:
Reservation for Women in the High Courts and the Supreme Court
-
- We should push for 50% reservation for women in judicial appointments and a minimum of 33% reservation.
- Every list should have women’s names for elevation. For example, if five candidates are recommended, at least two should be women.
- Women’s reservation be provided even in appointment of ad hoc judges.
- Whenever a woman judge retires, at the very least, her vacancy should be filled by another woman so that the number of women judges do not decrease. After Justice Hama Kohli’s retirement, her seat wasn’t filled by a woman. Soon, Justice Bela Trivedi will retire, leaving just one female judge in the Supreme Court. This practice should change.
- To actively advocate for reservations in all state government appointments within the High Courts to increase visibility for eligible women including in government legal panels, positions of Additional Solicitor General (ASG), Advocate General (AG), and others.
- Additionally, it’s important to emphasize that women must build their leadership capacity to compete effectively—not just within women lawyers’ associations, but also in mainstream legal associations. They should actively contest elections, engage with broader legal issues beyond gender-specific concerns, and contribute to common and public legal matters.
- Women’s associations should prioritize supporting women candidates during elections to strengthen female representation in leadership roles. This collective support will ensure that women candidates receive unified backing. Additionally, we should explore the possibility of creating an alternate president position specifically for women within Bar Associations to enhance their leadership opportunities.
Transparency in Judicial Appointments
- Appointments must be transparent. There is a skewed 1:2 ratio in appointments of women from bench and the bar, disadvantaging women from the Bar disproportionately and this needs to be fixed.
- The collegium should announce when they are considering names for appointments—how many spots are open, how many names they will send, and so on. How many names are being sent from the Bar and from the bench. If we only learn after names have already been sent, it is too late to suggest women candidates. All of this information must be made public.
- Currently, the process is opaque and the “boys’ club” system operates informally. Chief Justices often consult the same senior counsels—predominantly men—when making recommendations. There should be a women’s collective that submits lists of eligible candidates every time names are being sent.
- Information related to the identities, including gender, caste, and bar:bench ratio of the applicants and the final list of recommended persons, should be publicly available.
- Eligibility criteria should be made known. Income of a person should not be a criteria for judgeship.
- The memorandum of procedure for appointment (through which the high court judges are appointed) should mandate a 50% reservation for women and maintain a 2:1 bar-and-bench ratio.
- The collegium process also needs reform. The idea that three men sit together, deciding names based on recommendations from three other men, is unacceptable. There must be female representation and the senior-most woman judge in the High Court should be part of the selection process, whether for Supreme Court or High Court appointments. Senior women advocates should also have a say.
- Establish a Judicial Recruitment Commission to oversee appointments, following reservation policies to ensure diversity and transparency.
- We need a policy similar to that of the European Court of Human Rights, which refuses to accept single-gender lists. This ensures every recommended list includes women.
- To compile statistics on women who have practiced law for a substantial period (10-15 years) and meet eligibility criteria. This list should be shared with the judiciary and circulated among judges involved in appointments.
- Ensure balanced representation of women from the between the subordinate judiciary and direct appointments from the Bar.
Data and statistics on women in the higher judiciary
- The data on the low number of women in the judiciary needs to be shared widely.
- There should be a National Collective on this issue of women’s representation in the higher judiciary needs to be formed. Isolated regional efforts often get dismissed—Tamil men might only listen when Delhi women speak, and Delhi men might respond when Tamil women raise the issue. A national collective creates a powerful and unified voice. This can include women lawyers, retired judges, Bar Association representatives, supportive men—essentially anyone who champions women’s inclusion in the judiciary. This collective should not be limited to women alone; we also need men who back this cause. This collective effort will help us push for greater representation and leadership opportunities for women in the legal profession.
- We also need a central body to compile and analyse statistics regularly. These numbers will help us raise critical questions and track progress.
- Every High Court should have a Dashboard which give its data on appointment of women, including caste diversity, and the bar-and-bench ratio. Just as courts publish data on case disposals, they should display statistics on gender diversity—how many women are in leadership, how many are being appointed, and from which backgrounds.
- This could be used to also rank the High Courts to promote diversity and inclusion encouraging healthy competition. The Dashboard will both call out courts that lag behind and to celebrate those that do well.
- State Bar Councils to make available data related to eligible candidates and their identities, including gender and caste to make visible eligible women lawyers for elevation.
- To build this data, we need representatives in every High Court who can gather information and request data from the courts.
- To have a DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) unit in every High Court to push for women’s representation. This unit could include members from the court itself and possibly external experts who specialize in gender issues.
Advocacy for increasing women’s representation in the higher judiciary
- Utilize media platforms to promote and propagate these ideas effectively.
- Launch a signature campaign among lawyers as part of our media and advocacy strategy.
- Engage with Bar associations to discuss these issues and foster dialogue across legal networks.
- On March 8 we can invite changemakers from the judiciary, legal associations, and beyond. Just one event a year is too little to create an impact and so two additional days in the year should be selected where gender parity and diversity issues can be discussed at least three times annually. We can launch initiatives, use existing data, and share it widely.
- Advocate for women’s reservation in the judiciary as a key point in political party manifestos whenever judicial appointments are discussed.
- We should organize state-level and national-level symposiums and seminars. These events should focus on the mandate for women to be part of the higher judiciary and involve influential stakeholders, including members of the collegium, to internalize this concept and drive systemic change.
- Encourage Bar Associations to actively recommend eligible women candidates when submitting nominations. A comprehensive enumeration of all eligible women candidates across High Courts, with specific lists for each court, will strengthen our lobbying efforts.
- People can start writing articles to publicize these demands and the statistics we have. This helps spark conversation.
- Creating a WhatsApp group or similar platform for everyone interested in these reforms would help us share updates, success stories, and data.
- Revisiting existing articles, such as Geetha’s “Why This Gender Bias, My Lord?” in The Hindu
Most importantly the group shared the sentiment that women members of the Bar should also enjoy the process of creating change. While most of them will not personally benefit from these efforts, they were doing this for the daughters, sisters, and future generations of women lawyers. Finding joy in this journey will keep us motivated, and once we build momentum, we can take on even more issues for women’s equality.