Comments on: Gender Issues in Constitutional Reform: A Review of The Republic at 40 https://groundviews.org/2013/06/11/gender-issues-in-constitutional-reform-a-review-of-the-republic-at-40/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gender-issues-in-constitutional-reform-a-review-of-the-republic-at-40 Journalism for Citizens Wed, 12 Jun 2013 23:53:02 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.1 By: Happy Heathen https://groundviews.org/2013/06/11/gender-issues-in-constitutional-reform-a-review-of-the-republic-at-40/#comment-53999 Wed, 12 Jun 2013 23:53:02 +0000 http://groundviews.org/?p=12066#comment-53999 If I may add to Sharanga’s already critical response, whatever steps taken by the successive governments in relation to improving gender rights have been vehemently opposed by the ethnic and religious minorities.

Catholics were up and arms about the recently introduced abortion rights and yet this author has the misguided audacity to blame it all on the usual suspects!

]]> By: sharanga https://groundviews.org/2013/06/11/gender-issues-in-constitutional-reform-a-review-of-the-republic-at-40/#comment-53989 Wed, 12 Jun 2013 11:26:13 +0000 http://groundviews.org/?p=12066#comment-53989 //the authors note that the republican constitutions were inherently framed to promote Sinhala Buddhist interests and had no intent to protect citizenship and rights of any disadvantaged category including women. //

Really? The last time I checked, it had something like this:


Right to equality.
12. (1) All persons are equal before the law and are entitled to the equal protection of the law.

(2) No citizen shall be discriminated against on the grounds of race, religion, language, caste, sex, political opinion, place of birth or any such grounds:

Provided that it shall be lawful to require a person to acquire within a reasonable time sufficient knowledge of any language as a qualification for any employment or office in the Public, Judicial or Local Government Service or in the service of any public corporation, where such knowledge is reasonably necessary for the discharge of the duties of such employment or office:

Provided further that it shall be lawful to require a person to have sufficient knowledge of any language as a qualification for any such employment of office where no function of that employment or office can be discharged otherwise than with a knowledge of that language.

(3) No person shall, on the grounds of race, religion, language, caste, sex or any one such grounds, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, places of public entertainment and places of public worship of his own religion.

(4) Nothing in this Article shall prevent special provision being made, by law, subordinate legislation or executive action, for the advancement of women, children or disabled persons.

Not that I’m a big fan of giving special provisions to people, but the constitution certainly does have the intent to protect those who are disadvantaged, though perhaps the people who wrote it never did.

]]>