Woman or man, judge is ‘sir’: Gujarat CJ | India News
AHMEDABAD: The debate over whether judges should be addressed with the deferential British-era “My Lord” or “Your Honour” was briefly resurrected in the Gujarat high court Thursday and settled by a woman Chief Justice with a verdict in favour of “sir” as a “gender-neutral” alternative.
The genesis of the issue was a lawyer repeatedly addressing the division bench of Chief Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandip Bhatt as “Your Ladyship” during a hearing. When the bench pointed out that he should be acknowledging both judges instead of one, the counsel immediately apologised.
On completion of the arguments in the case being heard, the lawyer apologised a second time to Justice Bhatt, saying his intention was never to address only one judge and that he should have used “My Lords” instead.
To this, Chief Justice Gokani said, “Many a times, in the General Clauses Act, we say he includes she; sometimes she includes he also.”
Citing former Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya of the high court on the issue of addressing judges, she said, “In the past, because there were no women judges, ‘Her ladyship’ was not something used to address the court or a judge.”
At this, a senior advocate said “Her Ladyship” was surely not the correct way to address a woman judge. “Technically, it is ‘My lady’,” he said.
Chief Justice Gokani then said she believed the traditional appellations for judges were colonial relics and “too feudalistic”.
“We believe it should be either ‘sir’ or ‘madam’… It should be sir. That is the right way of doing it rather than ‘My lord’ or ‘Your honour’. So let it be gender neutral.”
When the lawyers present in the courtroom said they had become so accustomed to addressing judges as “lordships” that shifting to “sir” or “madam” would be difficult, Chief Justice Gokani quoted a discussion at the National Judicial Academy, where another former chief justice, SJ Mukhopadhyay, noted that many lawyers in Gujarat had already switched to “sir”.
In 2006, the Bar Council of India passed a resolution saying, “Use of colonial relics like ‘My Lord’ and ‘Your lordship’ should be discouraged.”
The genesis of the issue was a lawyer repeatedly addressing the division bench of Chief Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Sandip Bhatt as “Your Ladyship” during a hearing. When the bench pointed out that he should be acknowledging both judges instead of one, the counsel immediately apologised.
On completion of the arguments in the case being heard, the lawyer apologised a second time to Justice Bhatt, saying his intention was never to address only one judge and that he should have used “My Lords” instead.
To this, Chief Justice Gokani said, “Many a times, in the General Clauses Act, we say he includes she; sometimes she includes he also.”
Citing former Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya of the high court on the issue of addressing judges, she said, “In the past, because there were no women judges, ‘Her ladyship’ was not something used to address the court or a judge.”
At this, a senior advocate said “Her Ladyship” was surely not the correct way to address a woman judge. “Technically, it is ‘My lady’,” he said.
Chief Justice Gokani then said she believed the traditional appellations for judges were colonial relics and “too feudalistic”.
“We believe it should be either ‘sir’ or ‘madam’… It should be sir. That is the right way of doing it rather than ‘My lord’ or ‘Your honour’. So let it be gender neutral.”
When the lawyers present in the courtroom said they had become so accustomed to addressing judges as “lordships” that shifting to “sir” or “madam” would be difficult, Chief Justice Gokani quoted a discussion at the National Judicial Academy, where another former chief justice, SJ Mukhopadhyay, noted that many lawyers in Gujarat had already switched to “sir”.
In 2006, the Bar Council of India passed a resolution saying, “Use of colonial relics like ‘My Lord’ and ‘Your lordship’ should be discouraged.”
