22 September, 2020

OPINION | 'Judicial Opacity On Women's Entry In Sabarimala Is Troubling'

The Sabarimala verdict is a setback to the struggle against a dehumanising prohibition, writes professor Kalpana Kannabiran

Proscribed
A nine-year-old girl waits outside the Sabarimala temple with a placard that reads: “Ready to wait. Will visit the shrine after I am 50 years old.”
OPINION | 'Judicial Opacity On Women's Entry In Sabarimala Is Troubling'
outlookindia.com
2019-11-22T17:52:30+05:30

It was just days before Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi retired that the Sabarimala review petition was decided by a majority of 3:2. The September 2018 judgment—a 4:1 majority decision in favour of women’s entry into the temple—now goes before a larger bench for a relook. It is apt, when we consider these contrary outcomes, to recall some basic tenets in constitutional interpretation set out since 2009, marking the turn towards “transformative constitutionalism”. These include: the consideration of analogous grounds of discrimination as impermissible (i.e. any form of discrimination akin to what’s clearly listed as illegal, say untouchability); the principle of non-retrogression in the delineation of fundamental rights (i.e. a right, once granted, cannot be reversed); the unequivocal rejection of the de minimis argument (that something is too trivial for the law to consider) in keeping exclusions in place; an expansive reading of the Ambedkarite formulation of constitutional morality; and the unanimous 2017 declaration by a...

unsub

THIS ARTICLE IS PRICELESS...

To read this piece, and more such stories in India's most exciting and exacting magazine, plus get access to our 25-year archives goldmine, please subscribe.


More from Kalpana Kannabiran


Latest Magazine

September 28, 2020
content

other articles from the issue

articles from the previous issue

Other magazine section