Women Reservation Policy in India!

The demands for special concessions and privileges to women are matters of right and
not of charity or philanthropy. When reservation for women in panchayats was
announced, some people supported it but some others said that it would generate a spirit
of denigration.
At the panchayat level, one-third seats were reserved for women by making an
amendment (73rd) in the Constitution. Later on, a separate clause was added reserving
one- third of seats for the SC and ST women within the SC and ST quotas. This means
that if there are 100 seats in a local body, of which 23 seats are reserved for the SCs/STs,
then 7 or 8 of these (23) seats would be reserved for SC/ST women.
The 33 seats reserved for women would be adjusted to include the 7 SC/ST women seats
so that the general category of women reserved seats would come down from 33 to 26.
Some states (like U.P) have reserved seats for OBC women at the panchayat level. This
means that out of 33 seats for women, 7 will be for SCs/STs, 9 will be for OBC and 17 will
be for general women.
Before the Bill on 33 per cent reservation of seats for women in the Lok Sabha was
introduced in December 1998; it had been prevented from being introduced on three
different occasions: once, during Prime Minister Deve Gowdas time (1996), again during
Prime Minister Gujrals time (1997), and once again, during Prime Minister Atal Bihari
Vajpayees time (1998). At one stage (during I.K. Gujrals regime), the Bill was submitted
to Gita Mukherjee Committee which in its report, submitted in November 1996,
recommended one-third reservation for women.
The Womens Bill pending in the parliament (84th amendment to
Constitution) at the time of Vajpayees losing Vote of Confidence provided
for:
(a) 33 per cent seats for v/omen in legislatures;
(b) It did not suggest reservation on caste basis (i.e., it did not permit reservation for
SC/ST/OBC women; and
(c) It suggested rotational system.
The question to be discussed today, therefore, is: Is reservation policy or protective
discrimination for women a logical and a useful strategy for ensuring justice and equal

opportunity to women? The argument in favour of the Bill is that Womens

representation in politics will be a first step towards women empowerment. About two
years ago, a leading national daily published an urban opinion poll which showed wide
support for the womens reservation bill. But then a number of articles were published
against the Bill in a 10:1 ratio.
These articles had started appearing after one OBC member of the parliament (president
of a political party) had given a parkatti (the bobbed-hair brigade) statement in the Lok
Sabha against the members of womens organisations in a contemptuous way.
Several arguments are given against the Womens Bill. The first argument is that the
political parties are talking in favour of the Womens Bill only to appease and entice their
voters. Their non-seriousness in womens empowerment is indicated by the fact that
within their own organisations they have not introduced the quota system, except the
Congress Party which introduced 33 per cent womens reservation in the party only in
December 1998.
Even the BJP (which succeeded in introducing the Bill in the Parliament in December
1998) had allotted only 23 out of 477 seats it had contested in 1995 general elections to
women, out of which 13 women were elected. In the BJP Working Committee, out of 75
members there are only eight women. In its 650-member National Council, there are
only 150 women.
The Congress Party has only three women in its 20- member Working Committee. The
Communist Party has 12 women in its 150-member National Council, and three
members in its 21-member National Executive. In September 1999 general elections for
the Lok Sabha, no political party has given tickets to women in more them 10 per cent
cases. In some parties the percentage of women candidates is not even 2 to 3.
The second argument is that reservation cannot achieve much. Intact, it can be counterproductive. At best, reservation is palliative and no decisive transformation can take
place unless such a measure is accompanied by structural changes in the nations
productive relations.
The third argument is that our country is already divided in various groups. Womens
reservation will further divide the population artificially. Reservation for the backward
castes and tribes were accepted under social conditions for a period of ten years only,
and since then they have been continued for vested interest of catching political votes.

The fourth argument is that it will affect the efficiency and working of the parliament, as
even now all women members in parliament are not active. There are cases of women
MPs who have never spoken in their term of five years or spoken only once or twice in
five years. If a large number of such women enter parliament, what will be the nature
and quality of debates? Even in panchayats, a large number of cases of women
sarpanchas have been reported where decisions are taken by their husbands and other
male members of their families. What can thus be expected of women in parliament?
The fifth argument is that just as because of the reservation policy, the SC, ST and OBC
officers on higher administrative posts are working on the basis of caste and creed,
women in parliament too will take interest in womens problems only. We want
legislators who actively participate in national and international issues which require
vast knowledge and high education.
The sixth argument is that our experience in the last five decades has shown that the
reservation policy has not delivered the desired results. The candidates selected against
reserved seats have not been able to adequately articulate the grievances and needs of
the people of their constituencies.
The last argument is that reservations will generate conflicts and tensions.
The main demand of some leaders and political parties opposing the Womens Bill is to
include a built-in quota for the OBCs and minorities within the womens quota, i.e., they
want caste-based reservation along with gender-based reservation. Surprisingly, these
leaders and political parties have never demanded OBC reservation for men in the Lok
Sabha, knowing well that if they did, the number of OBC men in the Lok Sabha will
sharply decline, which will lead to their disempowerment.
Thus, what the members who want an amendment to the womens Bill favour in not only
gender discrimination but also caste discrimination. The demand for representation for
Muslims will further contribute to discrimination on religious basis. Will all these
discriminations (gender, caste and religion) protect the secular fabric of the country?
Categorising women on the basis of caste and religion will be a step towards their further
segregation in society because Muslim and OBC women representatives will have
nothing to do with the general problems and issues concerning women. They will be
sectoral leaders than leaders of women in India.
Major political parties are taking vague positions on the issue of quota within quota
because they are only concentrating on electoral benefits. They appear to be least

bothered about in the casteisation of political contests becoming institutionalised. What

they want is an opportunity to send their wives, daughters and sisters to parliament. The
present and past experiences cannot be forgotten.
Two former chief ministers of two states got their own wives nominated as candidates for
elections and one of them even became the Chief Minister in place of her husband. One
Congress MP in one state had to quit his Lok Sabha seat and his wife was nominated to
contest elections from the same constituency. The famous family consisting of mother,
son and daughter are occupying seats in the Lok Sabha since many years.
In November 1998 Assembly elections in three states and again in September 1999
general elections for the parliament, many MPs manipulated to get their wives and other
female family members nominated for contesting elections. The opponents of the socalled concept of dynasty polities are themselves practising family managed politics.
The institution of democracy was expected to serve as instrument for building a new
India. But has it produced the intended results? For its failure, it is not the institution
itself which is to be blamed, it is the way it has worked, or the way its working has been
distorted by those in power.
It is because of the vested interests of the middle classes and upper castes that our
country has a dualistic pattern of growth in which those with access to the holders of
power flourish and the population at the lower level (socially and economically) is denied
all the tangible gains from the development process. Will the reservation of seats for
women and womens increasing entry in parliament remove the dissatisfaction of these
people and give a new hope to poor, uneducated and the backward communities of our
country?
The disadvantaged people do need protection and opportunity to rise but opportunities
cannot be extended en masse and for all time to come. A watchdog body should keep an
eye on the progress of the introduced scheme and as soon as it is found that certain
disadvantaged group no longer needs the crutches of reservations, the scheme should be
withdrawn.
The Womens Bill has opened up the debate about the future direction of Indian politics
and society. Should male politicians and female activists look at the issue of seats in the
legislatures from purely limited political point of view? It appears that the goal of
entering the corridors of political power is becoming pre-eminent and the larger issues of
social philosophy regarding emancipation of women are being abandoned by everyone.

It will not be empowerment of women per se if they are segregated first on the basis of
gender and then on the basis of religion and caste. One suggestion is that we should be
aiming at is not the reservation of 33 per cent of seats for women but ensuring their
participation in the political system.
Whatever may be the theoretical arguments against the reservation policy, in practice
this policy will continue to be supported by all political parties because of the electoral
advantage the political parties derive from this issue. As such, the people, instead of
raising the issue of reservation, should raise the issue of vested interests of the political
parties and political leaders versus the logical interests of the common people in society.
Secondly, there should be no compromise on quality and efficiency. The eligibility
conditions should be such that women may think of political participation not for
gaining status but for serving the community at large.

Key Issues and Analysis of the Bill

There are divergent views on the reservation policy. Proponents stress the necessity of
affirmative action to improve the condition of women. Some recent studies on
panchayats have shown the positive effect of reservation on empowerment of women
and on allocation of resources.

Opponents argue that it would perpetuate the unequal status of women since they
would not be perceived to be competing on merit. They also contend that this policy
diverts attention from the larger issues of electoral reform such as criminalisation of
politics and inner party democracy.

Reservation of seats in Parliament restricts choice of voters to women candidates.

Therefore, some experts have suggested alternate methods such as reservation in
political parties and dual member constituencies.

Rotation of reserved constituencies in every election may reduce the incentive for an
MP to work for his constituency as he may be ineligible to seek re-election from that
constituency.

The report examining the 1996 womens reservation Bill recommended that
reservation be provided for women of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) once the
Constitution was amended to allow for reservation for OBCs. It also recommended
that reservation be extended to the Rajya Sabha and the Legislative Councils. Neither
of these recommendations has been incorporated in the Bill.