The 'keeper' of the Domestic Violence Act 2005 has bad taste. All know that the DV Act is NOT a one-night stand.
Marriages, families and spouses need respect, as propagated by United Nations. Families are the microcosms of society.
Families are under attack from the evils of society like prostitution, and keeps. The keeps can be either male or female - so gender-neutrality is not an issue.
Terms like 'keep', one-night stand, prostitute may NOT be pleasing, but are a reality (which cannot be hidden).
It is important for Indira Jaising to grow with the times and gender-neutrality.
The cause of Families, marriages and Spouses can only be fought by committed married people in India.
‘Keep’ in SC ruling in poor taste: Jaising
Oct 23, 2010
NEW DELHI: India's first woman additional solicitor general Indira Jaising on Friday strongly protested use of the words "keep" and "one-night stand" in the Supreme Court's judgment on live-in relationships, caustically telling its author Justice Markandey Katju that it was in very poor taste and that she was personally offended by it.
Jaising had an important role in drafting of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which was the core of the judgment given by a Bench comprising Justices Katju and T S Thakur on Thursday. While laying down conditions for a live-in reationship to come within the ambit of the DV Act, the Bench had said one-night stands, weekend relationships and `keeps' would not qualify as domestic relationships.
It was Justice Katju, in his inimitable style, who provoked Jaising as soon as she stood up to argue a case by asking: "So Ms Jaising, you are the author of Domestic Violence Act". And that was enough for the ASG to burst forth with her objections to gender-biased words used in the judgment.
As the Indian representative in the United Nations' Committee for Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Jaising had reasons to feel worried about the negative impact the judgment would have in the international forum.
"Supreme Court judgments are cited across the world. But this one possibly will tell the world that in India, women are regarded as `keep' or `rakhels'. I strongly object to the use of these words in your judgment. I do not expect this from the Supreme Court in the 21st century. I feel offended by it," Jaising said in a single breath.
While Justice Katju asked her to focus on the case at hand, reminding her that live-in relations and Domestic Violence Act were not the subject matter, Justice T S Thakur inquired whether use of the word "concubine" instead of "keep" would have been more proper.
Jaising was calmer but more distraught after the sparring. She wondered whether the court would have used similar words for men. She drew a comparison of Thursday's ruling with the famous Visakha judgment of SC. The latter is still the guiding law, even after nearly a decade and a half, to protect women from sexual harassment at the workplace.
She said someone should file an application seeking expunction of these words from the judgment, thus indicating that though she had nothing against the merit of the judgment, her objection was to the use of certain words that described women in a rather derogatory way.