Engendering Constitutional Justice: Women’s Rights and Substantive Equality in Contemporary Society

Abstract

In the past century, gender equality has been steadily enshrined as a core norm of constitutional democracies throughout the world. But the lived experience of millions of women remains, often dramatically, different from the rights given on paper. This paper explores the structural and jurisprudential gap between formal constitutional provisions and substantive gender justice, showing how patriarchal social orders, procedural barriers, and selective enforcement of rights continue to perpetuate inequality even when legal structures are ostensibly egalitarian. Using constitutional jurisprudence from India, South Africa, and some jurisdictions in Europe and the Americas, the article considers the doctrinal development of equality clauses, reproductive rights and antidiscrimination protections, while placing these issues within the broader feminist critique of liberal constitutionalism. The study further examines modern flashpoints – workplace sexual harassment, marital rape, property inheritance and digital violence – as test cases of how well constitutional architecture accommodates women’s concerns. It contends that gender justice involves more than just formal inclusion in constitutional texts, but a transformational constitutionalism that actively dismantles hierarchies entrenched in both law and social practice. The article ends with a proposal for a framework of intersectional constitutionalism as a methodological and normative lens for judges, legislators and civil society groups committed to the advancement of women’s rights in the twenty first century.

REFERENCES

1. Albertyn, C. (2007) Substantive equality and transformation in South Africa. South African Journal on Human Rights, 23(2), 253–276.


2. Banda, F. (2005) Women, law and human rights: An African perspective. Hart Publication.


3. Baxi, U. (2014) The place of the human right to health and contemporary approaches to global justice: Some immodest proposals. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 1(2), 76–82.


4. Citron, D. K. (2014) Hate crimes in cyberspace. Harvard University Press.


5. Crenshaw, K. W. (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139–167.


6. Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of colour. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.


7. Fredman, S. (2008) Human rights transformed: Positive rights and positive duties. Oxford University Press.


8. Fredman, S. (2016). Substantive equality revisited. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 14(3), 712.


9. Htun, M., & Weldon, S. L. (2012) The civic origins of progressive policy change: Combating violence against women in global perspective, 1975–2005. American Political Science Review, 106(3), 548–569.


10. Kapur, R. (2005) Erotic justice: Law and the new politics of postcolonialism. GlassHouse Press.


11. Klare, K. (1998). Legal culture and transformative constitutionalism. South African Journal on Human Rights, 14(1), 146–188.


12. MacKinnon, C. A. (1989) Toward a feminist theory of the state. Harvard University Press.


13. Menkel-Meadow, C. (2018). MeToo as feminist social movement and social rupture. Daedalus, 147(2), 107–114.


14. Menon, N. (2004) Recovering subversion: Feminist politics beyond the law. Permanent Black.


15. Nussbaum, M. C. (1999) Sex and social justice. Oxford University Press.


16. Olsen, F. E. (1983). The family and the market: A study of ideology and legal reform. Harvard Law Review, 96(7), 1497–1578.


17. Roux, T. (2013) The politics of principle: The first South African Constitutional Court, 1995–2005. Cambridge University Press.


18. Siegel, R. B. (2022). Memory games: Dobbs's originalism as antimovement constitutionalism—and some pathways for resistance. Texas Law Review, 101(1), 1–95.


19. Smart, C. (1989). Feminism and the power of law. Routledge.


20. Williams, W. (1984). Equality's riddle: Pregnancy and the equal treatment/special treatment debate. New York University Review of Law and Social Change, 13(2), 325–380.

Constitutions, Statutes and International Instruments

1. Constitution of South Africa. (1996). Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.


2. Pregnancy Discrimination Act, 42 U.S.C 2000e(k) (1978).


3. Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.


4. United Nations. (1979) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). UN General Assembly Resolution 34/180.

Cases

1. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022).


2. Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973).


3. Janzen v. Platy Enterprises Ltd. [1989] 1 SCR 1252 (Supreme Court of Canada).


4. Law v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1999] 1 SCR 497 (Canada).


5. Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971).


6. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (overruled by Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 2022).


7. Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1.


8. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241.