Civil code's focus on sexual harassment is a sign of big hope
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage across the world, wreaking havoc, casting a long shadow on everything, and even raising doubts about humanity's future (besides creating news fatigue). Can we simply shrug it off, take a breather, and discuss some other topic?
Only a weighty alternative would justify what might be perceived as a digression or impertinence. Latest screaming headlines and in-depth stories suggest there's no dearth of "big" issues: climate change and environment, economic inequality and poverty alleviation, de-globalization, protectionism, security and sovereignty, civil rights and human rights, and civil code and sexual harassment.
For the first time, China's legal framework has included an explicit definition of sexual harassment and will enshrine it in the country's first civil code, which was adopted by the nation's top legislature on May 28.
In my home country India, another billion-plus nation, a debate on the proposed Uniform Civil Code has been raging for decades, with no logical conclusion－enaction of a new law－still in sight.
The proposed UCC would be part of Article 44 of the directive principles in the Indian Constitution, whose aim is to protect vulnerable groups from discrimination and ensure harmony among the country's diverse cultural groups. The proposed UCC is expected to replace disparate personal laws based on cultural customs and religious faiths that govern interpersonal relationships and related matters.
It seems China's first civil code is making headlines also because the #MeToo campaign made (the now clearly defined) sexual harassment a global issue.
But, clear definitions and codes alone may not be adequate to achieve the desired results, especially in civil matters concerning attitudes, habits, misguided beliefs and prejudices, as borne out by the front-page lead story of China Daily on June 1.
If scores of cities in the United States are erupting in fiery violence in spite of local lockdowns, and if US National Guard troops had to be deployed to keep order, it's because one person ill-treated, and appears to have caused the death of, another person.
Are we, as individuals, communities, societies and economies, under-evolved and faltering? Technological advances have created comforts, conveniences and pleasures all right, but they also appear to have blindsided us, sweeping some long-pending fundamental wrongs under the carpet. Those things the pandemic is now "exposing", as if our true colors were some photographic film negative, brought into light inexorably, until the final print's inescapable, digitally unenhanced reality punches us in the face.
So, it's commendable that a back-to-basics movement－the stress on new definitions and codes－seems to be fading into both public consciousness and the list of top priorities everywhere. A caveat would be in order though: Strong deterrents against misuse of new laws and codes are essential too.
Sexual harassment has somehow come to mean exploitation or ill-treatment of, or crimes against, women by men. My sense is, laws alone won't bring about positive change. For instance, capital punishment, naming-and-shaming, media exposes, online outrage, offline protests and jail terms have all proven to be inadequate in eradicating social evils like gender crimes, prejudice, chauvinism, and commodification of human anatomy.
But there's hope. Global discourse has been spotlighting good societies' long-neglected fundamentals like education, public health, women empowerment, social harmony and enlightened parenting.
