COURSE ID : 4142

COURSE NAME : Governance, Policy and Political Economy

LECTURER : Dr Des Gasper

TITLE OF PAPER:

Women’s Reservation Bill

(Shiftology in Action)

STUDENT ID:

SB2434(Erna ID): 420357

Women’s Reservation Bill(Forces of Shiftology at Work)

Synopsis

Women have played an active role in Indian politics even from timesbefore independence. They made their presence felt from the firstparliament in 1952 – both as members and ministers. However, therepresentation of women in politics has not grown as expected despitehaving seen a long-serving prime minister, a president and severalchief ministers. To this day, women are underrepresented and thenumber of women representatives in the state assemblies and the housesof the parliament continues to be dismal even though the Panchayat Rajsystem has brought in equal participation of women and men at thegrassroots level politics and governance. In order to set right theimbalance, the government introduced the Women’s Reservation Bill in1996. The Bill has been discussed, debated, decried and ultimatelydenied. Thus far. This essay looks at the history of women inpolitics and forces of shiftology in action that have both made adifference and are attempting to and the roles of the actors involved inthe context of women’s reservation bill. It also reasons theimportance of this Bill not only for women but also for governance atlarge.

Introduction

Haryana, a state in the North India recently went to polls. One ofthe victors, Kavita Jain, was made a minister in the Cabinet ofManohar Lal, the new Chief Minister. Her mother, Kamlesh, made astatement that rocked the headlines and yet reflected the socialattitudes towards women. “Our daughter is cultured. Even if she hasbecome a Cabinet Minister today she still remains the footwear of herhusband” (Navbharat Times, 28 Oct, 2014). Haryana also happens to be

the state with the most skewed male-female ration in the country – 879females for every 1000 males.

India ranks in the top 20 nations in the process of women’sparticipation in politics (according to the reports by the WorldEconomic Forum India ranked an impressive 9th on the list). In therecently concluded Lok Sabha elections (in May 2014), over 65% ofwomen polled their votes (as against 67% polling by men). In about adozen states, the polling by women exceeded that of men. The gap ofpolling between men and women has decreased in the past few decades(from over 16% in 1962) to under 2% today. India’s performance isbetter than many developed nations like Denmark, France and the UK.

This however is not the reality of women in India. Women are stilltreated as less important than and not equal to men in all spheres oflife. India has the second largest number of child brides, thehighest number of dowry deaths in the world. Crimes against women arecommon – domestic violence, child abuse, female foeticide andinfanticide, dowry, acid attacks, workplace harassment, inequality inwages and regressive social diktats.

Woman though is celebrated as the symbol of both creation and power(‘Prakriti’ and ‘Shakti’) from ancient times. In Indian mythology,many demons could be slayed by a woman alone – and not by any man.And, the role of Goddesses to this day in the society is very strong.History is replete with the references to many a queens that ruled thestates – or won wars – in the subcontinent. One of the first rulersto fight against the British was a woman – Rani Chennamma from Kitturin Karnataka. Women played a salutary role in the struggle for andattaining freedom.

With the first ever general elections held in 1951-52, women enteredthe august halls of government formally. One would believe that theposition of women both in the society and administrative sphere wouldonly grow further since women had actively participated in the freedommovement and because women had won many a rights over the period ofthe British rule. 24 women were elected to the Lok Sabha while 15women entered the Rajya Sabha in the first Parliament and made theirpresence felt in the corridors of power. Rajkumari Amrit Kaur was thefirst woman to become a minister in the Union Cabinet. Over time Indiasaw many women becoming Chief Ministers and Governors of State. Indiawas also one of the first countries to see a woman as de facto head of

state in Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister; she was the mostpowerful person in the country for a period of 18 years until herassassination. India has seen a woman President too. Pratibha Patil,the nation’s 12th President served between 2007 and 2012.

With every general election the representation of women in theParliament has increased but only gradually – except for a blip in1977 when the women formed an all-time low 3.8% of the electedmembers. This year India elected its 16th Lok Sabha. Out of the 543elected members in the house, only 61 are women – about 11%. And,only 8% of all the candidates in the fray were women. The situationin the State Assemblies is even worse. Women form a mere 8% in stateassemblies (Electoral Statistics, 2014). There are two assemblies(one state, one union territory) without a woman member. India farespoorly in world rankings in women’s development indices. Annexure 1provides details of women’s representation in parliament over theyears.

Women in India: A Historical Discourse (Shiftology in Progress)

Historians suggest that women enjoyed a preeminent position in thesociety during the early Vedic times. They participated in performingreligious rites on an equal footing with men. They could practice anyvocation of choice and were even priests and philosophers(‘Brahmavadins’). A study of the Vedas indicates that at least fourwomen have composed hymns that are part of the Rig Veda. It is alsorecorded that Gargi, a female brahmavadin defeated Yajnavalkya in aphilosophical debate during the Vedic period. She also is creditedwith writing Gargi Sanhita. However, this exalted position did not lastvery long. With time – as the epics and other books that werecomposed during the Later Vedic Period and after suggest – theposition of women shifted and they were more and more confined to thehouse. With the waves of migration of people continuing into theIndian subcontinent, women found themselves further marginalized.Discriminations increased first under the Rajputs and exploded withthe Muslim rule – especially among the caste Hindus who wanted to‘protect’ their womenfolk from the invaders. And, a spate ofdiscriminatory practices sprung up further shifting the position ofwomen backwards. They included the system of ‘purdah’ (covering one’shead and face as a sign of modesty), child marriage, barring from

education (especially Vedas and other scriptures), ‘Sati’ (self-immolation of the widow on her husband’s pyre), ‘jauhar’ (mass suicideby – largely royal - women to avoid being captured by the enemy armyduring a war), ‘devdasi’ (God’s maid; forced institutionalprostitution) and dowry.

The advent of the Europeans and the English rule did not bring anyautomatic shifts in the lot of the women. It was the tireless effortsof reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy (succeeded in getting the Britishto pass a law that abolished Sati), Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar(instrumental in abolishing child marriage and bringing in a law forwidow-remarriage) and the Phule couple (Jyotiba and Savitri Phule) whopioneered education for women in the 19th Century.

The various acts that were passed during the British rule and afterindependence have declared the many social evils as crime. However,barring some even to this day crimes against women are far fromdisappearing. The section below tries to look at the crimes againstwomen in light of the laws that have been passed and hence resulted inthe various shifts that have taken place in the continual process ofdevelopment and empowerment of women.

SATI:

Roop Kanwar, a young woman of 18, committed Sati in Deorala, Rajasthanin 1987. That such an incident was allowed to happen even if thebereaved willingly sat on the pyre shows the deeply-entrenchedpatriarchal ideas in the society. It took 11 days for the governmenteven to issue a statement condemning the incident! Roop Kanwar was notonly hailed as a symbol of womanhood, the site of the Sati became aspot of pilgrimage. Until the government was forced to step in and barentry to everyone on the orders of the court (BUJ, 1987).Unfortunately, those who were arrested for participating in the Satiof Kanwar and glorifying the practice were acquitted for lack ofevidence (Rajalakshmi, 2004).

The first law against this ghastly practice was passed during the timeof the British in 1829 due to the yeoman efforts of Raja Ram Mohan Roywhen William Bentinck was the Governor General. The law had to berevisited by the Government of India and the state of Rajasthan in1987-88 in light of Roop Kanwar’s Sati. The laws that have been

enacted have largely ensured the stopping of Sati but haven’t stoppedits glorification.

CHILD MARRIAGE:

Laxmi Sargara was married off as a 1 year old girl to Rakesh who was 3then in Rajasthan. She learnt of her marriage when her in-laws camehome in 2012 to take her to their place, when she turned 18. Shedidn’t want this marriage but her appeal to annul it fell on deaf earsof her parents (and in-laws). Not one to give up easily, Laxmiapproached a local NGO for help and with their support got hermarriage annulled. Rakesh, her child groom also relented forannulment after due counselling. Due to her own conviction and timelysupport, Laxmi had bucked the tradition and had won a major victorynot just for herself but for the battle against child marriages itself(Huffington Post, 2012).

When one or both of the spouses are below the age of 18 it isconsidered a child marriage (UNFPA, 2012, pp10). The effects of anearly marriage are more severe on girls resulting in higher childbirths, more health concerns, loss of freedom to choose (husband,pregnancy, contraception), pulling out of education, etc. The age ofmarriage for girls in India is 18 as it stands today. This number hasbeen arrived at after several interventions by the State in revisingit. Despite the laws, child marriage is quite prevalent in India.Several states in India are known for getting their girls married atimproper age. As per the UN reports, a whopping 47% of girls in Indiaare married off before they turn 18 (UNFPA, 2012, pp23). Many Muslimorganisations have also filed petitions against the Prohibition ofChild Marriage Act 2006 (and CMPA 1929) arguing that it is incontravention with their religious freedom and that marriage must begoverned by the Sharia Law. Several High Courts – including the DelhiHigh Court – have disagreed with this stand. The resistance of theMuslim organisations to accept the marriageable age has resulted in aspurt of child marriages among the community in Kerala, the mostliterate state in the country (India Today 2013). Because of theefforts of the government and various NGOs working in this sphere, therate of child marriages in the country has consistently been comingdown.

DOWRY:

Dowry represents the gifts demanded by the bridegroom and his familyin both cash and kind from the bride’s. What possibly was given inancient times as a protection for the girl in times of difficulty,over time has evolved into a social evil. Grooms carry ‘price tags’based on their qualifications and employments. In states like AndhraPradesh, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh millions of Rupees are paid as dowry(apart from gold, vehicle, land and other gifts). The law to curbdowry (Dowry Prohibition Act) was first passed in 1961. Newspapers inthe 80s and 90s used to daily report stories of dowry abuses anddeaths related to dowry harassment. However, the coverage has comedown in the last decade. This does not mean that the crimes relatedto dowry have reduced. As per the statistics released by NationalCrime Records Bureau 91,202 dowry deaths were reported in the countryfrom January 1, 2001 to December 31 2012 (The Hindu, 2012). And, thedistribution of dowry crimes among the religions are similar; even theAbrahamic religions in India are under its influence.

EDUCATION & PROPERTY:

The level of education among women at the time of independence wasabysmal. Concerted efforts by the government through schemes toencouragement more enrollments of girls at schools – like girls-onlyschools, free education, scholarships, cycles etc. – the percentageliteracy among girls/women has risen up but is still way lower thanthat of males. 82% men are literate while only 65% women can read andwrite. More girl children drop out of schools every year than boysdespite the girls performing better at exams at all levels than boysacross the country. In Class X Board Examinations (called SSLC) inKarnataka over 85% girls cleared the exams as compared to 77% boys(Coastal Digest, 2014). At the CBSE too, girls fared better. Thistrend has been noticed consistently. In order to ensure education foreveryone the Central Government made Right to Education (RTE) afundamental right (Article 21-A and 21-E) and decreed that all privateschools shall earmark a percentage of seats to the children fromeconomically weaker sections. But this right does not address theproblem of drop-outs.

Reprehensible acts of female foeticide and infanticide are becomingrampant along with other crimes against girls and women. The problemof the rising power of the Khap Panchayats in some of the NorthernStates that have begun to give diktats to the villages on rules to be

followed by women like no denims for girls and no mobile phones untilthey are married.

Despite changes in law by successive concerned governments, stricterjudgments in several cases of crimes against women, the situationcontinues to be of concern. The unabated social injustice and crimesagainst women question the quality of governance in the country.India ranks a lowly 114th among 142 countries surveyed in matters ofgender inequality. And it ranks in the bottom 20 on indicespertaining to women’s education, income, work force participation andinfant mortality (US News, 2014). Annexure 2 provides a table ofranking of world nations in women’s representation in politics.

The story of progress of women and their participation in the publicsphere and governance in India is not uniformly bleak and negative.There have been some achievements too. In terms of law and statutes,substantial progress has been achieved both before and afterIndependence.

Women and Politics: Post-Independence Shifts

Kismatiya Devi – meaning, ‘the lucky one’ - is a sarpanch in a remotevillage Chapardaga in block Danda of district Garwah in Jharkhand.She is a tribal woman who was elected to the Gram Sabha in 2011, thefirst time ever elections for the PRI held in Jharkhand. Kismatiyawas not the first choice candidate to become the Sarpanch. Butbecause the seat was reserved for a woman who also had to be tribal,she made it to the post. An illiterate, initially it was her husbandwho called the shots and pulled the strings from behind the curtains.“But when I learnt the importance of my thumb impression on papers, Idecided to learn what I was placing them on and how it is benefitinganyone”. She opted to seek the help of the young girls who wereliterate to read out to her the documents that needed her approval.Today, Kismatiya carries about her role with confidence and is proudof her empowerment. “I do not take the diktats of menfolk lying downanymore”. Her stance has influenced other women in the village to comeforth and express their views and make their presence felt.

Traditionally women were not allowed to participate in theadministration even though one finds scores of exceptions in thecourse of history. However, this changed with the call of Mohandas

Gandhi to the women to participate in the freedom movement. True,there were women even before Gandhi’s call in the freedom movement –like Madam Cama and Annie Besant. But they were rare. Gandhi, thegreatest leader of India’s freedom struggle, wielded an influence thatextended to most sections of society. His appeal to play a role inthe movement resonated across the country. His own wife, Kastur Ba,became active in organizing women. Women participated in largenumbers in the Non-Cooperation Movement and the Civil DisobedienceMovement launched by Gandhi. Many leaders like Sarojini Naidu,Vijayalakshmi Pandit and Sucheta Kriplani emerged during the freedommovement and continued to participate in political activities post-independence too.

One of the dreams of Gandhi was to bring in governance at the locallevel through the ancient system of village panchayats electeddemocratically. This was enshrined in the constitution of India aspart of the Directive Principles of State Policy (Article 40) – adocument to guide the government in its development strategies. Thepower to make laws on local administration as per the Constitution wasa State Subject and hence the Centre could not make laws. Only a fewstates acted upon the requirement to promote local self-government,like West Bengal and Karnataka even though most states had some law onlocal self-government at least on paper by 1960 (Kaushik andShaktawat, 2010) . After decades of plodding, multiple Committees andCommissions, reticent state governments to pass effective laws onPanchayati Raj and concerns on stagnation in development, the law onPanchayati Raj Institutions (PRI) was promulgated in 1992 as the 73rd

Amendment to the Constitution. There were efforts by earliergovernments too to introduce this – notably by the Congress Governmentled by Rajiv Gandhi and the VP Singh-led United Front Government – butwithout luck.

Panchayati Raj Act was the biggest shift that India had enacted in thefunctioning of democracy and government. It is also one of the biggestever shifts in the involvement of women in the process of governanceseen anywhere in the world. The salient features of the PanchayatiRaj as enacted by the 73rd Amendment include the following:

a) Panchayati Raj introduces a 3-tier local government system at thelevel of villages, blocks and districts of all states with apopulation of over 2 million.

b) All the members of the Panchayats (at the three levels) areelected directly by the people. The Heads of the Panchayats arechosen by the elected representatives. The terms of thePanchayats are for 5 years and elections are held under thesupervision of state election commissions.

c) Reservation of seats for Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe(ST) based on their proportion in the population. Reservation inthe Heads of the Panchayats too.

d) Reservation of seats for women at 33% of the total seats (proportional reservationamong the SC/ST seats too). Seats to be reserved are based on rotation policy.

e) Any person who has more than two children is barred fromcontesting and holding officer under the Act. This provision wascontested in various states as violating Fundamental Rights; theHigh Courts have decreed in favour of the rule.

f) MLAs and MPs are members of the Panchayats they belong to andhave voting rights. However, they do not have voting powers inchoosing the Head of Panchayat.

g) Panchayats depend on the financial aid provided to them by thestate governments; they also have powers to levy certain taxesand collect them to run the panchayats (Singh, 1994).

The representation of women in the Panchayati Raj Institutions wasincreased from 33% to 50% by an amendment to the Article 243 (D) ofthe Constitution in August 2009. However, even before such anamendment was passed by the Centre, several states like HimachalPradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand had already implementedin their PRI. By 2011, many more states where elections were held tothe Panchayats revised the reservations before elections.

The Constitution (74th Amendment) Bill made provisions for reservationof 33% seats to women in all urban local bodies. Many states have alsorevised the composition of the urban local bodies by providing forwomen’s reservations up to 50%. The Constitution Amendment of Article243 (T) provides for 33% reservation for women in urban local bodies.

The success of these shiftology events have not yet been thoroughlystudied possibly because the events have only occurred recently.However, wherever studies have been made pertaining to smaller areas,the results appear to be positive and encouraging. But, thePanchayati Raj Institutions have a long way to go before local self-governance takes root and people at the grassroots level really have

the power to make a difference. The state governments are not yetready to delegate more responsibilities and power (both financial andadministrative) to the local government bodies of the PRI. Also, theinterference by both political masters and bureaucrats affect theperformance of these institutions. The political representatives atthe Higher Bodies (State Assembly, Parliament, etc.) are yet unwillingto dilute their powers or control over the local politics. Whateverthat needs to be done at the village level needs approval at thedistrict level defeating the purpose of decentralization. “The reportof the Eleventh Finance Commission (EFC) is a damning indictment ofthe working of the Panchayats and their handling by the StateGovernments all over the country. The EFC has come to the conclusionthat the 73rd Constitutional Amendment has not significantly alteredthe functional domain of the Panchayats at various tiers. TheCentrally sponsored schemes or the State level schemes for improvingcivic services have not been transferred to the local bodies forgrassroots level planning and implementation” (Misra, Dhaka, 2004).

Participation of women in local self-government is not always aspositive as that of Kismatiya Devi. The reality in many places isthat ‘women members in Gram Sabhas do not have enough time to attendthe meetings after their household chores. Most of them do not attendmeetings if they are held in villages other than their own. In manycases, meetings are attended and decisions taken by their husbands’(Sinha et al, 2002). There are some definitely positive shifts too. Astudy conducted under the aegis of J-PAL showed that “the reservationpolicy significantly improved women’s prospects in elections open toboth sexes, but only after two rounds of reservation. The presence ofa female leader in the village significantly increased the parents’aspirations for their daughters and increased educational attainmentfor adolescent girls and decreased the amount of time they spent ondomestic chores” (J-PAL 2012)

Women’s Reservation Bill: The Shift Waiting to Happen

Arguably the 108th Amendment to the Constitution has generated moreheat and newsprint than any since its first introduction in 1996 (thenas 84th Amendment). The Amendment aims to provide 33% reservation forwomen in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. This will be on arotation basis (including among the reserved seats for SC and ST) and

the law shall remain valid for a period of 15 years from the date ofits promulgation. After 15 years, there shall be a mandatory reviewof the law (Singh, 2010).

During the framing of the Constitution, there was a general debateregarding the provision of reservations for women. The same wasturned down by the women members of the Constitution Assembly. Thisstemmed from two reasons – the increased participation of women infreedom struggle and the hope that the participation of women inpublic activities would continue post-independence. However, thehopes were belied over time. However, the report submitted by theCommittee on Status of Women in India (set up in 1971) titled,‘Towards Equality’ in 1974 was the game changer in the movement forwomen’s rights in India. The Report recommended reservation of seatsfor women in local bodies. There were two dissenters who went furtherand recommended reservation in all legislative bodies (Sanyal, 2008).The dip in the representation of women in 1977 Lok Sabha electionsimmediately after the submission of this report provided the necessarymotive to spur the governments into action.

Brief History of the Bill

The Women’s Reservation Bill was first introduced by the United Frontgovernment headed by HD Deve Gowda in 1996. The Bill caused apandemonium in the parliament and did not pass the floor test. TheBill was reintroduced in the Parliament several times by the BJPgovernment – in 1998, 1999, 2002 and 2003 without success. Once comingto power in 2004, the Congress led UPA included the Bill in its CommonMinimum Programme and tried to introduce the Bill but with littlesuccess. Its own allies – Lalu Prasad Yadav-led Rashtriya Janata Dal(RJD), Mulayam Singh Yadav-led Samajwadi Party (SP) and the BahujanSamaj Party (BSP) led by Mayawati - were opposed. When introduced inthe Rajya Sabha in 2008, the SP members had tried to snatch the Billfrom the hands of the then Law Minister, HK Bhardwaj and tear it. TheBill saw its first success in 2010 when the Rajya Sabha successfullypassed it amid some ugly scenes. However, the Bill didn’t find favourin the Lok Sabha. Congress blamed the BJP for backtracking on itspromise to support the Bill. The BJP had decided to go quiet bygiving in to the demands of its member Uma Bharti, who wantedreservations within reservations based on caste/community (The Hindu,2010). This was akin to the demands or stance of the BSP, SP and even

Janta Dal (United) – JD (U) - led by Nitish Kumar and Sharad Yadav.BSP believes that the Bill supports the upper castes while SP wantsreservations for Muslims and Backward Castes/Classes. The Amendment inits present form does not make further reservations based oncommunity/backwardness.

The Actors in the Play: Pro and Anti Shift

The call for women’s reservation in higher legislative bodies hasgained momentum both among the political and the social class. Thereare several actors in this shiftology play. The major actors are thewomen (and men) at large and political parties. Other actors arewomen’s organisations, Civil Society and Non-GovernmentalOrganisations, fringe elements against reservations, InternationalOrganisations like the United Nations that are concerned about thestatus of women and the requirement of improving governance, othernations who are watching the developments.

India has a thriving democracy with many political parties both at thenational and regional levels. The major political parties at thenational level include the Indian National Congress (INC; generallyreferred to as the Congress), the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and theCommunist Parties (CPI, CPIM). The major regional parties include theSamajwadi Party (SP), the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the Telugu Desam(TDP), the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), the Trinamool Congress(TMC). Aam Aadmi Party is the new kid on the block that recentlycreated waves at the Delhi Assembly elections (2013). It hasambitions to become a national party.

All the major national parties are in favour of the women’sreservation bill. While some of the regional parties support the billthere are many who do not – like the SP, BSP, RJD and JD (U). Thereservations against the bill assume many forms including the demandfor reservations within reservation (community/religion/class basedquota). Unfortunately in India, political parties are yet to matureto have complete democracy in their own affairs. Several politicalparties are run like family feifdoms – SP, RJD, NCP and DMK are greatexamples of this – where most of the posts in the party and when inthe government are held by people from a single political family.Even the national party Congress faces this criticism for lack ofinternal party democracy. Though the major parties support the Billand have pushed for its approval in the parliament, these parties

themselves have few women as leaders despite a strong women cadre.Most of the party posts are held by men reducing women’s presence totokenism. Even tickets at the recently concluded Lok Sabha electionswere awarded to men largely.

To be fair to the political parties though, most of the changes thathave taken place in the country have come through political activism.Political parties have been at the forefront of bringing in changeseven before the society was willing or demanded them. The evils ofuntouchability and sati were banished by the political rulers eve whenthey were resisted by the majority. Similarly, reservations for theSC, ST and the Backward Classes were the work of an evolved politicalthought in the face of opposition. It is another matter though thatall these pro-social measures have not been implemented in their truespirit nor any audit carried out to better their delivery.

A phone survey was conducted by the organisation ‘Gram Vaani’ inassociation with Oxfam India in the five northern states of UttarPradesh, Uttarakhand, Bihar, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh involvingover 100,000 respondents. The survey found an overwhelming support of87% from the callers in support of the Bill even though more than 70%of the callers were men (Gram Vaani, 2014). There are severalorganisations like Gram Vaani and Oxfam in support of the rights ofwomen and women’s reservation. They include All India Women’sConference, ANHAD, Centre for Social Research (CSR), Jagori, StreeShakti and WomenPowerConnect (WPC). These CSO and NGO (and women’swings of leading political parties) work at the grassroots leveltrying to bring about a change in the status of women in the country –socially, economically and politically.

The forces that are opposed to the bill include the patriarchalsociety itself, religious groups with regressive attitude towardswomen’s empowerment and political groups that fear erosion of theirpower base. They would prefer a society where women continue to besubservient of men, have a less than equal status, performtraditionally recognised roles and duties in the name of religion,culture and tradition. The emergence of Khap panchayats is one suchreaction to the growing role of women in public sphere.

Why the Bill is required in India Today: Future Shift

In an ideal situation there is no necessity for reservation. But thereality is far from perfect. The plight of women in this countrycontinues to be sad. They are still a great distance away fromachieving any semblance of equality – in rights notionally and inreality. Social evils affecting women are widely prevalent and showno signs of abatement. More rapes go unreported than those reported,domestic violence against women is casually condoned by authoritiesand women are routinely asked to ‘adjust’ and stay married for thesake of children, families etc. India still does not recognizemarital rape as crime. A woman is a sister, a mother or a wife –always seen in a role and never as herself. Even women have beenconditioned to believe in the ‘rightful superiority of the male’. Toput it succinctly, women live a life of compromises everywhere.

We are still patriarchal. Men are not willing to cede the power thatthey wield to women anywhere. Be it at home or office or in any otherpublic sphere. Even the parties that are in support of women’sreservation have not increased the number of women candidates inelections. Nor does one see any special drives to enrol more womeninto political parties or groom them to take leadership positions orprovide reservations within the party functioning. Reservations shouldnot be limited only to the number of seats at the Lok Sabha and StateAssemblies. Women must at least form 1/3 of the Cabinets andMinistries, must have more access to finances, there must be moreparty functionaries who are women.

Provision of reservations for women at local government levels is agreat step forward. This ensures women play an active role indevelopment at the grassroots. But the absence of women at policyformulation level and in governance is not acceptable. Even thoughmany laws exist to benefit women, they may not exactly be the lawsthat are required to develop and empower women. We need mechanismsthat not only ensure their implementation but monitor their violationsvigilantly. These laws today are unfortunately monitored andimplemented through the same age-old patriarchal systems. Unlessthese systems change, the laws will not work. Most times the policeact as the mediators from the angle of protector of traditions thanprotector of the rights of the violated. The examples where rapecases are not registered, or where victims are urged to marry theperpetrator are too many to be quoted.

With the resurgence of religious fundamentalism across the country –both in social and political spheres – one needs to act fast to ensurethey do not further vitiate the atmosphere for women. There is agreat drive to impose regressive culture on women in the name ofsafety and security and preserving our heritage. When India has beenharping long about greater economic growth and larger role in worldpolitics, these mind sets will not change without major shifts ingovernment and governance. This can come about only throughreservations for women at the legislative level.

References

1. 'बबबब बबब बबबबबब बब बब, बब बबबबब बबबब बब बबबब', NavbharatTimes, October, 2014http://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/state/punjab-and-haryana/other-cities-of-punjab/haryana/kavita-jain-takes-oath-as-new-haryana-cabinet-minister/articleshow/44952390.cms

2. ‘Electoral Statistics, Pocket Book’, Election Commission of India, 2014http://eci.nic.in/eci_main1/current/Electoral%20Statisitics%20Pocket%20Book%202014.pdf

3. ‘Trial By Fire, A Report on Roop Kanwar’s Death’, Bombay Union of Journalists, Dec 1987http://www.unipune.ac.in/snc/cssh/HumanRights/07%20STATE%20AND%20GENDER/06.pdf

4. ‘‘Sati and the Verdict’, T. K. Rajalakshmi, Frontline Vol. 21, Issue 5, 2004http://www.unipune.ac.in/snc/cssh/HumanRights/07%20STATE%20AND%20GENDER/06.pdf

5. ‘Laxmi Saragra, India’s Child Bride, Has Marriage Annulled in Landmark Case’, Huffington Post, April 2012

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/26/laxmi-sargara-india-child-bride_n_1456212.html

6. ‘Marrying Too Young’, UNFPA, pp10 and Figure 1, pp23, 2012http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/MarryingTooYoung.pdf

7. ‘In a League of their Own’, M.G. Radhakrishnan and J. Binduraj, India Today, July 2013http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/child-marriage-indian-union-muslim-league-kerala-underage-marriages/1/287096.html

8. ‘Rising number of dowry deaths in India: NCRB’, The Hindu, August 2013http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/rising-number-of-dowry-deaths-in-india-ncrb/article4995677.ece

9. ‘SSLC Results Out: girls outshine boys; Chikkodi retains first place, Sirsi second, Belgaum third’, Coastal Digest, May 2014http://www.coastaldigest.com/index.php/news/64524-sslc-results-out-girls-outshine-boys-chikkodi-retains-first-place-sirsi-second-belgaum-third

10. ‘India slides in gender equality rank despite rapid economic growth; US climbs 3 spots to 20th’, US News and World Report, October 2014http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2014/10/28/india-slides-us-gains-in-gender-equality-ranking

11. ‘Women in Panchayati Raj Institutions – A Case Study of Chittorgarh District Council’, Anupma Kaushik and Gayatri Shaktawat, Journal of Developing Societies Volume 26 (4) 2010, pp473-483http://jds.sagepub.com/content/26/4/473.full.pdf+html

12. ‘Constitutional Base for Panchayati Raj in India: The 73rd Amendment Act’, Hoshiar Singh, Volume XXXIV No. 9, 1994, pp818-827http://jds.sagepub.com/content/26/4/473.full.pdf+html

13. ‘Grassroots Democracy in Action: A Study of Working of PRIs in Haryana’, Suresh Misra and Rajvir S. Dhaka, 2004, pp55-56

14. ‘Women’s Participation in Panchayati Raj for improving health status: A case for Uttar Pradesh’, Roopashri Sinha, Asha Singh and Piyush Bajpai, Journal of Family Welfare, Volume 48, Special Issue 2012http://medind.nic.in/jah/t02/s1/jaht02s1p77g.pdf

15. ‘Raising Female Leaders’, J-PAL Policy Briefcase April 2012http://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/raising-female-leaders

16. ‘Women’s Reservation Bill (108th Constitutional Amendment) Bill’, Rakesh S Singh, Women’s Link, Vol. 16 No. 2, April-June 2010 pp25-33http://www.isidelhi.org.in/wl/article/rakesh1602.pdf

17. ‘The Constitution (One Hundred and Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2008’,Kaushiki Sanyal, PRS Legislative Research, September 2008 pp1-4http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Constitution%20Eighth/bill184_20080923184_Legislative_Brief____Womens_reservation_Bill_final.pdf

18. ‘The Fourteen Years Journey of Women’s Reservation Bill’, The Hindu, March 9 2010http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/the-14-years-journey-of-womens-reservation-bill/article223383.ece

19. ‘Women’s Reservation Bill: A Mobile Vaani Network Campaign’, GramVaani Community Media, March-April 2014 pp1-17http://www.gramvaani.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Womens_Reservation_Bill_Report.pdf

Annexure 1: Women Representatives in the Lok Sabha

Lok SabhaTotalNo. ofseats

Number ofWomencontestants

No. ofWomenMemberselected

Percentageto the totalseats

Percentage oftotal number ofwomencontestants

First –1952 489 - - - -

Second-1957 494 45 22 4.45 48.89

Third-1962 494 66 31 6.27 46.97Fourth-1967 520 67 29 5.57 43.28

Fifth-1971 518 86 21 4.05 24.41Sixth-1977 542 70 19 3.50 27.14Seventh-1980 542 143 28 5.16 19.58

Eighth-1984 542 162 42 7.74 25.93

Nineth-1989 543 198 29 5.34 14.64

Tenth—1991 543 326 37 7.10 11.35Eleventh—1996 543 599 40 7.36 6.68

Twelfth-1998 543 274 43 7.91 15.69

Thirteenth-1999 543 284 49 9.02 17.25

Fourteenth-2004 543 355 45 8.29 12.67

Fifteenth-2009 543 556 59 10.82 10.61

Sixteenth–

543 640 61 11.23 09.53

2014Source: Election Commission of IndiaData for 1951-52 elections for women candidates not available

Annexure 2: Women’s Participation in Politics across the World

WORLD CLASSIFICATION

Rank CountryLower or single House Upper House or Senate

Elections

Seats* Women % W Electio

nsSeats

* Women % W

1 Rwanda 9 2013 80 51 63.8% 9 2011 26 10 38.5

%

2 Andorra 4 2011 28 14 50.0% --- --- --- ---

3 Cuba 2 2013 612 299 48.9% --- --- --- ---

4 Seychelles 9 2011 32 14 43.8% --- --- --- ---

5 Sweden 9 2014 349 152 43.6% --- --- --- ---

6 Senegal 7 2012 150 65 43.3% --- --- --- ---

7 Finland 4 2011 200 85 42.5% --- --- --- ---

8 Nicaragua 11 2011 92 39 42.4% --- --- --- ---

9 Ecuador 2 2013 137 57 41.6% --- --- --- ---

10 South Africa 1 5 2014 400 163 40.8% 5 2014 54 19 35.2

%

11 Iceland 4 2013 63 25 39.7% --- --- --- ---

" Spain 11 2011 350 139 39.7% 11 2011 266 89 33.5

%

12 Norway 9 2013 169 67 39.6% --- --- --- ---

13 Belgium 5 2014 150 59 39.3% 7 2014 60 30 50.0

%14 Mozambique 10 2009 250 98 39.2 --- --- --- ---

%

15 Denmark 9 2011 179 70 39.1% --- --- --- ---

16 Netherlands 9 2012 150 58 38.7% 5 2011 75 27 36.0

%

17 Timor-Leste 7 2012 65 25 38.5% --- --- --- ---

18 Mexico 7 2012 500 187 37.4% 7 2012 128 44 34.4

%

19 Angola 8 2012 220 81 36.8% --- --- --- ---

20 Argentina 10 2013 257 94 36.6% 10 2013 72 28 38.9

%

21 Germany 9 2013 631 230 36.5% N.A. 69 19 27.5

%

22 United Republic of Tanzania 10 2010 350 126 36.0

% --- --- --- ---

23 Slovenia 7 2014 90 32 35.6% 11 2012 40 3 7.5%

24 Uganda 2 2011 386 135 35.0% --- --- --- ---

25 Serbia 3 2014 250 85 34.0% --- --- --- ---

26 Costa Rica 2 2014 57 19 33.3% --- --- --- ---

" Grenada 2 2013 15 5 33.3% 3 2013 13 2 15.4

%

" The F.Y.R. of Macedonia 4 2014 123 41 33.3% --- --- --- ---

27 Austria 9 2013 183 59 32.2% N.A. 62 18 29.0

%

28 Algeria 5 2012 462 146 31.6% 12 2012 144 10 6.9%

29 Zimbabwe 7 2013 270 85 31.5% 7 2013 80 38 47.5

%

30 Italy 2 2013 630 198 31.4% 2 2013 317 92 29.0

%

31 Guyana 11 2011 67 21 31.3% --- --- --- ---

" Portugal 6 2011 230 72 31.3% --- --- --- ---

32 Cameroon 9 2013 180 56 31.1% 4 2013 100 20 20.0

%33 Switzerland 10 2011 200 62 31.0 10 2011 46 9 19.6

% %

34 Burundi 7 2010 105 32 30.5% 7 2010 41 19 46.3

%

35 Nepal 11 2013 575 172 29.9% --- --- --- ---

36 New Zealand 9 2014 121 36 29.8% --- --- --- ---

37 Trinidad and Tobago 5 2010 42 12 28.6% 6 2010 31 6 19.4

%

38 Luxembourg 10 2013 60 17 28.3% --- --- --- ---

39 Tunisia 10 2011 217 61 28.1% --- --- --- ---

40 Ethiopia 5 2010 547 152 27.8% 5 2010 135 22 16.3

%

41 Afghanistan 9 2010 249 69 27.7% 1 2011 102 28 27.5

%

42 El Salvador 3 2012 84 23 27.4% --- --- --- ---

43 Philippines 5 2013 289 79 27.3% 5 2013 24 6 25.0

%

44 Lesotho 5 2012 120 32 26.7% 6 2012 33 9 27.3

%

45 Belarus 9 2012 109 29 26.6% 8 2012 57 20 35.1

%

46 South Sudan 8 2011 332 88 26.5% 8 2011 50 5 10.0

%

47 Turkmenistan 12 2013 125 33 26.4% --- --- --- ---

48 France 6 2012 577 151 26.2% 9 2014 348 87 25.0

%

49 Australia 9 2013 150 39 26.0% 9 2013 76 29 38.2

%

50 Honduras 11 2013 128 33 25.8% --- --- --- ---

51 Namibia 11 2009 78 20 25.6% 11 2010 26 7 26.9

%

52 Bolivia 12 2009 130 33 25.4% 12 2009 36 17 47.2

%

53 Iraq 4 2014 328 83 25.3% --- --- --- ---

" Singapore 5 2011 99 25 25.3% --- --- --- ---

54 Kazakhstan 1 2012 115 29 25.2 8 2011 47 3 6.4%

%

" Mauritania 11 2013 147 37 25.2% 11 2009 56 8 14.3

%

55 Canada 5 2011 307 77 25.1% N.A. 96 38 39.6

%

56 Lao People's Democratic Republic 4 2011 132 33 25.0

% --- --- --- ---

" Latvia 9 2011 100 25 25.0% --- --- --- ---

57 Bulgaria 5 2013 240 59 24.6% --- --- --- ---

58 Poland 10 2011 460 112 24.3% 10 2011 100 13 13.0

%

" Sudan 4 2010 354 86 24.3% 5 2010 29 5 17.2

%

" Viet Nam 5 2011 498 121 24.3% --- --- --- ---

59 Lithuania 10 2012 141 34 24.1% --- --- --- ---

60 Equatorial Guinea 5 2013 100 24 24.0% 5 2013 75 8 10.7

%

61 Croatia 12 2011 151 36 23.8% --- --- --- ---

62 China 3 2013 2987 699 23.4% --- --- --- ---

63 Kyrgyzstan 10 2010 120 28 23.3% --- --- --- ---

64 United Kingdom 5 2010 650 147 22.6% N.A. 779 182 23.4

%

65 Israel 1 2013 120 27 22.5% --- --- --- ---

66 Peru 4 2011 130 29 22.3% --- --- --- ---

67 Eritrea 2 1994 150 33 22.0% --- --- --- ---

" Uzbekistan 12 2009 150 33 22.0% 1 2010 100 15 15.0

%

68 Guinea 9 2013 114 25 21.9% --- --- --- ---

69 Bosnia and Herzegovina 10 2010 42 9 21.4% 6 2011 15 2 13.3

%

70 Greece 6 2012 300 63 21.0% --- --- --- ---

71 Cabo Verde 2 2011 72 15 20.8 --- --- --- ---

%

" Dominican Republic 5 2010 183 38 20.8% 5 2010 32 3 9.4%

" Monaco 2 2013 24 5 20.8% --- --- --- ---

72 Pakistan 5 2013 323 67 20.7% 3 2012 104 17 16.3

%

73 Madagascar 12 2013 151 31 20.5% --- --- --- ---

74 Cambodia 7 2013 123 25 20.3% 1 2012 61 9 14.8

%

75 Albania 6 2013 140 28 20.0% --- --- --- ---

" Liechtenstein 2 2013 25 5 20.0% --- --- --- ---

76 Colombia 3 2014 166 33 19.9% 3 2014 102 23 22.5

%

" Saudi Arabia 1 2013 151 30 19.9% --- --- --- ---

77 Bangladesh 1 2014 348 69 19.8% --- --- --- ---

78 Czech Republic 10 2013 200 39 19.5% 10 2012 81 14 17.3

%

79 Panama 5 2014 57 11 19.3% --- --- --- ---

80 Kenya 3 2013 350 67 19.1% 3 2013 68 18 26.5

%

81 Estonia 3 2011 100 19 19.0% --- --- --- ---

82 Burkina Faso 12 2012 127 24 18.9% --- --- --- ---

83 Mauritius 5 2010 69 13 18.8% --- --- --- ---

" Republic of Moldova 11 2010 101 19 18.8% --- --- --- ---

84 Slovakia 3 2012 150 28 18.7% --- --- --- ---

85 San Marino 11 2012 60 11 18.3% --- --- --- ---

" United States of America 11 2012 431 79 18.3% 11 2012 100 20 20.0

%

86 Sao Tome and Principe 8 2010 55 10 18.2% --- --- --- ---

87 Togo 7 2013 91 16 17.6 --- --- --- ---

%

88 United Arab Emirates 9 2011 40 7 17.5% --- --- --- ---

89 Morocco 11 2011 395 67 17.0% 10 2009 270 6 2.2%

" Venezuela 9 2010 165 28 17.0% --- --- --- ---

90 Indonesia 4 2014 560 94 16.8% --- --- --- ---

91 Barbados 2 2013 30 5 16.7% 3 2013 21 6 28.6

%

" Malawi 5 2014 192 32 16.7% --- --- --- ---

" Saint Lucia 11 2011 18 3 16.7% 1 2012 11 2 18.2

%

92 Democratic People's Republic of Korea 3 2014 687 112 16.3

% --- --- --- ---

93 Libya 6 2014 188 30 16.0% --- --- --- ---

94 Tajikistan 2 2010 63 10 15.9% 3 2010 34 4 11.8

%

95 Chile 11 2013 120 19 15.8% 11 2013 38 7 18.4

%

96 Ireland 2 2011 166 26 15.7% 4 2011 60 19 31.7

%

" Republic of Korea 4 2012 300 47 15.7% --- --- --- ---

97 Azerbaijan 11 2010 122 19 15.6% --- --- --- ---

98 Gabon 12 2011 120 18 15.0% 1 2009 102 17 16.7

%

" Paraguay 4 2013 80 12 15.0% 4 2013 45 9 20.0

%

99 Chad 2 2011 188 28 14.9% --- --- --- ---

" Mongolia 6 2012 74 11 14.9% --- --- --- ---

100 Montenegro 10 2012 81 12 14.8% --- --- --- ---

101 Turkey 6 2011 548 79 14.4% --- --- --- ---

102 Malta 3 2013 70 10 14.3% --- --- --- ---

103 Somalia 8 2012 275 38 13.8 --- --- --- ---

%

104 Guinea-Bissau 4 2014 102 14 13.7% --- --- --- ---

105 Russian Federation 12 2011 450 61 13.6% N.A. 163 13 8.0%

106 Romania 12 2012 407 55 13.5% 12 2012 176 13 7.4%

107 Guatemala 9 2011 158 21 13.3% --- --- --- ---

" Niger 1 2011 113 15 13.3% --- --- --- ---

108 Bahamas 5 2012 38 5 13.2% 5 2012 16 4 25.0

%

109 Uruguay 10 2009 99 13 13.1% 10 2009 31 2 6.5%

110 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 12 2010 23 3 13.0

% --- --- --- ---

111 Dominica 12 2009 31 4 12.9% --- --- --- ---

112 Djibouti 2 2013 55 7 12.7% --- --- --- ---

" Jamaica 12 2011 63 8 12.7% 9 2007 21 6 28.6

%

113 Cyprus 5 2011 56 7 12.5% --- --- --- ---

114 Sierra Leone 11 2012 124 15 12.1% --- --- --- ---

115 Georgia 10 2012 150 18 12.0% --- --- --- ---

" Jordan 1 2013 150 18 12.0% 10 2013 75 9 12.0

%

" Syrian Arab Republic 5 2012 250 30 12.0% --- --- --- ---

116 Suriname 5 2010 51 6 11.8% --- --- --- ---

117 India 4 2014 543 62 11.4% 2 2014 243 29 11.9

%

118 Antigua and Barbuda 6 2014 18 2 11.1% 6 2014 15 5 33.3

%

119 Liberia 10 2011 73 8 11.0% 10 2011 30 4 13.3

%

120 Ghana 12 2012 275 30 10.9% --- --- --- ---

121 Zambia 9 2011 158 17 10.8 --- --- --- ---

%

122 Armenia 5 2012 131 14 10.7% --- --- --- ---

123 Democratic Republic of the Congo 11 2011 498 53 10.6

% 1 2007 108 6 5.6%

124 Malaysia 5 2013 222 23 10.4% N.A. 59 17 28.8

%

125 Hungary 4 2014 199 20 10.1% --- --- --- ---

126 Bahrain 10 2010 40 4 10.0% 11 2010 40 11 27.5

%127 Ukraine 10 2012 442 43 9.7% --- --- --- ---128 Botswana 10 2009 63 6 9.5% --- --- --- ---" Mali 11 2013 147 14 9.5% --- --- --- ---129 Cote d'Ivoire 12 2011 254 24 9.4% --- --- --- ---" Gambia 3 2012 53 5 9.4% --- --- --- ---130 Kiribati 10 2011 46 4 8.7% --- --- --- ---

131 Brazil 10 2010 513 44 8.6% 10 2010 81 13 16.0%

132 Bhutan 7 2013 47 4 8.5% 4 2013 25 2 8.0%133 Benin 4 2011 83 7 8.4% --- --- --- ---

134 Japan 12 2012 480 39 8.1% 7 2013 242 39 16.1%

135 Congo 7 2012 136 10 7.4% 10 2011 72 10 13.9%

136 Nigeria 4 2011 360 24 6.7% 4 2011 109 7 6.4%" Saint Kitts and Nevis 1 2010 15 1 6.7% --- --- --- ---" Tuvalu 9 2010 15 1 6.7% --- --- --- ---

137 Swaziland 9 2013 65 4 6.2% 10 2013 30 10 33.3%

138 Thailand 8 2014 197 12 6.1% --- --- --- ---139 Maldives 3 2014 85 5 5.9% --- --- --- ---140 Sri Lanka 4 2010 225 13 5.8% --- --- --- ---141 Myanmar 11 2010 429 24 5.6% 11 2010 224 4 1.8%142 Nauru 6 2013 19 1 5.3% --- --- --- ---143 Haiti 11 2010 95 4 4.2% 11 2010 20 0 0.0%144 Samoa 3 2011 49 2 4.1% --- --- --- ---145 Tonga 11 2010 28 1 3.6% --- --- --- ---

146 Belize 3 2012 32 1 3.1% 3 2012 13 5 38.5%

" Iran (Islamic Republic 5 2012 290 9 3.1% --- --- --- ---

of)" Lebanon 6 2009 128 4 3.1% --- --- --- ---147 Comoros 12 2009 33 1 3.0% --- --- --- ---" Marshall Islands 11 2011 33 1 3.0% --- --- --- ---148 Papua New Guinea 6 2012 111 3 2.7% --- --- --- ---149 Solomon Islands 8 2010 50 1 2.0% --- --- --- ---150 Kuwait 7 2013 65 1 1.5% --- --- --- ---

151 Oman 10 2011 84 1 1.2% 10 2011 83 15 18.1%

152 Yemen 4 2003 301 1 0.3% 4 2001 111 2 1.8%

153 Micronesia (Federated States of) 3 2013 14 0 0.0% --- --- --- ---

" Palau 11 2012 16 0 0.0% 11 2012 13 3 23.1%

" Qatar 7 2013 35 0 0.0% --- --- --- ---" Vanuatu 10 2012 52 0 0.0% --- --- --- ---

* Figures correspond to the number of seats currently filled in Parliament1  - South Africa: The figures on the distribution of seats do not include the 36 special rotating delegates appointed on an adhoc basis, and all percentages given are therefore calculated on the basis of the 54 permanent seats.Source: Inter-Parliamentary Union http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/regions.htm