National Commission for Men: Can India Address Male Grievances Without Diluting Women’s Rights?

The proposal for a statutory National Commission for Men has opened debate over whether India’s gender-justice system addresses male grievances without disturbing protections for women.

Rajya Sabha MP Ashok Kumar Mittal has argued that a dedicated institution should be about fairness, evidence and support not men versus women. The case for such a body rests partly on the scale of male suicide. NCRB data show men account for a substantially larger share of suicide deaths, while family problems, financial pressures and relationship difficulties remain important reported circumstances. Official domestic-violence data are far more developed for women. NFHS-5 found that about 31 per cent of ever-married women had experienced spousal violence, while India lacks an equivalent nationwide prevalence survey for men.

Supporters seek better data on male victimisation, mental health, domestic abuse, family disputes, parental alienation and child access. A commission could maintain a national database, conduct research, provide legal awareness and counselling, examine gaps in laws, and recommend reforms based on evidence. It could also support suicide prevention and improve access to mediation and mental-health services.

Critics, however, warn against creating a parallel bureaucracy, treating men's and women's vulnerabilities as identical, or turning the institution into a vehicle for weakening gender-specific safeguards. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, for instance, provides specific remedies for women facing domestic violence, while the National Commission for Women remains an established statutory institution.

A workable National Commission for Men would therefore need clear boundaries. It should not repeal or dilute women’s protections, replace police or courts, or assume every complaint reflects systemic discrimination. Instead, it could focus on research, referrals, counselling, legal literacy and policy review.

It could also work alongside the National Commission for Women, Family Courts, legal-services authorities and mental-health institutions. Any recommendation affecting existing protections could undergo transparent gender-impact assessment and public consultation.

The strongest case is institutional inclusion: ensuring legitimate male concerns are measured and heard while preserving protections and safety mechanisms already available to women across India.