“I am what I am,so take me as I am.”-A.Schopenhauer
Here’s a🧵on doctrines/judgements that have shaped LGBTQIA+ rights 🏳️🌈
•Societal Morality to Constitutional Morality
•Constitutional Morality vs. Majoritarian Morality
•Transformative/Living Constitution⬇️
A 🧵:
#UPSC
Here’s a🧵on doctrines/judgements that have shaped LGBTQIA+ rights 🏳️🌈
•Societal Morality to Constitutional Morality
•Constitutional Morality vs. Majoritarian Morality
•Transformative/Living Constitution⬇️
A 🧵:
#UPSC
DOCTRINE OF MANIFEST ARBITRARINESS
•If a law is drastically unreasonable,capricious,irrational or without adequate determining principle,excessive & disproportionate,it would be manifestly arbitrary.
Eg: Navtej Singh Johar judgement held that Sec 377 was "manifestly arbitrary"
•If a law is drastically unreasonable,capricious,irrational or without adequate determining principle,excessive & disproportionate,it would be manifestly arbitrary.
Eg: Navtej Singh Johar judgement held that Sec 377 was "manifestly arbitrary"
LIVING CONSTITUTION & TRANSFORMATIVE CONSTITUTIONALISM:
•The Constitution is a living organism & that it must be given life to adapt to changing times and societal attitudes
•The Constitution is a living organism & that it must be given life to adapt to changing times and societal attitudes
CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY vs. SOCIETAL MORALITY:
•It refers to the moral values & principles embodied in a country's constitution,& how they should guide the interpretation and application of the constitution & laws rather than societal attitudes or perceptions.
⬇️
•It refers to the moral values & principles embodied in a country's constitution,& how they should guide the interpretation and application of the constitution & laws rather than societal attitudes or perceptions.
⬇️
•Constitutional morality always trumps any imposition of a particular view of social morality by shifting & different majoritarian regimes.
•‘Constitutional morality cannot be martyred at the altar of social morality.’
•‘Constitutional morality cannot be martyred at the altar of social morality.’
INCLUSIVITY & DIVERSITY in the judiciary:
•It refers to efforts to ensure that the composition of a nation's judiciary reflects the diversity of the population it serves
Eg:measures to increase the representation of women,people of color,LGBTQ community,those underrepresented
•It refers to efforts to ensure that the composition of a nation's judiciary reflects the diversity of the population it serves
Eg:measures to increase the representation of women,people of color,LGBTQ community,those underrepresented
•“The social & geographical diversity must find its reflection at all levels of the judiciary as diversity on the bench promotes diversity of opinions & efficiency.
•People from different backgrounds enrich the Bench with their diverse experiences.”
Former CJI Ramana
•People from different backgrounds enrich the Bench with their diverse experiences.”
Former CJI Ramana
1.Naz Foundation v. Govt of NCT of Delhi(2009)
•The court decriminalized homosexuality in India by striking down Sec 377 of the IPC
•Sec 377 is violative of A14,A15(1), A21 of the Constitution
•It’s an unacceptable violation of individual privacy,liberty,dignity & autonomy
•The court decriminalized homosexuality in India by striking down Sec 377 of the IPC
•Sec 377 is violative of A14,A15(1), A21 of the Constitution
•It’s an unacceptable violation of individual privacy,liberty,dignity & autonomy
2.NALSA v. Union of India(2014)
•"Recognition of transgenders as a 3rd gender is not a social or medical issue but a human rights issue.”
•It affirmed that the fundamental rights will be equally applicable to transgender people
•Right to self-identification of their gender
•"Recognition of transgenders as a 3rd gender is not a social or medical issue but a human rights issue.”
•It affirmed that the fundamental rights will be equally applicable to transgender people
•Right to self-identification of their gender
4.Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India(2018)
•Sec 377 was read down & held to be manifestly arbitrary & violative of A14,15 & 21
•“Discrimination is the antithesis of equality & that it is the recognition of equality which will foster the dignity of every individual."
•Sec 377 was read down & held to be manifestly arbitrary & violative of A14,15 & 21
•“Discrimination is the antithesis of equality & that it is the recognition of equality which will foster the dignity of every individual."
5.Arunkumar v. Inspector General of Registration(2019)
•The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court upheld the marriage between a trans woman & a cis man & affirmed it to be valid under the Hindu Marriage Act,1956.
•The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court upheld the marriage between a trans woman & a cis man & affirmed it to be valid under the Hindu Marriage Act,1956.
6.S. Sushma vs Commissioner of Police(2021)
•While considering the petition filed by a lesbian couple seeking protection from harassment, court observed that the LGBTQIA+ community “can’t be left in a vulnerable atmosphere where there isn’t any guarantee for their safety”
⬇️
•While considering the petition filed by a lesbian couple seeking protection from harassment, court observed that the LGBTQIA+ community “can’t be left in a vulnerable atmosphere where there isn’t any guarantee for their safety”
⬇️
•J. Venkatesh, while dealing with this matter, volunteered to undergo voluntary psycho-education sessions in order to unlearn & overcome his prejudices against the queer community
•“Ignorance is no justification for normalising any form of discrimination.”
•“Ignorance is no justification for normalising any form of discrimination.”
•Directed Union & State Governments to take steps to prohibit any attempts by medical professionals indulging in conversion therapy to ‘cure’ or ‘change’ the gender identity &/or sexual orientation.
“We cannot change history but can pave a way for a better future. The Constitution is a living organism and it has to be given life. It is time to bid adieu to prejudicial perceptions deeply ingrained in societal mindset."
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
Please note the correction:
"I am what I am, so take me as I am" is attributed to Johann Wolfgang
von Goethe
Arthur Schopenhauer had pronounced, "No one can escape
from their individuality."
"I am what I am, so take me as I am" is attributed to Johann Wolfgang
von Goethe
Arthur Schopenhauer had pronounced, "No one can escape
from their individuality."
Loading suggestions...