Themes > Current Issues
09.03.2010
Will Women's Reservation in Parliament make a Difference?
Jayati
Ghosh
It
may still happen. If the Women's Reservation Bill - which was tabled
in the Rajya Sabha yesterday amidst chaos and disruption - does actually
get passed by both houses of Parliament, it will bring to closure an
issue that has been hanging fire for 14 years in national politics.
It may even be law in time for the next general elections in the country.
Of course, it will be historic and all that. But will it actually make a difference to overall empowerment of ordinary women, and not just those who are able to get voted into Parliament? Or will it be largely symbolic in its impact on the conditions of most women in the country? While the nature of what is unfolding is yet to be seen, there is no question that this particular legislation will set in motion a process that may be hard to reverse. That is why so many feminist activists and women's groups have stressed this particular law as a major part of their mobilisation.
Why should it make a difference? After all, we cannot really claim that thus far all the women who have managed to achieve a certain position of leadership in national politics have really differentiated themselves by highlighting and championing the issues important for women. In fact, aside from some very inspiring exceptions, many elected women MPs have not made much of a mark in any major respect, leave alone the particular concerns of women.
But that is not really an argument, because it is well known that there is a dynamic that can be set in motion by sheer numbers. Currently women constitute only 8.2 per cent of MPs, which is lower (around half) than the proportion of more than twenty years ago. This makes them a potentially lonely minority, in a context where raising issues from women's perspective or demanding that laws and policies be more gender-aware can be an isolating experience if there is not enough support from other members.
But when the numbers increase beyond such a small minority, things tend to change. It has been found in many countries where women are substantially represented in legislative bodies (such as in the Nordic countries) that such a presence increases the likelihood of more gender-sensitive legislation as well as the culture of the house, empowering individual women to speak up more and be heard, and generating many more women leaders who are then taken seriously across the political spectrum.
This does not simply mean a better deal for the few women who are able to get elected - it is likely to translate to a different focus on policies and programmes that may help the majority of women in the country. The significant effects of the 73rd and 74th Amendments on the empowerment of rural women through reservation of seats in local bodies are still being realised. And this is likely at the national level as well.
How important and necessary this is may not be so well understood by those who do not see the huge gender gaps that continue to persist in socio-economic outcomes, as well as the gender-blind nature of the design and implementation of policies. A new publication of the UNDP, ''Power, Voice and Rights: A turning point for gender equality in Asia and the Pacific'' (Asia Pacific Human Development Report 2010) that was released in Delhi yesterday, provides a timely reminder of how far we have to travel to achieve even minimum gender equality or be on par with most other countries even within the Asian region.
Thus, South Asia (and within that India) ranks much worse than other parts of the Asia Pacific region (and close to sub Saharan Africa) in terms of most important indicators: sheer survival (sex ratios at birth and missing women); education (literacy, school retention and higher education enrolment); nutrition and health (malnutrition, life expectancy and risks of maternal mortality); employment (work participation, wage gaps); security and voice (violence against women, political participation).
This Report is particularly interesting because it highlights the causes of such divergence and of gender gaps in general. The factors affecting economic empowerment are by now well known, such as lack of assets and education, inadequate access to credit and restricted ability to work out of the home. What is particularly important - and has direct relevance for a law that provides quotas for women as legislators - is the role of legal systems and their implementation in the empowerment of women. The Report notes that, because of competing influences on legal systems in the region, many countries have ended up with ''contradictory or archaic statutes and discriminatory practices'' that actively militate against women.
The barriers for women come from construction of the laws themselves and shortfalls in their substance (whether in terms of property and inheritance laws, allowing divorce on reasonable grounds, protection from violence) as well as from unequal access of women to the legal system and other mechanisms for justice.
The Report also notes, correctly, that ''Recognising that the law cannot claim to be fully impartial is an important step forward. The law deeply influences development in different ways and also shapes the outcomes of many non-legal interventions. The legal process and the law thus need to be crafted in ways that genuinely advance gender equality.'' (p. 12).
Given this, the urgency of having more women legislators who can shape the content of law, as well as redirect policies to move away from the traditional male breadwinner model to a more gender-sensitive and inclusive approach, is obvious. The passing of this Bill will therefore be a critical step forward not just for women, but for Indian society in general.
Of course, it will be historic and all that. But will it actually make a difference to overall empowerment of ordinary women, and not just those who are able to get voted into Parliament? Or will it be largely symbolic in its impact on the conditions of most women in the country? While the nature of what is unfolding is yet to be seen, there is no question that this particular legislation will set in motion a process that may be hard to reverse. That is why so many feminist activists and women's groups have stressed this particular law as a major part of their mobilisation.
Why should it make a difference? After all, we cannot really claim that thus far all the women who have managed to achieve a certain position of leadership in national politics have really differentiated themselves by highlighting and championing the issues important for women. In fact, aside from some very inspiring exceptions, many elected women MPs have not made much of a mark in any major respect, leave alone the particular concerns of women.
But that is not really an argument, because it is well known that there is a dynamic that can be set in motion by sheer numbers. Currently women constitute only 8.2 per cent of MPs, which is lower (around half) than the proportion of more than twenty years ago. This makes them a potentially lonely minority, in a context where raising issues from women's perspective or demanding that laws and policies be more gender-aware can be an isolating experience if there is not enough support from other members.
But when the numbers increase beyond such a small minority, things tend to change. It has been found in many countries where women are substantially represented in legislative bodies (such as in the Nordic countries) that such a presence increases the likelihood of more gender-sensitive legislation as well as the culture of the house, empowering individual women to speak up more and be heard, and generating many more women leaders who are then taken seriously across the political spectrum.
This does not simply mean a better deal for the few women who are able to get elected - it is likely to translate to a different focus on policies and programmes that may help the majority of women in the country. The significant effects of the 73rd and 74th Amendments on the empowerment of rural women through reservation of seats in local bodies are still being realised. And this is likely at the national level as well.
How important and necessary this is may not be so well understood by those who do not see the huge gender gaps that continue to persist in socio-economic outcomes, as well as the gender-blind nature of the design and implementation of policies. A new publication of the UNDP, ''Power, Voice and Rights: A turning point for gender equality in Asia and the Pacific'' (Asia Pacific Human Development Report 2010) that was released in Delhi yesterday, provides a timely reminder of how far we have to travel to achieve even minimum gender equality or be on par with most other countries even within the Asian region.
Thus, South Asia (and within that India) ranks much worse than other parts of the Asia Pacific region (and close to sub Saharan Africa) in terms of most important indicators: sheer survival (sex ratios at birth and missing women); education (literacy, school retention and higher education enrolment); nutrition and health (malnutrition, life expectancy and risks of maternal mortality); employment (work participation, wage gaps); security and voice (violence against women, political participation).
This Report is particularly interesting because it highlights the causes of such divergence and of gender gaps in general. The factors affecting economic empowerment are by now well known, such as lack of assets and education, inadequate access to credit and restricted ability to work out of the home. What is particularly important - and has direct relevance for a law that provides quotas for women as legislators - is the role of legal systems and their implementation in the empowerment of women. The Report notes that, because of competing influences on legal systems in the region, many countries have ended up with ''contradictory or archaic statutes and discriminatory practices'' that actively militate against women.
The barriers for women come from construction of the laws themselves and shortfalls in their substance (whether in terms of property and inheritance laws, allowing divorce on reasonable grounds, protection from violence) as well as from unequal access of women to the legal system and other mechanisms for justice.
The Report also notes, correctly, that ''Recognising that the law cannot claim to be fully impartial is an important step forward. The law deeply influences development in different ways and also shapes the outcomes of many non-legal interventions. The legal process and the law thus need to be crafted in ways that genuinely advance gender equality.'' (p. 12).
Given this, the urgency of having more women legislators who can shape the content of law, as well as redirect policies to move away from the traditional male breadwinner model to a more gender-sensitive and inclusive approach, is obvious. The passing of this Bill will therefore be a critical step forward not just for women, but for Indian society in general.
© MACROSCAN 2010