On November 28, 2024, CLPR organized a roundtable discussion in Bangalore with women lawyers practising in the Karnataka High Court focusing on women’s equality in the higher judiciary. The event bought together senior advocates, government pleaders and independent lawyers to examine barriers preventing women from attaining leadership positions within judiciary and legal institutions.
At the Roundtable, CLPR presented the key findings from the CLPR’s primary research which highlighted the significant underrepresentation of women in higher judiciary. Women face higher scrutiny for appointments, shorter tenures and fewer opportunities for elevation to the High Courts and the Supreme Court. Persistent barriers such as gender bias, sexual harassment, opaque appointment processes, and inadequate institutional support continue to hinder progress.
A live survey was conducted among the participants to get their responses on significant hurdles for women in legal profession an the results were as follows:
I. An Enabling Professional Environment
The first theme discussed was on the need for a more inclusive professional environment and the institutional support necessary for enabling women to thrive in leadership roles. Most lawyers commented on the hostile environment within courts, laden with sexual harassment and the lack of gender sensitization amongst the bar and the bench. Inappropriate comments in skewed power dynamics especially when coming from a judge, further exacerbates the hostility at the workplace. Some of the suggestions given to address this were:
- Gender sensitization in the early years of the profession be made mandatory for both advocates and judicial officers. She proposed that the judiciary take initiative for this, and constitute a gender sensitization committee for new judicial officers.
- To achieve tangible change amongst advocates, it was suggested that enrolment into any Bar Council be tied to mandatory gender sensitization courses.
- Putting up of display boards that warn that ogling or making sexually coloured remarks are punishable offences. She equated it to anti-smoking ads, saying sexual harassment has to be “made ugly” for the men to stop perpetuating it.
- Lack of effective PoSH committees was also brought up as a major issue, with participants noting the low number of complaints received. There was also discussion on the lack of a PoSH committee in the bar association.
- Establishment of a dedicated helpline where individuals can easily access the contact numbers of POSH committee members. This would allow aggrieved women to report incidents confidentially and register complaints through a reliable and accessible platform
- Who would take responsibility for the sensitisation was a big issue. While the judicial enterprise is a hierarchical institution with rule making authorities to which parties are accountable, the Bar Council of India functions more as an association of lawyers than as a regulatory institution.
- Ongoing training and awareness sessions be conducted by senior lawyers for newly enrolled advocates.
- Scope of the Advocates’ Welfare Fund be expanded to include maternity relief as well as situations of financial instability for young advocates.
- Workplace improvements of upgrading court infrastructure, creche facilities and safe and hygienic working conditions needed.
II. Institutional and Policy Reforms
On the nature of institutional reforms necessary to increase women’s representation in judicial appointments, it was suggested that quotas for women should be provided in key legal roles. Participants emphasized the necessity of 30% reservation for women to drive change and transparency in judicial appointments. This should be done through establishing timely processes and clear selection criteria. Participants were also in favour of an alternative to the collegium system in the form of a Judicial Appointment Commission for greater accountability.
On the question of what changes are needed to ensure women have equal opportunities to advance into leadership roles, the suggestions were as follows:
- 30% Reservation/affirmative action as the only way to ensure substantial change in gender composition of the bar and bench.
- Reservation also has a signalling effect that encourages more women to join the profession since discrimination would no longer act as an absolute prohibitive barrier from reaching positions of influence.
- Some felt that reservation may not work as there are not enough practicing women litigators to fill up reserved positions.
- The collegium appointment process must be time-bound to avoid delays in the appointment of female judges. There be clear criteria for elevation and appointment, similar to the one set out for senior counsel designation by the Supreme Court.
- 50% of all government pleaders should be women and in the empanelment of advocates for government institutions, at least 50% women in every list recommending names for such positions. These posts act as gateways to positions of power and influence within the legal fraternity and the judiciary and since women currently constitute a disproportionately low number of empanelled lawyers and government pleaders, this limits their exposure that comes with the position.
- Collective Action: there was a need to form a women lawyers’ association to advocate policy reform, mentorship, and increased professional visibility.
The Bangalore Roundtable provided a critical platform to identify barriers and propose actionable reforms. This roundtable led to collective action by several members of the Karnataka Women’s High Court Bar to take up the issue of reservation for women in the elections of the Advocates Association, Bangalore which resulted in the Supreme Court passing mandatory orders for reserving the Treasurer post for a woman and 30% of the Governing Council posts for women. This is a huge step forward and we hope that such engagement will lead to reforms for gender diversity in the judiciary.
