Date post: | 05-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | supriya-goyal |
View: | 218 times |
Download: | 0 times |
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 1/7
Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results: Improving Women's Reservation BillAuthor(s): Madhu KishwarReviewed work(s):Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 35, No. 47 (Nov. 18-24, 2000), pp. 4151-4156Published by: Economic and Political WeeklyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409983 .
Accessed: 29/03/2012 02:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Economic and Political Weekly.
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 2/7
iscussion _______
Equality o f Opportunities
v s Equality o f Results
ImprovingWomen'sReservationBill
MADHU KISHWAR
Iam as amusedby the title of MeenaDhanda'sarticle, 'Representationof
Women:ShouldFeministsSupportQuo-tas?'(EPW,August12,2000) as I ambyits content.Firstly, he titleassumes hatfeminists n Indiawere
waitingall this
while for Dhanda'sapprovaland clear-ance beforethey decidedwhat stand orcourseof actionthey shouldtakeon theissueofquotasorwomen.Dhandahouldknow by now that all feminists do not
support he Women's ReservationBill
sponsoredby the government GWRB).At the same time, numerousrespectedfeminists fIndia, s well asmany eadingnon-feministwomen,areendorsing,and
actively supporting the AlternativeWomen'sReservation ill (AWRB)pro-'posed ytheManushi-initiated,orumor
DemocraticReforms.Funnily enough,Dhanda's xhortationo feminists o takea positivestandon the GWRBhascomefouryearsinto the debate.Therefore, twould have been more appropriate fDhandahad subtitledher article, 'WhyMeenaDhandaReceivedaLateWake-upCall to Supportthe Sarkari Women'sReservationBill'.
Her defence of the GWRB assumesthat if flag-waving feminists supportthe bill, it will becomea sacred cause.
Actually, he bill has gotten stuck in a
stalemate, otfor ackof feminist upportbut because he vastmajorityof womenin Indiahave not yet put their weightbehind t. Dhanda,and those who agreewith her, shouldactuallybe addressingthemselveso his mportantuestionatherthanresting ontentwith thethought hat"womenfrom more than 40 voluntaryorganisations,ncludingboth rural andurbanbased,called fora unitedsupportfor hewomen'sbill" p2975).Ifwomen'
organisationswho are supportingtheGWRB fail to mobilise mass electoral
support, hen their 'resolutions'will nottake themvery far.
Dhandamarshals early32 authorities,half of them westernacademicswritingand theorising n substantially ifferent
contexts,and cites from37 articles,pa-pers,andreports but does not takethetrouble o readeven a reasonable
ampleof themore han20 articles havewrittenon thesubjectof herpaper fourof themin Manushi,Nos 96, 97, 107 and 116).
She buildsherentirecase on just one
piece I wrote in EPW four years ago('Womenand Politics:BeyondQuotas',EPW,October26, 1996).Evenwiththatshe laboursso hardto misrepresentmyargumenthat tisunrecognisableven orme. At the end of her articleshe piouslydeclares: Ifanalternativeegislationwere
puton offer...thenhealternativeegisla-tion shouldalso be discussedalongwith
thecurrently roposed ne."She adds nfootnoteNo 5, "...oppositiono this leg-islationalso needs to rise to the task of
providing 'more subtle and nuanced'alternatives. Until such alternatives
emerge,we shoulddiscussseriously he
legislation hat s at presenton offer."Isitpossible hatDhandas obliviousof our
easily available,well knownand muchdebatedAlternativeWomen's Reserva-tion Bill published n Manushi,No 116andcirculated sacampaign ocument your Forum or DemocraticReforms?
Inher zeal to attackmy view, she also
overlooks he fact thatYogendraYadav,whose contributionshe acknowledgesgratefully n a footnote for havingsup-portedher "theoretical"reatiseagainstManushi's position, has changed his
position of support o the GWRB andbecomea co-author f theAWRBdraftedat Manushi's nitiative.One can under-stand hatbeingbased n OxfordDhandais out of touch withgroundrealities n
India,butbeingan academic he cannotafford o be so intellectuallyazythatshe
avoids acquaintingherself with easilyaccessible,writtenmaterial n thesubjectof her deliberations.
There re omanynaccuracies nd alse
statementsn Dhanda'sarticle n relationto my positionon quotas hat, orlack of
space,I cannotpossiblydeal with themall here.Therefore, will focus onjustafew while at the same time introducingreadersof EPW o the advantages f thealternativeegislationwe haveproposed.
Rightat the start,Dhanda ells us thatshe feels calledupon o reframehedebateonthe ssueintermsof concerns f "iden-
tityandrepresentation",otrealising hatthese have been preciselythe pointsofreference orManushi ndotherwomen's
organisationsengagedwith this issue.
What else could they be? According'toDhanda, he "bulkof the debate on the
questionof genderquotashas been con-ducted in 'consequentialist terms' ". And
whatdoes thisesoteric ermmean? Beingconcernedabout the consequencesof a
particularaction'. Simply put, bhandaseemsto propose hat mportant oliticalmeasures eundertaken ithnoregardotheirpotentialor actualconsequences.
Dhanda's article demonises me as a
cynical opponentof the GWRB when
anyonewho has even a cursoryacquain-
tance withwhatI have said or writtenorcampaignedor wouldknow thatI do not
oppose special legislative measures toenhance women's participation n our
legislatures.They wouldknow thatoverthe last fouryearsI havebeensteadfastlyproposing mprovementso the originalbill, which is a seriously lawedpieceof
legislationfor the following reasons:
(1) The basicshortcomings thatone-thirdof the seats in our legislaturesare
soughtto be reserved hrougha rotatinglotterysystem.The bill provides or therotation f reserved eats neverygeneralelection.Thisrotationwill automaticallyresultntwo-thirdsf the ncumbentseingforciblyunseated n every generalelec-tion.Theremaining ne-thirdwill be leftin a limbo until the last moment,not
knowingif theirconstituency'will orm
partof the one-thirdrandomly-reservedseats or not. This will require hem toscrambleat short notice to find anotherseatfromwhichto contest.Suchcompul-sory unseatingviolates the very basic
principles fdemocraticepresentation.t
EconomicandPoliticalWeekly November18, 2000 4151
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 3/7
jeopardisesthe possibility of sensible
planningo contestandnurture politicalconstituency,or both male and femalecandidates.
(2) Womenlegislators,when elected,undera rotatingquotawill notbe able tonurse heirconstituencies n a long-termbasis,becauseafter he de-reservationfthatconstituency fterone term, heyare
not ikelyto geta ticket or the same seat.Thus,they will be deprivedof a strongpoliticalbaseandwill foreverberegardedas lightweightpoliticians.This in effectwill make theirpresencein legislaturesornamental,nd will render ess effectivetheirparticipationn politics.
(3) If legislatorsdo not have the incen-tivetoseek re-electionrom hesamecon-
stituency,politicswill becomeeven more
predatory nd unaccountable.This willcontributeoamoreunstable oliticalpro-cess and makeit difficult for women tobuild their ong-term redibilityas effec-
tiverepresentatives,incetheywill notbeable to contesttwice fromthesamecon-
stituency. n sucha situation, hosemenwhogetpushedout of their onstituenciesat thelast momentor whosee their'allies
sidelined, will either sabotage femalecontendersn revengeor spendmuchoftheirpoliticalcapitalhelpingtheir ownfemale elativesncorneringhesereserved
seats, husunderminingheveryobjectiveof thebill. Womenbroughtn asproxieswould be expected o keeptheseatssafefor menuntil henextelection,when heywould
again ryoreclaim'theireats.Such
womenwould acklegitimacy n theeyesof the voters.
(4) Since women are not likely to be
givenparty ickets o contest romgeneralconstituenciesf the territorial uotabe-comesoperational,his will putan artifi-cial reezeof 33percent n women'srepre-sentation ndghettoisewomen'spolitics.
(5)Womenelected n reserved onstitu-encies will be contesting against otherwomenonly and,will lack thelegitimacyand opportunityneeded to prove their
ability ndacceptability. onfiningwomen
tofightelections nlyagainst therwomen,amounts o declaring hatwomenare not
competent o face men. Leadershipac-
quired n such a mannerwill be seen as
unnatural, rtificialand as having beenfoisted on the electorate.
(6)TheGWRBscompletelyilentaboutwomen's epresentationntheRajya abha.
Dhanda's asualdismissal f thesebasicflaws n the ottery-based uotasproposedin theGWRBwouldbelaughablef itwas
notpublishedna prestigeousournal ikeEPW.Thefact hatunder he ottery-basedrotation,neithermale nor female politi-cians would be ableto plantheirpoliticalfuture,prepare nelectoralbaseby long-term work in the constituency,because
theywouldnot be ableto seekre-electiontwice in succession fromthe same con-
stituency,s dismissed lippantlywith the
following comment:If the nterestsf womenvoters re o becateredo atall,reservationylot cannotbutbe agooddevice.Thereasont wouldbeagooddevicesthat very onstituencywill have o be alert othepossibilityf it
being henext eservedne,sothatnoonewho eeks lectionrom constituencyanaffordoneglect omen'snterestsp2971).
Sucha naive statement an come onlyfromsomeonewho has a very superficialfamiliaritywith the realities of Indian
societyandpolitics.Nowhere nIndiaarewomenvoting,oracting,as anorganised
vote-bankon women'sissues.Caste andcommunity onsiderations lay an over-
whelming role in women's votingbehaviour at the cost of their genderidentity..Most of those who advocatereservationshave no electoral base andhave notmanaged o organisewomen asa politicalconstituency.Thisis animpor-tant easonwhymalepoliticians avebeenable to get awaywithactually earing heWomen's ReservationBill to shreds in
parliament.venafter twassurreptitiouslytabledby the law minister,Jethmalani,
theyhavesucceeded n
stallingall efforts
to have it discussed n parliament: heyknowverywell thatwomenvoters n their
constituencyare not going to hold themtoaccount or this.Therefore,o think hatall malepoliticianswill becomesensitiveto women's 'interests' implybecauseof
rotation,mountso iving ncloud-cuckoo-land. In fact,manyof ourwomenpoliti-cians are themselves not sensitive towomen's concerns.
TheGWRBhas metwitha humiliatingfate,not ustbecause"the nterests f thetwo[menandwomen] lash", as Dhanda
would have us believe - butprimarilybecause.women are notyet an organised.political group,as they are in the US,
Germany,Australia,New Zealandandsome of the Scandinavian ountries.
Dhanda sserts hatmyoppositiono theGWRB is based on the fact that I am
cynicalaboutthe calibreof womenpar-liamentarians ho will emergeout of the
quotasystem.Muchof mywritingon the
subjectdeals with the distortionsn our
political system and the consequent de-
clining standardsof ourpolitical represen-tatives - both male and female. This is not
due to our variousquotas. Rather,it is the
productof a more fundamental weakness
of our system of governance, insofar as it
allows the holding of public office to be
used as a licence to loot andplunder.That
is why our electoral politics has come to
be dominated by money, muscle powerand downright criminals. Such an atmo-
sphere is not conducive to the emergenceof Hansa Mehtas, Kamaladevi Chatto-
padhyays or Sarojini Naidus - just as in
today's polity, Lal Bahadur Shastris and
Sardar Patels could not survive. Hence
Manushi has taken on the larger task of
campaigningfor a comprehensiveandfar-
reaching package of electoral reforms, in
addition to lobbying for improvementsin
the ReservationBill. Inpursuitof thatend,our Forum for Democratic Reforms has
actuallyprepareda draft bill whichwe will
put on the nationalpolitical agenda as wedid with our AWRB.
To counter the shortsighted provision of
lottery-basedreservations, I had first pro-
posed a system of multi-seat or dual-
memberconstituencies, a version of which
has been recently implemented by the
Labour Partyin England(see Manushi 96
and 97 of 1996). Through these years I
have been consistently appealing that we
seriously examine and learnfrom the suc-
cess of democracies of NorthernEuropeand Scandinavia - Denmark, Germany,
Sweden,Finland - which have
imple-mented voluntary, party-based quotas for
women, with extremely encouraging re-
sults. Our Alternative Bill uses the party-based quotas model of Scandinavian
countries, but with specific safeguardsbuilt into it keeping the requirementsof
Indianpolity in mind (Manushi 116). The
Table 1: Independents Elected to LokSabha in Successive General Elections
Year NoofSeats Noof Percentage fFilled Independents Independents
Elected WhoLost
.Deposit
1952 489 38 66.61957 .494 42 60.11962 494 20 79.01967 520 35 86.21971 518 14 94.01977 542 09 97.21980 529 09 98.91984 542 05 99.71989 529 12 98.91991 534 01 99.51996 542 09 99.71998 542 06 99.1
Source: LokSatta Data Unit.
4152 EconomicandPolitical-Weekly November18, 2000
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 4/7
importantprovisions of our bill are as
follows:
Alternative Women'sReservation Bill
(1) A law should be enacted amendingtheRepresentation f thePeople Act, 1951,
to make it mandatory orevery recognised
politicalpartyto nominate women candi-
dates for election in one-third of the con-stituencies.
(2) Among seats reserved for SCs and
STs also, one-third of the candidates
nominatedby recognised partiesshould be
women.
(3) To preventa partyfrom nominatingwomen candidates only in states or con-
stituencies where the party's chances of
winningelections are weak, andto ensure
an even spreadof women candidates, the
unit for consideration (the unit in which
at least one out of three party candidates
shall be a woman) for the Lok Sabha shall
be a state or union territory.For the State
Legislative Assembly, the unit shall be a
cluster of three contiguous Lok Sabha
constituencies.
(4) In the event of any recognised party
failing to nominateone-thirdwomen can-
didates, for the shortfall of every singlewomancandidate,two male candidates of
the partyshall lose the party symbol and
affiliation and all the recognition-related
advantages.
(5) A law, amendingArticles 80 and 171
of the Constitution, should be enacted
providingfor women's quota of one-thirdof the seats, elected or nominated to the
Rajya Sabha or Legislative Councils.
Corresponding amendments need to be
made in the Fourth Schedule of the Con-
stitution and the Representation of the
People Act, 1950.
Advantages of This Model
(1) Parties.will be free to choose their
women candidates and constituencies tak-
ing local political and social factors into
account.Parties will nurturewomen can-
didates,wherethey can offer a good fight,
rather han in pre-fixed lottery-basedcon-stituencies, where they may or may not
have viable women candidates.Thus there
is flexibility and natural promotion of
leadership.
(2) Though seats are not reserved, there
will be a large pool of credible and serious
women candidates in the fray. If partiesfield more women candidates, the pro-
portion of elected women is bound to
increase.This is so because the real contest
in elections is only among candidatesnominated y recognisedparties.Table1
clearly hows hat heroleof Independentsin ourelections s marginal nddeclining.InLokSabha lections, smanyas99.7 percent of Independentsost their caution
deposits.(3) A womancandidatewill be contest-
ing bothagainst emaleand male candi-.
datesof rivalparties.Therefore,hedemo-cratic choice of voters is not restrictedto compulsorily electing only womencandidates.
(4) As women membersare electedin
competitionwith othercandidates with-outreserving eats- theywill be seenas
legitimate epresentativesntheeyesof the
publicand not ustbeneficiaries f chari-table measures.
(5) A womancandidatewho wins willhave been elected on her own strength,backedby party upport.She will not bea mereproxyor political ightweight.
(6) Therewill be no need for rotationof reservations.Therefore,the electedwomen and men can nurture heir con-stituenciesandemergeas majorpoliticalfiguresin theirown right,with an inde-
pendentpowerbase.
(7) At the same time, in the absence of
reserved seats, there will be healthy com-
petition between'men and women politi-cians for nomination to a particularseat.
(8) This model also provides for reser-
vation of seats for women in the RajyaSabha,andlegislative councils, somethingthe GWRB has altogether ignored.
(9) Parties. will be able to nominate
women from BCs, minorities and othercommunities for elective office in areas
where there.iselectoral advantageto them.
This obviates the need for a quota within
quotas - an issue which has blocked the
existing bill. Those who are concerned
about OBC representationneed not settle
merely for one-thirdquotafor BC women
within the 33 per cent women's quota as
they are demanding now. They can field
as many BC or minority women as theythink appropriate.
(10) This method is.most likely to find
favour with political parties and incum-
bent legislators, as there will be no fearof being uprooted at short notice by draw
of lots. Both.compulsory reservation and
regular rotation are avoided.
(11) Unlike with the lottery system of
reservedconstituencies, inwhich women's
Table 2: The Gender AdvantageThough he numberof women elected to LokSabha has not been very impressive, heirsuccess rate
(percent of contestantsgettingelected) has alwaysbeen higher han the maleaspirants
Year No ofSeats TotalNo of Male FemaleAvailable Contestants Contested Elected PerCent Contested Elected PerCent
Winning Winning
1952 489 1,874 - -
1957 494 1,518 1,473 467 31.7 45 27 60.01962 494 1,985 1,915 459 24.0 70 35 50. 01967 520 2,369 2,302 490 21.3 67. 30 44.81971 520 2.784 2,698 499 18, 5 86 21 24.4
1977 542 2,439 2,369 523 22. 1 70 19 27. 1
1980 542 4,620 4,478 514 11.5 142 28 19.7
1984 542 5,570 5,406 500 9.2 164 42 25.61989 529 6,160 5,962 502 8.5 198 27 13.61991 521 8,699 8,374 492 5.9 325 39 12.0
1996 543 13,952 13,353 504 3.8 599 39 6.71998 543 4,750 4,476 500 11.2 274 43 15.7Total 52,806 5,450 10. 32 2,040 350 17.16
Note: Gender-wisedatafor1952 not available.Source: The Timesof India,NewDelhi,September14, 1999.
Table 3: Comparative Performance of Men and Women Candidates of Recognised
Parties in Lok Sabha ElectionsYear TotalParty M4le Female
Candidates Elected Per Cent Contested Elected PerCent Contested ElectedPer.CentContested Winning Winning
1984 1,394 510 .36.59 1,327 469 35.34 67 41 61.191989 1,523 498 32.70 1,437 474 32.99 86 24 27.911991 2,319 516 22.25 2,180 479 21.97 139 37 26.621996 2,269 530 23.36 2,153 493 22.90 116 37 31.90.1998 1,964 488 24.85 1,831 451 24.63 133 37 27.82Total 9,469 2,542 26.85 8,928 2,366 26. 50 .541 176 32.53
Source: Compiled by Lok Sabha Data Unit from Statistical Reports on General Election,ElectionCommissionof India,NewDelhi.
Economic and Political Weekly November 18, 2000 4153
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 5/7
presence is likely to get ossified at
33 per centsince there would be resistance
tolettingwomencontest from non-reserved
constituencies, this model allows for far
greaterflexibility in the number and pro-
portionof women being elected to legis-latures.If women are candidates for one-
thirdof all seats contested by each party,
theoretically they could even win the vast
majorityof seats - all on merit.
However,given thepresentstateof affairs, it is likelythat, to begin with, about one-third of the
contestedseatswill be won by women. But
this percentageis likely to grow over time
as women gain more confidence and
strength.It also ensures thattheirpresencein legislatures more nearly reflects their
actual electoral strength so that they are
not seen as mere recipients of charitable
measures.
Plugging Possible Loopholes
A party may be tempted to nominate
women from constituencies where it isweak. However, by making the unit of
consideration the state or union territoryfor Lok Sabha, and a cluster of three Lok
Sabha constituencies for the legislative
assembly, this risk is avoided. Partieswill
be compelled to nominate women in all
states andregions. No serious partyseek-
ing power canafford todeliberatelyunder-
mine its own chances of election on such
a large scale. By failing to support and
nurturewomen candidates,a partywill be
jeopardising the winning chances of twice
the numberof its male candidates who will
lose the reserved symbol for this non-
compliance.In the absence of actual reservation of
seats, therecould be. ears that women maynot be elected in one-thirdconstituencies,as the voters may prefera male candidate
over a female candidate on account of
gender bias. However, evidence so far
suggests thatwomen candidatesof partieshave not suffered any gender discrimina-
tion at the hands of voters. In fact, veryoften, the percentageof success of women
candidates is higher than that of male
candidates. Table 2 shows thatthe successrate of women candidates in Lok Sabha
elections has been uniformly higher than
that of their male counterparts in every
generalelection. It is possible to arguethat
thefew women who contestare moreoften
partycandidates,and therefore, their suc-
cess rate s exaggerated.However, Table 3
clearlyshows thateven among candidates
of recognised political parties,the success
rate of women candidates is higher than
that f men.While32.53percent f womencandidatesfrecognised arties avebeenelected oLokSabhaince1984, he uccessrateof malecandidatess only 26.50 percent. This trend is seen in all generalelectionssince 1984,except n 1989.This
points oan mportanttrengthnourpolity- that s votersdo notdiscriminategainstwomen.Nor aretheyaverse o preferringwomenover men as the
careergraphsofJayalalitha, Mamta Banerji, Maneka
Gandhi,UmaBharati,ndMayawatihow.
Women are marginalised ecausepartybosses do not give themticketsor even
organisationalesponsibility. herefore,tis the malepartybosses who need to be
pushed into making space for women.Votersdonotneed obecompelledo voteforwomenbecause heyshow nocompa-rable esistanceoelectingwomen.There-
fore, t isreasonableoassume hatwomenwill be elected nlargenumbers, nd hat,in fact, theirpresence n Lok Sabhawill
exceed one-third n manycases, if eachpartygives 33 percenttickets o women.
Regrettably,his carefully houghtoutexercise of suggestinga more workableformula orreservationsinds not even a
fleetingmention n Dhanda's reatise.Asa result,Dhanda'sarticleappearsmorelike an exercise in usinga dummycon-struct sapunching agbecause he daresnotengagewithManushi's ealposition.
Thefollowing para s one of the manyexamplesof how Dhandahasselectively
,picked up out of context phrases andsentences romdifferent artsof my EPWarticle opresent caricaturef myviews
bystringinghem ogethernoneparaand
cooking up an altogetherdifferentargu-ment andthrust romtheone I intended:
She Kishwar]akes are onote hatwhiletheelectorates receptiveo the idea ofwomennpower, he eadersmaynotbe.Therefore,heargues,we mustnot looktowards ushingwomen ntothelegisla-ture midstgangster'oliticians,ut"lead-ersandpartieswill have o initiatewide-
spread ocialreformmovementswithintheirrespectiveommunities"o "realis-
tically preparegroundfor women toemerge..."[Kishwar1996]. This, sheconsiders, s particularlymportantor'backwardastes'(p 2970).The point about the electoratebeing
"receptiveothe deaofwomen npower",but eaders otbeingready oacceptpowersharingwithwomenwasmadeoemphasisethatthe low representationf women inIndian egislaturess not dueto women's
inability o face electoralbattlesandwin
themas is true for manyothercountrieswhere women fear rejectionby voters
simplybecause heyarewomen.Women's
marginalisationn Indianpolityis duetothe fact thatpartybosses keep themoutof theelectoral rayby denying hem ick-ets to contestelections.The pointmadewas thatfieldinga higherproportion fWomen in elections s bound o result na
higherproportion ettingelected.TheIndian otershavedemonstratedheirpro-womenbias timeandagainwithwomencandidates utperformingmale aspirantsin almostevery electionsince 1951.
"We must not look towardspushingwomenamidstgangsterpoliticians"wassaid to makeanaltogether ifferentpoint- namely, that the marginalisationofwomen s apartandparcelof themargin-alisation.ofdecent,honestpeople npoli-tics. The politics of post-independenceIndia has proved nhospitableo women-asmoney,musclepowerand crimehave
come to dominateIndianpolitics. Thispointemphasisesheneed or ar-reachingandwide-ranginglectoral eforms atherthanbeing an argument gainst he pre-paredness f Indianwomento taketheir
rightfulplace in the politicalarena.
My plea went as follows: Given the
increasing criminalisationof electoral
politics,women regettingidelined. hosewho surviveare hose who comeattached
to,andpatronised'by,owerfulmale ead-ers.By forciblyunseating sizeablenum-berof male eaders hrough nunpredict-able lottery
system,we
encouragethe
tendencyof maleleaders o sabotage hewholeprocessbyputting pproxywomenfortheone reservederm.Ourparliamentwould be filled with too many rubber
stamps ike RabriDevi in thatcase.I went on to pleadthat eministsought
not to be confinedto the politicsof thezananadabba.They hould eequally on-cerned abouteffecting overall electoralreforms.That is why the document"pre-paredocampaignoranmproved omen'sreservation chemeends.with a detailedstatementon the far-reaching lectoral
reformswe envisageas a pre-conditionomakingour politics worthyof women.
The pointaboutthe need for politicalleaders to initiatewidespread ocial re-forms in theirrespective ommunitiesocombathecrippling estrictionslacedonwomenwas made nanaltogetherifferent
context, n response o theobstructionisttacticsusedbymaleOBC eaderso sabo-
tagetheWomen'sReservation ill.Theyhadwrongly rguedhat hewomen'squota
4154 EconomicandPoliticalWeekly
November18,
2000
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 6/7
wouldbe cornered y uppercaste,upperclasswomenbecause f casteprejudicen
allocating ickets.I pointed utthat f todayOBCleaders
failto findanadequate umber f womencandidatesor electoralbattles,it is be-cause heyhave made no spaceforthemin theirparties.OBC womenlag behindbecauseheirmen mposeoppressiveand
restrictiveracticesn theirowncommu-nitieswithregard o women'sparticipa-tion npublicife,especially n north ndia,where he bulk of male leadersopposedto the Bill come from. Low sex ratio,
'purdah',lliteracy, evererestrictions nwomen'smobility,all are characteristicfeatures f the communities rom whichthese eaders ome..Therefore,heextenttowhich he OBCwomenremainperiph-eral in politics is directlyrelated to theattitude f men n theirowncommunitiesratherhandueto thediscriminationtthe.handsof 'upper'castes.
I went on to add that wherever andwhenevermaleleadershad taken he ini-tiative ocarry utthis nternal eform,heresultshadbeenencouraging, s the ex-
perience f theSharad oshi-ledShetkari
Sangathanahows. The supportbase ofthisorgaaisations mainlyamongsmalland middle farmersof OBC castes inMaharashtra.Yet Joshi was able to
galvanise akhs of womento play a rolein he armers'movement ecausehemadeserious efforts to empower women byadheringo non-violentmodes of protest
andbuilding culture frespectorwomenin the organisation. Furthermore, he
Sangathana romotedall-womenpanelsinpanchayats,ndmadespecialattemptstofieldwomennzillaparishadndVidhanSabha lections.Hisorganisationmabde
significant mpacton genderrelations nruralMaharashtray carryingout cam-
paigns against domestic violence and
liquor onsumption,and by calling forthe granting of inheritance rights towomen.Therefore,my pointwas that ifOBC leaderswant to ensure that OBCwomen are not overshadowedby 'for-
ward-caste'women, they have to learnto make respectfulspacefor women oftheircommunitiesn public ife andtheir
villagesviolence-free.Inher nthusiasmoprove hat-myppeal
for cultural eformamongOBCcommu-nities sderogatoryoOBCwomen,DhandadoesnotevengetherABCof politicsand
sociology right.She says:"Strikingly,tis women politiciansof the 'backwardcastes' thathave'emerged'n thecurrent
climateof flux ntheIndian olitical cene.One is temptedo offera straightnstanceof falsificationof Kishwar's heory, hatwomenare notyet readyand need a pre-paratoryocial reformmovemento makea proper ntry ntopolitics.The instanceis Mayawati,whois thefirstamong lowcaste'women o become hechiefministerof a state"(p 2970).
Firstly,Mayawati s not a 'backwardcaste' leader buta scheduled astepoli-tician. foneMayawatisenough oprovethatwomenarereadyandpreparedor theelectoralarena,why are there not more
MayawatisnMayawati's wnparty?Whydoes she remainthe queen bee in the
BahujanSamajPartyandno one hearsof
anyother emalepoliticianof notein theBSP?Mayawati erselfdoes notdeny,asdoes Dhanda, hatit was KanshiRam's
special patronage hathelpedher in theinitialyears ogainprominence. hisdoesnotblindmeto the act hatMayawatiwent
on to createherown specialbase in herpartyand is todaya formidableeader nherownright, n the samewaythat ndiraGandhi irstbecameprimeminister,olelyonaccount fher ather, awaharlal ehru,but later built up her own independentpoliticalbase.Justas one IndiraGandhi,even as primeminister,didnotprove hereadinessof all Indianwomento takeonthe male.politicalestablishment,o also
Mayawati,he irstdalitwoman obecomethe chief ministerof a state, s not proofenough hatdalitwomenhaveacquiredhe
strength o win electoralbattleson theirownor eventhatalldalitmenareready o
promotewomenof their ommunityn the
way hatKanshiRampromotedMayawati.Dhandasays it is my "unquestioned
assertion" hat"even he mostuntalentedof mendonotallow hemselves"o be usedas proxies.Shegoes on to allegethatmy"unstatedonclusionhas to be that evenan intelligent,albeit,dependentwoman,makes a worse parliamentarianhan themost untalentedupposedly ndependentman." Thereafter,she puts me in the
companyof ImmanuelKantwho denied
activecitizenship o womenbecause hey'do not possess civil independence.' notherwords, heclaims hatmysuggestionsfor improving he bill makeme no dif-ferentfrom all those who want womentreated ssubject eopleacking asic ights.
It is clearthat Dhanda'srhetoric acksawareness f thehistoryof the initiativestaken o strengthenwomen'srights n thelast few decades.Even tle worstenemyof Manushiwouldnot hesitateto admit
thatManushihasplayeda leadingrole in
puttingssues of women'sempowermenton the political agenda. And Manushistarted hisprocessmuchbeforewomen'sissuesbecameashionablendmuchbefore
flag-waiving ndianeminists ikeDhandalearnt o hurlacademic argonat us.
Finally, t isnotjust hatDhanda istortsandfalsifiesmyviews on thesubject, he
does a similarexercise in distorting hehistoryof howtheidea of reservationsorwomencame ooccupysuchan mportantplaceonourpolitical genda.Dhanda asesher entire case on the assumption-thattwasthefeminist obbywhich ook he eadinadvocatingor awholedecade hecauseof women's inclusion n local as well ascentralgovernment.To quoteher:"Thefruitof their feminist]abourwasthe73rdand 74thamendmentso the IndianCon-stitution nactedunanimously y thepar-liament n 1992."Sheattributestheresentstalemate ver theGWRB o thefactthat
the"interestsfthe wocollectivities menandwomen]clash."For herit is "hardlysurprising hatthe women's bill was so
easily scuttled n thepredominantlymaleIndianparliament..."
She eitherdoes not know or does notremember hat the initiatives for thesemeasuresat the village, disfrictand na-tional evelwere akenbymen,evenbeforefeministsthoughtof, or demanded, uchmeasures.Theprocessbegan n the1980swithRamakrishna egde' governmentnKarnataka. s anintegralpartof thepro-.
cess of bringingabout ignificantdevolu-tionofpowers opanchayatsnKarataka,
Hegde and his colleague Nazir Sahibintroduced5 percentreservation f seatsfor women in all the panchayatsof thestate. The enthusiasmgeneratedby this
experiment nspiredRajivGandhi.toni-tiatea similarmove'in heentirecountry,hence the 73rd and 74th amendments.Dhandaailstoappreciatehesignificanceof the fact that these amendmentswere
passedunanimouslyyparliamentn1992,whichwas no less male-dominatedhanthe presentone.
In those days reservationwas not afashionable ssue among feminists.Norhad internationalaid organisationsputtheirweightbehind hisbrand f affirma-tive action.That is why menlike Hegdewere neither eted nor celebratedby thefeminists. Even the present bill cameinto existencebecausesome of the maleleaderslike Mani ShankarAiyarof the
CongressPartyworked irelessly o put ton the politicalagendaof the Congress
EconomicandPoliticalWeekly November18, 2000 4155
8/2/2019 Equality of Opportunities vs Equality of Results Improving Women's Reservation Bill
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/equality-of-opportunities-vs-equality-of-results-improving-womens-reservation 7/7
Party,Most feminists, including thoseDhandacites as being the crusaders orwomen'squotas,were in factopposed owomen'sreservationill the late 1980s.Itis 6nly whenthe GWRB met with resis-tance nparliament, henvariouswestern-
aid-agencyundedNGOsbegan osupportthisformof women'sempowerment,hatthe whole issue was transformednto arhetorical eminist battle
againstIndian
patriarchy.Thebiggest ronyof thisfarcicalbill is
that hewestern und-givers,who aresup-porting he NGOs'campaign or lottery-basedquotas'forwomenin India,wouldneverdaresuggest such an absurd ormof affirmativeactionin their own coun-tries.This is a classiccase of thirdworldcountries eingconsideredworthy f thirdratelegislation.
I challengeDhanda o check with Anne
Phillipsandall the otherwestern eministauthorities he quotes,whether hey are
willing to proposesuch a legislation ortheir own countries. Western feministsknow thatthey would makethemselves
objectsof ridicule f theydaredproposesuch an absurdmeasure.Thatis why in
westerndemocraciesheyaredemandingand implementing equalityof opportu-nity' throughparty-based uotas.How-ever, ndian eminists fDhanda'slk nsiston 'equalityof results'- they want thata certain ixed percent of womenmust
win, irrespectiveof whether there are
grounds for such a victory or not.
I, for-one, mconvinced hatagood partof maleresistance o33 percentrepresen-tation for women is due to the shoddyhandling of the issue by the pro-reservationistactivists. For years theyinsisted that the bill should be passedwithoutas muchas a debate.This showsutter ackofrespect ordemocratic orms.A bill requiringan amendment o the
Constitution, ndwith far-reaching on-
sequences, ught o bethoroughly ebatedandseriously onsidered eforeadoption.Pro-GWRBwomen activists steadfastlyrefused o acceptevenwell-meaning ug-
gestions or mprovementothebill.Any-one, who dared o pointout some of itsflawsorproposea betteralternative,was
attacked,ilifiedand reated s asaboteur,asDhanda asdone-inherarticle. f femi-nists of her persuasionare bent upon.
preventing healthydebateandcrushingeven themildestvoices of dissentwithinthewomen'smovement, heyshouldnot
complainwhen they invite similar re-
sponsesfrommen.
Finally,a commenton thegapbetweenDhanda'sideology and praxis.She de-clares atherighteouslyhat"Theeminist'
[approach]s committedoevolvingwaysof communicatingbetweenwomen,andin most casesbetweenmen andwomen."I cannot comment on how successfulDhanda s in communicatingwith men,but I certainly do feel that Dhanda'sarticle ails as anexercise n
building om-munication hannels'withotherwomen,.such as myself.The essence of commu-nication s a sincereeffort to understand
the other person's viewpoint, even if one
does not agree with it. The essence of
communication is also the willingness to
listen to anotherpersonwith anopen mind.
Those who distort, caricature and vilifyanother individual, and conjure up a
dummy figure for attack in orderto provethemselves right, cannot possibly be
called effective communicators, no
matter with what gusto they wave thefeminist flag and no matter how manyinternationaleministacademicstheyquoteand footnote. 1'
Letters to Editor
(Continuedrom p 4066)
decrease n rainfall, ecologicalimbalanceandthe loss of wildlife. Inthis alarming ituation, he existing
developmentmodels andprocessesneed to be questioned.The presentmodel of development onsiders
displacement s an inevitable
consequenceof the developmentprocess.The rightof the people to
participaten the decisionsconcerningthe projects hatdisplacethemshouldbe reasserted.Thereshould be
weightagefor the consentof theaffectedpeople in the process.
The emergencyclause in the Land
AcquisitionAct shouldbe amended nsuch a way that it could be used
onlyin times of natural alamities,andothergenuine emergencies.
Acquisition or the 'publicpurpose'shouldbe definedrestrictively nd infavour f thepoor.Theonusof providing'publicpurpose'mustrest with the
government s a mandatoryequirementnot only before butalso afterthe
implementationf the project.In caseswhereprojectsead to benefits,the
displacedpersons/project-affectedpersonsmusthave a proportionatepredeterminanthare in its ownership
as well as benefits.People who havepaidand are still payingthe priceof
developmentmustbenefit rom the
project.Displacement nd resourse
depletionhits womenthe most. Lawand policy mustaddress tself
specifically to the gender question,re-examineand redefine he conceptof family as a unit,emphasisewomen'spresence n it andenunciatetheirrights.
The traumaandhardship ausedbymultipledisplacementss unjustifiablein any circumstances.This should beavoided.Unless complete ustice isfirst meted out to those who have been
ousted,impoverished nd marginalised,it would be unethicalandagainst he
aspirations nd spiritof theConstitution f Indiato continuewiththe same patternof development.The.state is underan obligation o do
justice and restore he hopes.ofmillions of people who have been thevictims of a developmentparadigmassistedby it. The righttorehabilitationmustbe recognisedas afundamental ight.Projectauthoritiesmust include the cost of rehabilitationin their
projectcost.
Compensationshouldbe on a 'landfor land' basis.The governmentmustpublishan
annualreport ndicating he statusof
displacementand rehabilitation.
separate nstitutionalmechanism houldbe created or maintaininguch a dataon a continuousasis.A strong,eliable,
ongoingdatabase s a necessarypreconditionor formulatingpolicies,laws and for doing complete ustice tothe affected.If total rehabilitations
practically mpossible,we should lookfor alternativemodelsof development.
The guidingprinciplesadoptedbyUnitedNationsshouldbe madebindingas a legal document n dealingwith theissue of internaldisplacement.
AntonyDias, SaraChanda,BipinK
Jojo, D SunderRaj,HemalathaH M,Usha S Sarod,Siby Tharakan
(coordinator) nd otherparticipantsattending he national eminaron
InternallyDisplacedPeoplein India.
Bangalore
4156EconomicandPolitical'Weekly November18, 2000