Property rights key to gender parity

The Madras High Court, in a recent verdict in a case filed by a man against his wife, claiming exclusive ownership over assets bought with his money, ruled that “a wife contributes equally towards acquiring family assets by doing domestic chores indirectly, helps husband to be gainfully employed, and both the spouses are, thus, entitled equally to share whatever they earned by their joint efforts”.

The ruling, the first by an Indian court, was hailed by women’s rights activists and family and property lawyers as it marks a significant expansion of homemakers’ rights regarding their husbands’ property.

The issue of gender disparities in land and property rights is a global concern, with women owning less than 20 per cent of the world’s land (as reported by UN Women). Almost 43 per cent of women are in the agricultural labour force, yet, out of 161 countries, only 37 have specific laws granting equal rights to own, use, and control land (UN). 

In fact, two-fifths of the world’s nations impose limitations on women’s property rights, according to the World Bank’s ‘Women, Business, and Law’ report from 2020. In India, women’s land rights average a mere 12.9% (State of Land Report, 2018). A 2020 survey in 41 developing countries revealed that “in almost all countries, men are more likely to own property than women” (World Bank).

A review of property and inheritance laws of 189 countries found that “women face several legal barriers to access, own and administer assets” (‘Women, Business and Law’, World Bank, 2019). Close to 40 per cent of countries have at least one constraint on the grounds of sex; in 36 countries, widows haven’t been granted the same inheritance rights as widowers; and 39 countries prevent daughters from inheriting the same proportion of assets as sons (Equality Now). Countries in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia regions have the most restrictive laws, particularly regarding inheritance (World Bank).

Regarding homemakers’ property rights, it is more or less dependent on how laws govern asset management during marriage. Only 6 per cent of the world’s constitutions comprehensively protect equality at every stage of marriage — entry, exit, and within marriage (World Policy Analysis Centre). As women are more likely to perform unpaid activities that benefit the household, they typically have fewer monetised contributions. According to the most recent survey, (Charmes, 2019) more than three-quarters (76.4 per cent) of unpaid domestic care work is done by women. In India, a time-use survey by the National Statistical Office (NSO) revealed that 82 per cent of homemakers are women.

A study that estimated the monetary value of unpaid care work said that it amounts to 10 per cent to over 50 per cent of a country’s GDP (as reported by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). 

In India, a study conducted by Mint evaluated the monthly worth of a homemaker’s contribution in a family of five in a metro city at approximately Rs 45,000, based on the rate of an informal worker. Unfortunately, such contributions continue to be undervalued not only by families and society but also in economic calculations, statistics, policy and political discourses. So far, only 28 economies have recognised women’s non-monetary contributions.

The non-recognition of homemakers’ domestic labour puts them at a disadvantage, especially at the time of dissolution of marriage when determining the division of marital property. In divorce cases in India, maintenance and alimony calculations take into account the woman’s lifestyle. Commenting on the Madras High Court’s recent judgment, a family and property lawyer noted that it has “created a right in an asset beyond this lifestyle rule”.

Nevertheless, among the constitutions of all 193 UN member countries, 85 per cent explicitly guarantee equal rights, and 100 per cent of those adopted since 2000 include a gender equality guarantee. However, only 7 per cent of constitutions guarantee gender equality while allowing customary or religious law to supersede the constitution (World Policy Analysis Centre). T

he Indian Constitution mandates gender equality, but religious and personal laws that dictate most property rights also prevail. However, the 2005 amendments to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, have promoted women’s property ownership rights, and a marginal increase of 2.6 percentage points was registered in women owning a house and/or land, alone or jointly (NFHS-5).

Now, UN Women spearheads gender equality in ownership and control over land as its core strategy to ensure women’s economic security and reduce feminised poverty. The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals have set a specific target to achieve them by 2030.

However, progressive laws alone may not suffice as their effectiveness largely depends on social acceptance, prevailing cultural norms, and traditions. The judiciary can also be a change agent through liberal legal interpretations, as demonstrated by the Madras High Court’s acknowledgment that “while there was no law that recognised a housewife’s contribution, there was no law barring judges from recognising it”.

(The writer is former D-G, Doordarshan and AIR)