|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:35 PM August 2nd, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that this law discriminates against men, and that a 14th amendment "equal protection" challenge in federal court might be worth a try.
The 14th amendment says: "No state shall [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
My understanding is that, unlike lower court judges, who're elected, federal court judges are appointed for life and are generally more cerebral.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:35 PM August 2nd, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
The Indian Supreme Court probably doesn't have anything analogous to the 14th Amendment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:58 AM August 3rd, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually it does. Article 14 of the Indian Constitution reads
Right to Equality
14. Equality before law.- The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
In the past, a fairly large number of federal and state laws have been struck down by the courts on this count.
Unfortunately in this case the constitutional challenge was based on the ground that this provision is being misused, and the SC rightly said that misuse by itself does not make a law unconstitutional.
A better strategy would be to challenge it on the ground that it violates Article 14, and a group of lawyers in my city are currently drafting a writ petition based on that. But now that the SC has upheld this law, it is unlikely to reopen the issue at least for some time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:18 AM August 4th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme court would not on the ground mentioned . But we are planning to challenge on the ignorance and worng information using the available statiscs on marital and non marital sucicide whcich suggest that such protection is actually required for male of the species not women becasue the mental harassment o tbe driven to sucide seem to happening to men and not women. Of course no court would take a polictically incorrect decision .but it will be a signal that it is no longer lone individuals who are fighting.
"women are more dangerous then men " Old Jungle saying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 07:43 PM August 2nd, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
when we abandoned neutral wording of laws we no longer were a country of equal individuals under the law. we are now in a race to see who is the current darling special case. be warned india. by allowing non neutral language at so young a time in your political life and your emargence on the world sphere as more an equal will be tarred by factions each fighting for their own special laws.
its happening here... slowly, but its happening. VAWA... and in child.. its only a matter of time then like sweden in business...
there is no such thing more equal...
there is also no such thing as a law that will help things be equal and then have a dissolve clause when they are equal. the reason is that since equal is impossible, dissolve is not needed.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Anonymous User writes "The Indian Supreme Court