Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9048
S. Rajam, Atreyo Banerjee
As the movement for recognizing queer rights in India gains momentum, it is critical to evaluate the rights of a particularly neglected group within the LGBTQIA+ community: intersex children. Since 2018, the Indian Supreme Court has decriminalized consensual adult same-sex relationships and has recognized the right to privacy—including decisional and bodily privacy—as a fundamental right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. However, even after these crucial decisions, intersex children are still subject to medically unnecessary surgeries without their consent. Many suffer long term consequences from such disentitlement. In this Article we examine the rights of children from an ethical and legal perspective in the Indian context. Drawing on classical, feminist, and queer bioethics frameworks, we briefly review the ethical violations inherent in performing genital surgeries on intersex children without their consent. We analyze India’s international legal obligations and argue that those obligations fill a significant gap in India's jurisprudence on sexual minorities. We also analyze the domestic legal framework, studying key decisions of various high courts, including the Indian Supreme Court, that have recognized the right to self-determination of gender identity. Finally, we suggest possible alterations to the current legal framework that, if implemented, will help further legal recognition of the rights of intersex children.
{"title":"Right To Genital Integrity: Law, Limbo and The Status of Intersex Children in India","authors":"S. Rajam, Atreyo Banerjee","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9048","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000As the movement for recognizing queer rights in India gains momentum, it is critical to evaluate the rights of a particularly neglected group within the LGBTQIA+ community: intersex children. Since 2018, the Indian Supreme Court has decriminalized consensual adult same-sex relationships and has recognized the right to privacy—including decisional and bodily privacy—as a fundamental right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. However, even after these crucial decisions, intersex children are still subject to medically unnecessary surgeries without their consent. Many suffer long term consequences from such disentitlement. In this Article we examine the rights of children from an ethical and legal perspective in the Indian context. Drawing on classical, feminist, and queer bioethics frameworks, we briefly review the ethical violations inherent in performing genital surgeries on intersex children without their consent. We analyze India’s international legal obligations and argue that those obligations fill a significant gap in India's jurisprudence on sexual minorities. We also analyze the domestic legal framework, studying key decisions of various high courts, including the Indian Supreme Court, that have recognized the right to self-determination of gender identity. Finally, we suggest possible alterations to the current legal framework that, if implemented, will help further legal recognition of the rights of intersex children.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46336039","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9046
V. Narain
In 2018, in Indian Young Lawyers Association (IYLA) v State of Kerala, popularly known as the Sabarimala case, the Indian Supreme Court struck down a rule that prevented girls and women in the 10-50 age group from entering the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The Court, in a 4-1 decision, held that the temple rule violated women’s right to equality and right to worship and was not protected under the right to religious freedom. Sabarimala is a landmark decision. For the first time,the Court insisted that all discrimination must be tested against constitutional values and discrimination that perpetuates stereotypes and disadvantage will not withstand constitutional scrutiny. It emphasised the importance of substantive equality in contesting discrimination against women and challenging the structures of oppression that exclude women. Finally, the Court linked women’s equality rights with equal citizenship. Focusing on the Sabarimala decision, this paper evaluates the recognition of women’s rights in Indian constitutional jurisprudence and assesses its transformative potential. The paper aims to place women’s equality rights squarely within constitutional discourse; to further develop understandings of justice that will constitutionalize women’s equality rights and ensure their inclusion in constitutional doctrine and discourse and to create salient changes in women’s everyday lives.
{"title":"Constitutionalizing Women’s Equality in India: Assessing the Sabarimala Decision","authors":"V. Narain","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9046","url":null,"abstract":"In 2018, in Indian Young Lawyers Association (IYLA) v State of Kerala, popularly known as the Sabarimala case, the Indian Supreme Court struck down a rule that prevented girls and women in the 10-50 age group from entering the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. The Court, in a 4-1 decision, held that the temple rule violated women’s right to equality and right to worship and was not protected under the right to religious freedom. Sabarimala is a landmark decision. For the first time,the Court insisted that all discrimination must be tested against constitutional values and discrimination that perpetuates stereotypes and disadvantage will not withstand constitutional scrutiny. It emphasised the importance of substantive equality in contesting discrimination against women and challenging the structures of oppression that exclude women. Finally, the Court linked women’s equality rights with equal citizenship. Focusing on the Sabarimala decision, this paper evaluates the recognition of women’s rights in Indian constitutional jurisprudence and assesses its transformative potential. The paper aims to place women’s equality rights squarely within constitutional discourse; to further develop understandings of justice that will constitutionalize women’s equality rights and ensure their inclusion in constitutional doctrine and discourse and to create salient changes in women’s everyday lives.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42880539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9045
Magdalene Lam
The most recent Singapore Supreme Court decision of Ong Ming Johnson v Public Prosecutor [2020] SGHC 63 follows a slew of unsuccessful constitutional challenges to Singapore’s anti-sodomy legislation, s377A of the Penal Code. Despite growing domestic activism, there is little hope that the provision will be repealed by a conservative Parliament. The onus is therefore on the Singaporean judiciary to abolish this archaic feature of Singapore’s colonial past, and this Note proposes new strategies for challenging s377A. The failure of past s377A challenges does not foreclose the possibility of future success, and Singaporeans may take cues from the successes of United States and Indian litigants in challenging their domestic anti-sodomy laws. This Note adopts a cross-jurisdictional analysis of anti-sodomy challenges and argues for enhanced constitutional protection of the LGBTQ+ community under Art. 9 (right to life and liberty) and Art. 12 (equal protection) of the Singaporean Constitution.
新加坡最高法院最近作出的Ong Ming Johnson诉公诉人【2020】SGHC 63的裁决，是在对新加坡反鸡奸立法《刑法典》第377A条提出一系列不成功的宪法挑战之后作出的。尽管国内激进主义日益高涨，但保守派议会废除该条款的希望渺茫。因此，新加坡司法部门有责任废除新加坡殖民历史的这一古老特征，本说明提出了挑战s377A的新策略。过去s377A挑战的失败并不能排除未来成功的可能性，新加坡人可能会从美国和印度诉讼当事人挑战国内反鸡奸法的成功中得到启示。本说明对反鸡奸挑战进行了跨司法管辖区分析，并主张根据《新加坡宪法》第9条（生命权和自由权）和第12条（平等保护）加强对LGBTQ+群体的宪法保护。
{"title":"The \"Limited\" Assistance of Foreign Jurisprudence: Lessons from India and the United States on Sexuality and Governance","authors":"Magdalene Lam","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.v42i2.9045","url":null,"abstract":"The most recent Singapore Supreme Court decision of Ong Ming Johnson v Public Prosecutor [2020] SGHC 63 follows a slew of unsuccessful constitutional challenges to Singapore’s anti-sodomy legislation, s377A of the Penal Code. Despite growing domestic activism, there is little hope that the provision will be repealed by a conservative Parliament. The onus is therefore on the Singaporean judiciary to abolish this archaic feature of Singapore’s colonial past, and this Note proposes new strategies for challenging s377A. The failure of past s377A challenges does not foreclose the possibility of future success, and Singaporeans may take cues from the successes of United States and Indian litigants in challenging their domestic anti-sodomy laws. This Note adopts a cross-jurisdictional analysis of anti-sodomy challenges and argues for enhanced constitutional protection of the LGBTQ+ community under Art. 9 (right to life and liberty) and Art. 12 (equal protection) of the Singaporean Constitution. \u0000 \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45845810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Prof. Katherine Franke's remarks were delivered during the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"Remarks from the 2022 Symposium","authors":"Katherine M. Franke","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9790","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9790","url":null,"abstract":"Prof. Katherine Franke's remarks were delivered during the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42611068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"Ladies: You Really Do Not Have the Constitutional Rights You Think You Have","authors":"V. Nourse","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9792","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9792","url":null,"abstract":"This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45427188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ms. Jaffe-Geffner's remarks were delivered at the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"Opening Remarks from the 2022 Symposium","authors":"Nina Jaffe-Geffner","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9699","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9699","url":null,"abstract":"Ms. Jaffe-Geffner's remarks were delivered at the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45792687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"The Equal Rights Amendment in Global Context: Gender Equality in Constitutions Worldwide and the Potential of More Comprehensive Approaches","authors":"Aleta Sprague, J. Heymann, Amy Raub","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9701","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9701","url":null,"abstract":"This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48682599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"Class, Care, and the Equal Rights Amendment","authors":"K. Andrias","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9789","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9789","url":null,"abstract":"This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44904794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"Making the Equal Rights Amendment That Is Needed in the Twenty-First Century","authors":"Julie C. Suk","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9700","url":null,"abstract":"This piece was submitted in connection with the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46811850","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
New York Attorney General Letitia James's remarks the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.
{"title":"Remarks from the 2022 Symposium","authors":"Letitia James","doi":"10.52214/cjgl.vi.9791","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52214/cjgl.vi.9791","url":null,"abstract":"New York Attorney General Letitia James's remarks the 2022 Symposium The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee of Sex Equality in the U.S. Constitution. The event was co-sponsored by the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law and the Columbia Law School ERA Project.","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43740586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：