I thought rape wasn’t a women’s issue. That rape was about the violation of human rights. About assaulting not just a woman, but the idea of civil society itself. Last week, though, the Cabinet decided to tinker with my beliefs. It cleared a Bill, to be tabled in Parliament, proposing that only women judges try rape cases. And the National Commission for Women pronounced its approval of this “positive step” towards gender justice.

I read every printed line available on the subject to get to the heart of the proposal’s intent. According to a news report, it is meant to provide respite from “the tough questioning resorted to by defence lawyers to browbeat and shame rape victims in courts normally presided over by male judges”. Not that I am heartless, but where is the head of this Cabinet intent? If it exists at all, my contention is, it’s muddled.

z Why assume, and give up

on, the sensitivities of

male judges?

z Why assume, and take for granted, the sensitivities of women judges?

z Why assume, and almost ensure, that male participation in rape trials be only as perpetrator and defendant?

z Why assume, and without any collated evidence whatsoever, that women judges will expedite proceedings, increase conviction rates, or indeed provide comfort zones for complainants during trials in rape cases?

z Why assume, and knowing full well how false an assumption it is, that there are enough women judges to try all rape cases the country over?

... contd.