equality of opportunities vs equality of results improving women's reservation bill

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.

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409983?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409983?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw



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



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



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



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



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



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

equality of opportunities vs equality of results improving women's reservation bill

Documents