Sunday, March 14, 2010

Women Reservation Bill: Lok Kiya Jaye?





Sometimes we come across issues and political debates where there are no rights and wrongs. There are only belief systems that people propound amidst the loud cacophony of conflicting interests, conventional thinking and  their own moral values. One such debate is about the Woman Reservation Bill (WRB) that was passed by the Rajya Sabha recently and is stated to be tabled in the Lok Sabha in the months to come. Like audience to a tennis match, I had been sitting across the court, my head swinging left-right-left-right to the various shots (and potshots) the pro and anti WRB lobby hit each other with and while doing so I realized that while all root for participation of women and their better engagement in Indian politics but different people (men and women alike) have different degrees to which they support this particular Bill.

While a few dismiss the bill at the very face of it, many are in support with it as long as certain changes are brought about to it. There is a lobby that seeks to have a sub-quota within the quota and there are many who support it just because they want to be seen as pro-women while some oppose it because they simply do not believe in the philosophy of  reservation whether for women, for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes or other backward classes. 

Pacifists like me are mostly optimist as far as reservation is concerned. We see what we would like to see. They tell us reservation is a solution and we look at it hopefully, with susurrations of parity, equality, social equity and political voice to all ringing in our ears. We haven't really felt the change so far, whatever change that has been has clearly not trickled down to the underprivileged masses. Not yet. But because we want the change so bad, we presume that there has been. It is akin to saying that because we want protection we take for granted the existence of God. It sounds acceptable in the context of the Almighty but does it work in this society? I would like to see some report on reservation. An analysis with some statistics pertaining how, when and where exactly reservation worked, which community benefited, how long would they be needing it and when should it be lifted for that particular class/caste/group. An assessment to see how far reservation has helped and in which areas, whether that of education, employment, legislature, judiciary, whether it worked well and where it is proving to bring more disparity than equity, is long overdue. It will not only be an eye-opening exercise but will also lead to a better planning for such endeavors in future. 


Reservation, from the time it was inserted into the Constitution, was not meant as a gift neither was it a charity for any community. It was a method by which the caste-ridden society like ours was to crawl out from beneath the legacy of the oppressive caste system. Whereby under-represented and marginalized groups were to be given opportunities on a quota basis keeping in mind that the same were denied to these groups for all these years in many spheres like employment, education, legislature etc. Those were the basics. How far have we reached? My research on the topic lead me to a report  on Impact of Reservation Policy in Higher Education in India by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS). Why don't we have more of these? And if we do why don't we have them circulated massively?

Coming back to the Woman Reservation Bill, one finds that though the idea of larger representation of woman  is much coveted by all (including men) but the higher up you move in the echelons of academicia and experts on Indian politics and society, the less celebratory the tone becomes. This is because though the end is desirable, there are many aspersions clouding the means.

The system of rotation, it is feared, would do more harm than good to any constituency. It will give less incentive and motivation for an MP to bring about better facilities to his constituency. He will serve not those for whom he has worked. Seems like a lose-lose situation. The question as to whether there should be a sub-quota within a quota is also an interesting one and makes sense to me. Besides, if the underlying purpose of WRB is to increase the number of women lawmakers in the country, which is at present close to a dismal 10 per cent even after 63 years of Independence, then why not make a law thereby making it compulsory for political parties to have an intra-party quota for fielding women candidates? There is hardly any democracy within any of the major national political parties. Corruption, greed and self-interest are the deciding factors as to who will lead the party, it is even more blatant when these parties distribute tickets at the time of elections. The answer to this is that our society is such that it becomes nearly impossible for women candidates to win elections against dominant male candidates. Is there any study supporting this particular argument? I would like to read. And even though I am a woman, this counter argument sounds like the cry of a bad loser to me. But keeping in mind the holistics of the whole debate would I decide to do without the Bill all together? I would say no. A helpless but incontrovertible no. That's the dilemma shrouding this Bill, it makes it tough to take a firm stand, wheresoever one may be sitting.

The WRB is not being lauded in its essence it is being seen as a precursor to what is sought after and in that we say our cheers. The Bill shows us a metaphorical tunnel at the other end of which lies a (wishful?) end to discrimination, infanticide, female foeticide, dowry deaths, oppression of women and their ultimate empowerment. And thus, we cheer for it. However, difficult questions are a plenty, and many an eyebrows have been raised and rightly so. The Women Reservation Bill comes with an asterisk -- the real deal we are yet to know. Till then, don't touch that remote!

8 comments:


  1. Well I think if reservations do any good then this should have been the first bill ever to clear the approvals.. I wonder why it was saved for so many years..sixty years is a long long time... when you answer why... that shows the conditions of where women's stand in India and stood in India... it took over sixty years to just reach that consensus :)... well... a big leap i should say.. coz its been ages;not decades but centuries and more, that we ve lived a life where women have taken a backseat and men have led.. Though on a lighter note one thing I can assure you... no man can beat a woman at politics.. they are THE best of the lot :P be it inside the walls seeding their men's brain or be it outside gossiping :P Well... if you are not such a man who has a woman to observe, go watch some serials :P hehe kidding..

    let me give this a twist... lets forget about reservations among other swatches.. lets focus on it on a man vs woman plane... they say men and women should be treated equals.. yet these men and women; both secretly approve of those expectations which they want met.. very hypocritical!! they talk of consititutional equality.. yet the gender bias comes in with the law itself... maybe am not well informed here, so correct me if am wrong, I havent heard of capital punishments given to women who are found guilty doing a similar crime a man would do... havent heard much or maybe there are no women criminals at all or maybe just few to come in picture.. I personally dont approve of it either.. Someone who is given a status of a deity in our society.. someone who gives birth to our children.. we cant even think of such penalties for em... to me it ll be kind of barbarianism... but I have heard no man claim it for this kind of gender bias(there maybe those little few.. there are some always)... So tell me... am uneducated and uninformed here... Are there same planes for both the gender then? Does that how our constitution and our laws see it.. Do they see em equal?

    Why do you think suddenly after sixty years India needs women representatives when there was no such identified need for centuries. Do you mean to say we are more educated and more civilised, organised than we ever were? Or do you see it as something where women are given a chance to voice their opitions and make them matter... Well everyone involved may have their own set of interests in seeking so... I see it as something that nature demands from us... I see it as a need not because some politicians or some society or some organisation's gimmick to make things better for em... I see it as a need because the ratio to man vs women is going down significantly... I see a need because if people dont understand it it will be too late.. if the other doesnt feel the need for women for their own best they might as likely wipe them off and then get wiped off.. This need nature has created us to EVOLVE, SUSTAIN and STAY... That is Co-Exist!! that balance itself quotes the need for such arrangement...So if there is a need at all... this is what holds the major share.. Rest will just follow... Rest can just be..

    Reservation of any kind other than this is absolute bullshit to me.. Its nonsensical chaos that is manipulated for personal greed by our politicians!

    Now onto something honest.. when I came here.. I expected something softer.. some capture maybe.. but this post, I very honestly feel is very insightful and thought provoking.. I really enjoyed reading it... Not because I can talk about a lot of many many more things but that would be silly to do here.. but because of the spark, the stimulation it offers.. We ll sure settle this deal sometime in person :P hehe :D you havent seen THAT me yet :D hehe :D It ll be a very good interaction ;) i can assure you of that!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, it may have taken that long a time because reservation is one such issue which leaves one or the other section of the society feeling bereaved. Just like a person would not complain if his father chose to keep all his money to himself, but if the father gave it all to the other (poorer) son, he will definitely mind it. To him, it is not about whether he needs that money, it is rather about why he was not treated equally. The fact that he was already better off would not occur to him. He may love his brother still, but his 'notional right' becomes his priority, which he wouldn't readily give up. One just has to replace the poor brother as the marginalised sector and the others as those who cry hoarse about the same. That was about reservation. As for me.. I am not against it but I do feel that instead of caste the criterion should gradually shift to the economic status of a particular family or person. Keep the percentages the same, but change the criterion to something that more reflects the standing of a society. The same has not been done so far and I know that there are various sociological reasons for that. This is my view of reservation as far as jobs and all are concerned.

    As regards equality between men and women and how the concept of reservation is in itself against it. The argument that 'if we talk of gender equity then why do we talk of reservation for a particular gender' is I am sure as old as the concept of women reservation. And I swear that at first it sounds true. It sounds true as long as one ignores the anomalies that are engrained into the society from ages. In order to bring about real equality perhaps one last shot at inequality or preferential treatment in favour of women is needed. Once that is achieved -- and we hope that a day like that is not far away -- the womenfolk shall no longer need reservation. THAT has to be the objective.

    You rightly mentioned constitutional equality and I would like to make one point here. Article 14 talks of equality in the Indian Constitution but what is that equality? Is equality among unequals acceptable? Would that amount to equality that the framers of the Constitution aimed for? Could a prince and a pauper have the same set of needs and expectations from the sovereign? Do they stand equally on any pedestal? Equal treatment for entities which are unequal at the core is also a form of inequality. Herein comes the concept of 'positive discrimination' or 'affirmative action'. One that aims to bring about equality by giving preferential treatment to the backward sections of society so as to bring about a common platform. It takes into account race, ethnicity, disabilities and also gender when policies are being framed. If the backward remain backward, the country will never move forward. Whether that be caste, gender or any other form of societal division. We must strive to annihilate the caste system and gender disparity but at the same time can we afford to become caste or gender blind?

    ReplyDelete
  3. You are right, so far no woman has been executed under death penalty in India. And frankly, I don't think any justification to that is fitting. If the facts so show, it may happen in years to come. I don't find that a symbol of equality and I am sure no one would. Having said that, i also think that a man who kills his wife because of mental torture may not be judged at the same level with a wife who kills her husband under mental torture. Their levels of sustenance, mind are both different. And though it may not be an excuse for most criminal cases but for something like the capital punishment which is pronounced specifically for the rarest of the rare cases, there are many legal angles the judges take into account. You must have seen 'Provoked' or heard about Kiranjit Ahluwalia Case, the one on which the movie was made. There are reasons and there are reasons. We strive for equality, and we should, but can we be blind to the fact that biologically, mentally, sociologically men and women and NOT alike! Their reactions to situations, levels of sustenance, physical abilities etc are not the same. And if laws became inflexible and completely gender neutral, it would cause more injustice. Law is not like a gadget manual. In order to be effective and just it has to be fliexible. Each case is to be judged on its merit. And though I am not in favour of capital punishment but at the same time I think that if in a particular case the facts show beyond doubt that her gender had nothing to do with the said crime, then it is better to set a precedent that conveys gender neutrality. FTR I am really not in favor of the death penalty.

    I agree with your points as to why you think women reservation is needed in this hour and date! Good!

    And lastly, I am glad you found the post insightful and thought provoking! It gave me food for thought. And kudos! I appreciate your comment.. it was very nicely articulated. We may lock horns over reservation per se.. but well.. that's the way the cookie crumbles!

    PS: Apparently we are now on the topic of Reservation in our Constitutional Law class as well. I am yet to study the cases...but i am sure some new facts are going to spring up. Would share here. :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Let me put it short and crisp ;)

    Para 1

    reservation is not just about reservation per se.. there is more to it. reservation with respect to who-needs-it-most is still understood but it still cant balance the aptitude/capability versus quota of any kind on any basis except meritorial!!

    Para 2

    Hehe :D how unseemingly appropriate is that.. Today you talk of Men and Women reservations.. you divide em by caste, creed, color, disabilities.. or say even divide on their economic grounds... hehe.. and you never know years from now people will come up with age as reservation factor or even their health conditions :P You just wait and watch how it gets manipulated in years to come :P Quote me someone and that is my forecast :P

    Para 3


    Quote

    "You rightly mentioned constitutional equality and I would like to make one point here. Article 14 talks of equality in the Indian Constitution but what is that equality? Is equality among unequals acceptable? Would that amount to equality that the framers of the Constitution aimed for? Could a prince and a pauper have the same set of needs and expectations from the sovereign? Do they stand equally on any pedestal? Equal treatment for entities which are unequal at the core is also a form of inequality. Herein comes the concept of 'positive discrimination' or 'affirmative action'."

    Unquote


    To me that is baseless.. its mere manipulation of how they want it to be and how it suits em best!!
    Those are mere buzzwords huffed in by smart n elite.. Why? I dont need to answer that.. you know it!


    Quote

    "We must strive to annihilate the caste system and gender disparity but at the same time can we afford to become caste or gender blind?"

    Unquote


    That itself explains how they promote and how they disguise it! Quiet a contradiction that is!

    BTW these are just my views.. nothing rude.. nothing personal ;)

    Reservation of any kind doesn't appeal me
    in any form!

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I never said I have a problem with the system!

    :D heheh Shanti Shanti!!

    But all that is said and done is not all that justified.. Or do you mean to say its so pure that we just follow religiously.. Well go ahead! No point debating that then...

    And you completely misjudged me here :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. niyaa very well written. it will be interesting to have a discussion with you on issues like these n yes with thnigs like these its imp to have an all round perspective. i think there goin to be problems some evident on the face of it while some may crop up after its implementation. the best what can be done is at least iron out those problems evident now n then pass the bill.
    And also before policies like these are introduced reports should carefully be studied as to success of previous policies n flaws if any so that the same is not repeated.

    ReplyDelete