“她就是这么说的”:把女性证词放在强奸审判的中心——重写拉贾和奥尔斯。v.卡纳塔克邦(2016)10 SCC 506”

P. Dash, R. Thyagarajan, Tejasvini Puri
{"title":"“她就是这么说的”:把女性证词放在强奸审判的中心——重写拉贾和奥尔斯。v.卡纳塔克邦(2016)10 SCC 506”","authors":"P. Dash, R. Thyagarajan, Tejasvini Puri","doi":"10.1080/24730580.2021.1986288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper is an attempt to re-imagine a 2016 Division Bench judgement of the Supreme Court of India in an appeal against conviction for rape, through a feminist dissent. The imaginary dissent is situated in the time and place of when the majority decided the appeal and significantly departs, both methodologically and substantively, from the majority opinion. It does so by according primacy to the complainant’s testimony and evaluating it independently of the other evidence on record, including the medical evidence. The accompanying commentary sets the judgement in the context of the socio-legal framework in which it was delivered and highlights the ways in which the dissent demonstrates the possibility of writing a feminist judgment even while adhering to the limits set by applicable law.","PeriodicalId":13511,"journal":{"name":"Indian Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“That’s what she said”: centring women’s testimony in rape trials - re-writing Raja and Ors. v. State of State of Karnataka (2016) 10 SCC 506”\",\"authors\":\"P. Dash, R. Thyagarajan, Tejasvini Puri\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24730580.2021.1986288\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This paper is an attempt to re-imagine a 2016 Division Bench judgement of the Supreme Court of India in an appeal against conviction for rape, through a feminist dissent. The imaginary dissent is situated in the time and place of when the majority decided the appeal and significantly departs, both methodologically and substantively, from the majority opinion. It does so by according primacy to the complainant’s testimony and evaluating it independently of the other evidence on record, including the medical evidence. The accompanying commentary sets the judgement in the context of the socio-legal framework in which it was delivered and highlights the ways in which the dissent demonstrates the possibility of writing a feminist judgment even while adhering to the limits set by applicable law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2021.1986288\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2021.1986288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文试图通过女权主义者的异议,重新想象2016年印度最高法院分庭对强奸定罪上诉的判决。想象中的异议位于多数人决定上诉的时间和地点,并且在方法上和实质上都与多数人的意见有很大的不同。它的做法是将申诉人的证词放在首位,并独立于其他记录在案的证据,包括医疗证据,对其进行评估。随附的评注将判决书置于判决所处的社会法律框架的背景下,并强调了异议如何证明即使在遵守适用法律规定的限制的情况下,也有可能写出女权主义判决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“That’s what she said”: centring women’s testimony in rape trials - re-writing Raja and Ors. v. State of State of Karnataka (2016) 10 SCC 506”
ABSTRACT This paper is an attempt to re-imagine a 2016 Division Bench judgement of the Supreme Court of India in an appeal against conviction for rape, through a feminist dissent. The imaginary dissent is situated in the time and place of when the majority decided the appeal and significantly departs, both methodologically and substantively, from the majority opinion. It does so by according primacy to the complainant’s testimony and evaluating it independently of the other evidence on record, including the medical evidence. The accompanying commentary sets the judgement in the context of the socio-legal framework in which it was delivered and highlights the ways in which the dissent demonstrates the possibility of writing a feminist judgment even while adhering to the limits set by applicable law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Interpreting without bannisters? The abstraction problem afflicting the basic structure doctrine Courts, mining conflicts, and Adivasi rights: a case study from central India (2000–2022) “ Mutated Sumangali Scheme ”: challenges in enforcement of labour laws in spinning mills of Tamil Nadu Protection of stakeholders’ interests in the Indian corporate landscape: examining the “ifs and buts” The maze of interpretation: abortion laws and legal indeterminacy in Indian courts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1