Senior Advocate Indira Jaising on Friday opined that the Supreme Court should issue binding guidelines on what judges should or should not say while rendering judgments on gender justice..During a virtual seminar titled Feminist Lawyering: From Invisible To Invincible organized by the Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum, Jaising highlighted,."We are not concerned with the mindsets but overt actions of people....What I would like to see is binding guidelines issued by the Supreme Court of India which tells judges what they should say in a judgment when it comes to the issue of gender justice. The language matters. Instead of using an expression like "Oh, she was ravished", you need to say she was "sexually abused"."Senior Advocate Indira Jaising.Jaising added that all Constitutional Courts in the world issue practise directions, and that the Supreme Court of India is the only exception to this. .She then referred to a Supreme Court judgment wherein it was affirmed that judges cannot ask a rapist to marry the victim because that would be adding to the survivor's injury. Despite this, she noted, the Madras High Court recently asked a rapist to marry the survivor. .Madras High Court grants bail to man accused under POCSO Act who undertook to marry victim after she turns 18 [Read Order].Baffled by this order, Jaising said, "According to me, the time has come for accountability of judges and binding guidelines (in cases of gender justice).".The second speaker for the event was Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, who, borrowing an idea put forth by Edward Styer, said, ."Feminist Lawyering is to reveal what the dominant power has hidden, to render pronounceable that the dominant power has silenced or declared unpronounceable.".Ramakrishnan also elucidated on how feminism is not a unidimensional territory. “Feminist lawyering does not have to be practiced by a woman, but it has to be an ideology that interrogates patriarchy, and interrogates limiting stereotypes", she said..Speaking on the poor representation of women on the Bench, Jaising said that only seven women judges have been appointed to the Supreme Court in the past 70 years. Same was the case with Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe representation on the Bench, she added. .Another interesting aspect pinpointed by Jaising was the architecture of the Supreme Court. Terming that the same was "sexist", she averred that the Supreme Court was not designed with a vision that one day, it would be flooded with women lawyers. .She sadly recalled that till two years ago, there was no creche in the Apex Court..Supreme Court gets new Creche [Read Circular]."No woman should be compelled to choose between motherhood and her profession", said Jaising when asked on the reasons that prompted her to file a plea before the Court, raising the said grievance. .Jaising also spoke about how being a “feminist lawyer” does not mean “espousing the cause of women alone”, and quoted Justice DY Chandrachud to say that it was a “struggle for social emancipation”..Ramakrishnan suggested that criminal procedural law can be made more people-friendly. Elaborating on this, she said, ."Magistrates should engage with the people who come from custody, explain the process by telling them that not everybody is driven to imprisonment. Some of the basic changes in criminal law which are to do with human rights, would necessarily impact the plight of women as well.".Towards the end of the seminar, Jaising urged all young lawyers to refrain from giving up on their arguments. "...Try to persuade the judges with your line of argument. Speaking your mind in a respectful manner is fabulous", said the Senior Advocate. She added that many judges changed their minds after listening to a good argument. .The webinar ended with a virtual question and answer session.