A pathbreaking ruling on equality

The Supreme Court (SC)’s interim ruling allowing women to sit for the National Defence Academy (NDA) entrance exam for entry into the Army is a game-changer in eliminating gender discrimination. Opening NDA to women is long due. Armed forces must evolve

The Supreme Court (SC)’s interim ruling allowing women to sit for the National Defence Academy (NDA) entrance exam for entry into the Army is a game-changer in eliminating gender discrimination. The court will hear the matter again on September 8 for final orders. The current landmark ruling is a logical step forward after the SC’s powerful intervention in 2020 ordering the Centre to grant permanent commission to women in the Navy and Army. Women are already being recruited through the Officers’ Training Academy and Short Service Commission. Therefore, shutting off entry through the NDA is inconsistent with the often stated claim that the armed forces have evolved on gender.

The very nature of warfare has changed. To be sure, physical fitness remains a prerequisite for both men and women, but technical expertise, decision-making skills and mental resilience are equally important, none of which are governed by gender constrains. (File photo)

The apex court has been consistently critical of the discriminatory attitude when it comes to giving women equal opportunities in the Army. On Wednesday, the SC bench acerbically observed: “Don’t make (the) judiciary intervene every time. Do it yourself rather than inviting orders from the court. You must accept the broad principle of gender neutrality and structure it to your peculiar set-up.” At present, there are only 0.56% women officers in the Army, 1.08% in the Air Force and 6.5% in the Navy — in the 1.4 million-strong armed forces.

Arguments to keep women out of the Army — low acceptance in leadership roles, physical constraints, vulnerability to sexual and other harassment, or lack of infrastructure — actually reflect institutional biases which need to be corrected. Women are victims of this mindset and must not be penalised for it. Since the induction of women into the Army in 1992 as officers, there has also been little evidence of women seeking special treatment.

The very nature of warfare has changed. To be sure, physical fitness remains a prerequisite for both men and women, but technical expertise, decision-making skills and mental resilience are equally important, none of which are governed by gender constrains. If NDA needs to change the curriculum, create new infrastructure and provide for separate training standards to facilitate gender inclusion, then it must do so to ensure that the court’s directive is carried out in letter and spirit. At the root of all the SC’s rulings on women in the Army lies the principle of equality. This is not only important to meet a cherished constitutional value but will also make armed forces better and stronger. The court has opened yet another door to gender inclusion — the government and forces must embrace the change.