brand logo

Gender Apartheid in Police Dept

17 Feb 2021

Yesterday (16), the Supreme Court set dates to hear a Fundamental Rights (FR) petition filed by a group of 18 Senior Superintendents of Police (SSPs), seeking the annulment of the appointment of Sri Lanka’s first female Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG). While various parties expressed mixed feelings about this petition on several grounds, including the gender of the said officer and the alleged violation of the FR of the petitioners, this will be a landmark case in the history of the Sri Lanka Police Department, as it involves the appointment of Sri Lanka’s first female DIG. The main argument raised by the petitioners was that there was no cadre position available within the Sri Lanka Police by the rank of “Woman DIG”, and that making such an appointment, even in an acting capacity, is in violation of the approved recruitment and promotion scheme of the Police. In the petition, they also request that the said appointment be declared illegal, and null and void, and that the respondents of the petition be directed to either remove the Woman DIG, or that the said appointment be rescinded.  Last but not least, the petitioners seek an interim order staying the decision taken to appoint the Woman DIG until the verdict is given. According to the petition, no female officers are envisaged in the existing DIG cadre, which includes DIGs and Senior DIGs. This raises a serious question – why are female Police officers not entitled to the rights granted by the country’s supreme law, the Constitution, and why do they have limits concerning career development on the mere basis of a person’s gender? Even though the Constitution, in its Article 12(1) for the right to equality, says that no citizen shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, religion, language, caste, sex, political opinion, place of birth, or any one of such grounds, the petitioners in the said petition claim that at the time of the appointment, there was no cadre position available within the Sri Lanka Police by the rank of Woman DIG. However, male Police officers are entitled to it. An alarming factor that comes to light in this connection is the approved recruitment and promotion scheme of the Sri Lanka Police being inconsistent with the country’s Constitution, as sex is not supposed to be a factor that affects employment and promotion opportunities. What does the allegation – that the topmost State institutions tasked with making appointments to the country’s main law enforcement agency, i.e. the Department of Police, failed to follow the approved recruitment and promotion scheme, and 18 SSPs claiming that their FR in terms of Articles 12(1) and 14(1)(g) had been violated due to the said appointment – tell us? And most importantly, in a time when the world has started counting on people’s abilities and knowledge instead of gender, why has Sri Lanka failed to amend and update laws and regulations to give women the opportunity to be appointed to any position provided they are fit to fulfill the responsibilities? As far as ensuring equal treatment for people of all genders is concerned, Sri Lanka has taken a number of admirable steps. However, there is still a lot more to do, and changing laws, regulations, and policies, in fact, is one point where it should start. And, at the same time, what would happen after the Supreme Court’s verdict? Will the authorities end up rescinding the above-mentioned female officer’s appointment and forget everything, or will they look into taking long-term steps to ensure equality at the foremost law enforcement institution that is expected to help and protect the public?


More News..