On Sep the 12th 1996, the United Front government led by then Prime Minister
H D Deve Gowda introduced the Women�s Reservation Bill to the Lok Sabha, the
Lower House of the Indian Parliament. Following the bill�s introduction the
President�s address spoke about it with the following glowing words: "We
are also keen to promote gender equality and removal of discrimination
against women. As you know, the Government has already introduced a Bill for
Reservation of Seats for Women in Lok Sabha and Legislative Assemblies to
ensure their better participation in policy making."
Several governments have come and gone in India since then, and nothing has
happened. Personally, I seriously doubt the pious wish expressed in the
sentence: "We are also keen to promote gender equality and removal of
discrimination against women.� What was the bill, though? It suggested that
for a period of 15 years (following which it would be reviewed by a Joint
Committee of both Houses of Parliament) every third election in various
constituencies in the country would be restricted to women candidates alone.
For a decade now, the Women�s Reservation Bill has been a matter of extreme
political polarization and controversy, touching several raw nerves all at
once due to its very nature: it proposed to reserve 33.3% seats in
Parliament and state legislatures for women. Quite naturally, this quota for
women would mean men having to vacate their offices or seats for at least
one five year term in the next Lok Sabha. Intelligent, capable and competent
women were certain to, make an impact in Parliament and state legislatures
and erode the power of male MPs. Many male MPs were personally threatened as
they would lose their constituencies � centers of personal vested
interest-to women. Most of the criminals and antisocial elements who manage
to evade arrest by getting elected to office in India would have been forced
to vacate their seats of power.
The �magic� number of 33% as the quota for women contesting elections was
given on a completely unexplained basis. Reservation for discriminated
groups like the formerly discriminated Hindu Castes has been determined on
the basis of their numerical strength in the overall population. Even here,
in a country where women form a number somewhat less than 50% of the
population, the same numerical basis was not given in their favor. It would
be easy to be cynical and say that the Magical figure of 33% represents some
projection into the near future of Indian women's declining sex ratio?
To give the devils their due, village and tribal assemblies, Panchayats,
already have a 33% reservation for women. Why, then, has there been
opposition to a similar proposal for Parliament and state legislatures?
Opponents argue that reservation would only help women of Elitist groups.
They say that women from the elite would gain political power, aggravating
the plight of the poor and deprived sections, therefore, causing further
discrimination and under-representation to the poor and backward classes.
They also fear that many male leaders would not get a chance to fight
elections if 33 percent of seats were reserved for women. The Bill�s
advocates say that it is essential to ensure active political participation
by women and lead to gender equality in Parliament, resulting in the
empowerment of women as a whole. Historically, women have been deprived and
discriminated against in India. Increased political participation of women
would help them fight the abuse, discrimination, and inequality they suffer
from, say the Bill�s supporters.
The problem is that the Bill�s opponents seem to vastly outnumber it�s
advocates because it has not been passed or even come close to being passed
for ten years now. One excuse that has been offered to stall it has been
that it does not offer a quota for discriminated caste Hindu women within
the 33% quota for women. I personally find this argument difficult to
accept. With all sympathy for my OBC sisters, may I ask those gentlemen, who
offer this excuse to stall this legislation, FIRST OF ALL WHERE DO WOMEN
HAVE ANY CASTE PRIVILEGE IN A PATRIARCHAL SOCIETY? WHEN THEY MARRY THEY LOSE
THEIR NATAL FAMILY NAME AND THEIR CHILDREN DO NOT CARRY THEIR LINEAGE!!! THE
CHILDREN THEY GIVE BIRTH TO BELONG TO THEIR HUSBANDS� FAMILY!!! And, if this
concern were genuine, why could those who would like to see reservation for
discriminated caste Hindu women within the context of the 33% overall
reservation not incorporate an amendment to the original bill or bring in a
private amendment with this feature instead of defeating the original bill
wholesale? Moreover, is it not a fact that among the one-third reserved
seats for women, there are bound to be a number of seats which would go to
women from the discriminated castes? If this were a concern, why do these
opponents not put forward discriminated caste women candidates as their own
party�s representatives in elections?
There are
people, who oppose the Bill on the grounds that it should also include a
quota for Muslim women, dividing women even further. And, while they claim
that they work in the interest of the discriminated castes, they have been
talking about agreeing to pass the bill if the reservation were slashed from
33 to 15%.The election commission suggested a way out of the impasse by
reserving some seats exclusively for women. With this came the automatic
response from opponents of the bill that they would like to increase the
total number of seats in Parliament to 900 if this were to happen, as they
could not stomach losing 181 seats from the present total to women
candidates. In the present Loksabha (lower house of the Indian Parliament)
there are 268 discriminated caste MPs, not due to any reservation given to
them, but due to caste configurations in various states. So, if male
discriminated caste MPs could be elected in such large numbers without
reservation, why not women? It is crystal clear that there is a conspiracy
to continue male dominance in the corridors of power.Two of the parties
opposed to the bill, the Samajwadi Party and the Rashtriya Janatha Dal, have
only two to three women MPs out of a total of 38 MPs. If these parties call
themselves the champions of discriminated caste Hindu women, why they do not
allot one third of their party tickets to women in the Loksabha polls? Why
are there not enough women in the posts of party functionaries and office
bearers? The list is endless and the questions are unanswered as the
�saviors� of discriminated caste women remain tightlipped on these issues.
Their �concern� for the discriminated castes is just one more excuse to
stall the Bill yet again.Further, the Joint Committee looking into this
issue has recommended to the Government to consider the question of
discriminated caste reservation as and when they think fit. If such a
constitutional amendment is brought and Parliament in its wisdom would pass
that Bill, then discriminated caste women would automatically come within
the purview of one-third reservation. Then, why do male politicians hold up
this Bill on such an excuse? Some Members of Parliament ask from where so
many able women would come who would be fit to be Members of Legislative
Assemblies and the Lok Sabha. May I say with all humility that this is an
assessment of women from the point of view of our patriarchal society or the
personal views/hypocrisy of some high men? Think back to 1952 - the first
general elections. The percentage of women elected to the First Loksabha was
only 4.4. Are we to believe that among the stalwart freedom fighters of our
country there was such a dearth of capable women that they could not put up
more candidates and get them in Parliament? Has the situation changed
substantially since then? In 1996, the percentage was 7.2. The highest
percentage ever reached in Loksabha was 8.1 per cent in 1985. Who can deny
that over the past fifty years of Independence, despite many difficulties
and denial of equal opportunities, our women have made a mark in new and
varied fields of life? Many of them have distinguished themselves as
teachers, as doctors, as engineers, as officers in different disciplines and
most important as social and political workers. Lakhs of common women have
participated in the struggle of all sections of our nation for winning their
own sectoral demands, for improving the quality of life of their families
and society, for defending our national unity and for widening the content
of our democracy! What better political education can there be for potential
candidates to decision making bodies at all levels?
Another excuse
raised is, if one-third seats were given to women, there would be a dearth
of able MPs and MLAs and that the standard of performance of the legislative
bodies would go down. Let us respectfully suggest taking an opinion poll of
those who are watching the live TV broadcast of Parliament Sessions. It
would be interesting to see what the voters think about the standard of
performance of the present House where 92.8 per cent are men MPs and only
7.2 per cent are women. Why is it that the
politicians who committed themselves to these measures have done nothing to
enhance the participation of women within their respective parties?
How can 33 percent reservation for women in Parliament and state
assemblies� work, if there aren�t enough women active in parties, if the
parties don�t have enough viable candidates to field? What measures of
internal reform are these parties contemplating in order to include women in
party decision making and leadership roles? Why are they not ready to share
their space with women??? I take the liberty of quoting a statement of
Mahatma Gandhi: "Woman is the companion of man
gifted with equal mental Capacities. She has the right to participate in the
minutest details of the activities of man and she has the same right of
freedom of liberty as he. By sheer force of a vicious custom, even the most
ignorant and worthless men have been enjoying a superiority over women which
they do not deserve and ought not to have." While women are
increasingly mobilizing and empowering themselves in groups/organizations
and contributing to liberation movements and movements for democracy, when
it comes to leadership and decision making positions within most of these
organizations and movements, women are a distinct minority and their
participation in electoral politics is significantly smaller.
Why are there very few women in elected or appointed government positions?
There are several major reasons for this. For one thing, the whole political
culture and style is male dominated and alien to women. Political power
today is increasingly exercised by government bureaucracies and high
political offices are often filled by appointments from the top levels of
the civil service, so that women�s exclusion from this sphere significantly
weakens their opportunities for political participation and power. Given the
prevailing situation in electoral politics, many women have opted to work
for political and social change outside the system. However, an increasing
number of women have felt this work needs to be complemented by
strengthening their positions within the political power system. Without
decision making power and control at all levels, the gains women have made
are very easily ignored and eroded. Too many of the
major economic and political decisions in the world are being made without
any input from women. There is a growing conviction about the
need to influence policy and political decisions not only through lobbying
and other actions on the outside, but through wielding political power in
decision making positions too.
Most women face tremendous opposition from family, community and the male
political leadership if they decide to enter electoral politics or public
life. The present political leadership, in spite of its populist rhetoric,
wants to keep women out of the political scene. Women politicians are still
looked upon as appendages to the males in the political arena. Indian
women�s lower educational level, inferior social status and lack of autonomy
are reflected in their lower participation in politics. Increasing
criminalization, corruption and compromises required to sustain one�s
political career deter women from entering mainstream politics.
QUOTAS NOT ONLY CREATE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, BUT BRING
ABOUT EQUAL PARTICIPATION TO GET EQUALITY IN THE FINAL RESULT, BY CREATING
EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY. ELECTIONS ARE ABOUT REPRESENTATION, NOT EDUCATION
AND QUALIFICATION. THE CORE IDEA BEHIND QUOTA SYSTEMS IS TO ENROLL WOMEN
INTO POLITICAL POSITIONS AND TO ENSURE THAT WOMEN ARE NOT ISOLATED IN
POLITICAL LIFE.
A number of strategies and mechanisms are being used to increase women�s
participation in electoral politics. Some of these are mechanisms set up by
government such as quotas. Quotas have been used more successfully to
increase the number of women in the LEADERSHIP OF POLITICAL PARTIES and in
their election lists particularly where there is already a strong group of
women within the party pressing for changes.
Political participation is a major path to women�s empowerment; to increased
decision making power and greater ability to influence matters that affect
our lives in the community and the larger society. In the broad sense,
participation in politics goes far beyond electoral politics; voting and
election to public office.
But Parliament is a people�s representative body, and people mean men and
women. What Parliament, therefore, do we have at present with just 50
percent of the people represented? What type of democracy does India have?
Can the democracy afford to be gender blind? For any democratic process, the
world�s half of population i.e. women�s perspective on issues and their
active and equitable involvement in politics are an integral aspect. Hence,
democracy, by definition, cannot afford to be gender blind- it must strive
towards equality and representation of women and men in decision making
process and in the opportunities to achieve both these goals.
There are, it must be admitted, several problems inherent in this particular
scheme as proposed in the bill. Accepting 33 percent permanent reservation
for women is like demanding that some seats be reserved in every bus for
women or the equivalent of a ladies compartment in every train. Men then
come to expect women to remain confined to the �ladies section� and assume
that all the remaining seats are reserved for them. Even though there would
be no legal bar on women contesting from non women specific reserved
constituencies if the bill were to be passed it is highly unlikely that
women would be given tickets from outside the reserved constituencies. This
same pattern is evident with the discriminated castes who have been
permanently confined to reserved constituencies.
THE QUOTA SYSTEM PLACES THE BURDEN OF ENROLMENT NOT ON
THE INDIVIDUAL WOMAN, BUT ON THOSE WHO CONTROL THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS.
The present scheme of reservation would ensure that women would enter the
electoral battle only against other women and never get an opportunity to
contest against men, a sure way to perpetually ghettoize women�s politics.
As it is, women in India have deeply imbibed the notion that �women are
women�s worst enemies� because of the way they are pitched against each
other in the family structure. Their dependence on men estranges them from
other women because men mediate women�s relations with the outside world.
Therefore political solidarity among women is hard to build.
I think the main hurdle in the way of the passage of this Bill is the fear
of some men that they would be deprived of their seats and consequently
their leadership. It is true that some men MPs will be deprived of their
seats for some time as the 7.2 per cent seats held by women now would
increase to 33 percent. But, in any case, as per the bill�s provisions, the
seats reserved for women would rotate and moreover the reservation is
supposed to be reviewed after 15 years according to the Joint Committee's
recommendation. For capable long-standing established political leaders,
there should be no problem in contesting and winning from another
constituency nearby. In any case, none of WOMEN have come to the politics
with the idea that THEY shall be life-long occupants of THEIR seats as MPs
and MLAs. The necessity of giving reservation has arisen from the fact that
despite being almost 50 per cent of the voters, the representation of women
in decision making bodies has remained insignificant. Does this not also
deprive the whole of society by not utilizing the talents of women in the
highest decision making fora? Has this not impoverished our democracy to a
considerable extent? I again implore the male POLITICIANS here to establish
a real partnership between men and women in the highest decision making
forum in order to hit out unitedly against the age old discrimination
against women, and thereby, let us help in the establishment of a joint
leadership of men and women which could only enrich our democracy and
advance our society.
THE CHALLENGES AHEAD
The road ahead is full of challenges for women�s participation in politics.
Strategies must be developed and strengthened to give women access to
decision making positions within different political power structures.
Strategies must also be developed to strengthen women as a constituency
which can make its demands felt on political parties and governments and
become a force to support women in politics.
It is imperative that unless and until women take the forefront in politics,
pressing issues pertaining to women like the quota controversies and from
women point of view, the hither too suppressed expression will continue.
Therefore, women taking active role in politics is a need, not a fancy or
just a power struggle. LET US ENTER POLITICS, CONTINUE OUR STRUGGLE AND TAKE
LEADERSHIP. WOMEN CANNOT PUT UP WITH PATRIARCHAL POWER ANY MORE!
