Women's reservation bill: Madhu Kishwar tears it apart and rightly so

There are certain things that you can thank social media for, and one of them is that so long as you have connectivity, there’s no shortage of entertainment thanks to people like Madhu Kishwar taking to Twitter. Kishwar has quickly established herself as someone you can rely upon to speak her mind freely, uncaring of whether it makes her sound like a raving lunatic, insensitive or a woman with a wicked sense of humour. https://twitter.com/madhukishwar/status/488737897827155968 https://twitter.com/madhukishwar/status/489677614869536768 https://twitter.com/madhukishwar/status/488890044120199169 However, what her tweets have obscured is that beyond the intellectual and political bungee jumping that she indulges in online, Kishwar possesses a sharp mind and can wield impressive critical insight when she’s so inclined. Both these qualities were on display in a recent piece that she wrote about the Women’s Reservation Bill that has been consistently neglected since it was first introduced in Parliament, in 1996. Kishwar is among those who doesn’t support the Women’s Reservation Bill. “The bill in its present form is a classic example of the growing gap between pious promises and actual results of government policies and legislation in India,” writes Kishwar, before going on to explain its problematic aspects. [caption id=“attachment_1622815” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Madhu Kishwar. Agency[/caption] The existing version of the Women’s Reservation bill requires reservation on a rotation basis, “which means two-thirds of the incumbent members will be forcibly unseated in every general election and those remaining will stay in limbo till the last moment.” It would also ghettoize women and create a situation where the quota makes women fight each other, rather than involving women in mainstream politics where they can compete with candidates irrespective of gender. Also, if male legislators are forced to hand over their constituencies to female candidates, they will engineer things so that their wives/ daughters/ sisters inherit the seat. “This is how the biwi-beti-bahu brigade came to dominate our elected bodies, even at the panchayat and zila parishad levels where this rotation system has already been imposed,” writes Kishwar. The concerns that Kishwar outlines are all very valid. As this paper on women in Indian politics by the research organization Brookings points out, “the goal of Reservation Bill must not be merely to increase the number of women representatives, but improve women’s representation overall.” The report points out Pakistan as an example of a country where the quota system has led to a high percentage of women in the political system (mostly because of the number of independent candidates who are women), but the actual good it’s done is limited. “Pakistan’s example demonstrates how quotas can often perpetuate the perception that women should only contest from seats earmarked for them, creating therefore a glass ceiling preventing women from contesting general seats,” concludes the report, echoing the concern voiced by Kishwar in her article. Kishwar isn’t just criticizing the existing Women’s Reservation Bill; she’s also got a solution in hand. Her organization Manushi, in collaboration with the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies and Lok Satta, has drafted an alternative bill that Kishwar feels is more responsive to what’s needed to encourage women’s participation in Indian politics. “First, parties will be free to field women candidates where they can offer a good fight rather than in pre-fixed lottery-based constituencies, where they may or may not have viable women candidates. Thus, there is flexibility and promotion of natural leadership. Second, women candidates will be contesting both against female and/or male candidates of rival parties. The democratic choice of voters will not be restricted to compulsorily electing only women in one-third constituencies while the other two-thirds are treated like male monopolies. Third, unlike the lottery system of reserved constituencies, where women’s presence is likely to get ossified at 33 per cent since there would be resistance to letting women contest from non-reserved constituencies, this model allows for far greater flexibility in the number and proportion of women being elected to legislatures. If women are candidates for one-third of all seats contested by each party, theoretically they could win a majority of seats, all on merit. Fourth, it obviates the need for a quota within a quota as is being demanded by certain OBC parties. Since the onus of fielding women candidates will be left to each party, those concerned about increased representation of backward class women can field as many as they think appropriate.” In stark contrast to some of the opinions Kishwar puts forward on Twitter, these are all well thought-out and sensible ideas that respond much more sensitively to the lopsided gender balance in Indian politics than the existing bill. The alternative bill is discussed in greater detail here. As the document observes, “the participation of women in [Indian] politics has actually declined since the days of freedom movement.” It’s a statistical fact that tends to go unnoticed because there are a number of prominent Indian women politicians in play. However, this doesn’t mean that Indian women are adequately represented. India ranks 105th in the world when it comes to women’s participation in politics. That’s 53 places behind Pakistan, in case you were wondering. However, while a bill to encourage more women candidates would be welcome, it’s worth keeping in mind that regulations are not enough to ensure the gender imbalance is fixed in actuality. According to the constitution of the Indian National Congress, 33% of seats in different committees as well as 33% of the seats for the AICC are reserved for women. In reality, only five of the 42 in the CWC are women and six of the 57 members of the AICC are women candidates. Thirty of the 35 state screening committees for elections don’t have a single women in them. The CPI(M) that has been so vocal about criticizing past governments for not pushing the women’s reservation bill has an abysmal record of its own: only one of the 12 members in its politbureau is a woman. BJP’s track record as far as enabling women candidates is marginally better. In 2007, it amended the party constitution to provide 33% reservation for women and an amendment in 2010 increased the number of women in cadre posts. While this has meant that there are more women in the party, most of them have been ghettoized with women being relegated to the BJP Mahila Morcha. For instance, only two of the 19 members in BJP’s Central Election committee are women. Interestingly, data from the Election Commission of India shows there the number of women standing as independent candidates in general elections has consistently increased since the early 1990s. In her article, Kishwar writes, “whatever the form and shape of the women’s reservation law, we cannot overlook the tragedy inherent in the fact that 67 years after Independence, women need to seek the quota route to entry in politics. This acquires more poignancy because, when the Constitution was coming into force, most prominent women leaders refused to accept the principle of reservation as a route to political power. They did so in the belief that as in the Mahatma Gandhi-led freedom movement, they would be able to carve out a respectable space for themselves without being offered crutches.” Perhaps the initiatives like the alternative reservation bill suggested by Kishwar will be the first step towards a time when women will be able to make space for themselves in Indian politics, without needing quotas or being held back by political ghettos and glass ceilings.