NEW DELHI: The contentious bill providing for 33% reservation of women in
legislatures has been hanging fire since September 1996 when it was first
introduced in the Lok Sabha by Ramakant Khalap, then the law minister in the HD
Deve Gowda government.
The move has since been fiercely resisted in Parliament by parties demanding
that women's reservation should also incorporate an "OBC" quota.
While the demand for a "quota within a quota" by pro-backward outfits like RJD
and Samajwadi Party has often been seen as an "excuse" to oppose the bill,
discontent runs deep in national parties like BJP and
Congress as well with MPs fearing loss of constituencies if
women's quota kicks in.
While the force of political correctness has led the parties to support the
bill, the lack of consensus within has ensured that the legislation remains in
cold storage.
The current impetus was provided by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh when he
assured a CPI delegation on Saturday that the Cabinet would consider the bill.
Coming towards the fag end of the budget session, the assurance, in any case,
seemed designed for the galleries. The unrelenting opposition from Lalu Prasad,
who is acting in concert with other pro-social justice formations, pointed to
the continued pitfalls.
The choice of Rajya Sabha for introducing the bill is deliberate. Unlike in the
case of Lok Sabha where the bill lapses with the end of the tenure of the House,
legislations pending with the Upper House don’t suffer from such a disadvantage.
All that Prasad agreed to was that the bill be introduced in the Rajya Sabha. In
fact, he made it a point to make a pit stop where TV cameras are lined up in
Parliament to emphasize the need for "representation of women from weaker
sections".
He listed out other options like making it mandatory for political parties to
allot 33% of their tickets to women but made it plain that his reservations had
not dissipated.
Prasad's media intervention was deliberate. It drove home the point that the
bill was being brought to the Cabinet only after he showed the green signal and
was not going to be much of an advance given that the budget session was all but
over.
Also, as sources close to the minister put it, referring the bill to a standing
committee would put it in deep freeze.
The decision to "revive" the bill seems to have come at a time when the
government has been facing one setback after the other.
At the beginning of the budget session, the government had attempted to put the
India-US nuclear deal in the agenda as its talks with IAEA over a safeguards
agreement concluded. But a few hawkish words from CPM leader Prakash Karat put
paid to that.
Thereafter, despite a successful Budget studded with populist giveaways, the
government has been pushed on to the backfoot by rising inflation. With its Left
critics also chipping in, the government has come under attack from BJP over
price rise, an issue with an obvious public resonance.
A step towards "gender justice", howsoever tentative and lacking any real
support in the ruling coalition, might allow the PM to claim a "positive"
result.
By referring the bill to a standing committee, the government may hope to have
the option to bring it upfront before the next general elections.
If polls are held on time, there are two full sessions of Parliament to pass the
bill — monsoon and winter sessions.
But unlike the decision to introduce the bill and send it to a standing
committee, actually passing the proposed legislation in both Houses is not an
easy task. Despite Left and BJP declaring their support, the bill can split the
UPA vertically, something the Congress leadership is not likely to view with
favour ahead of a general election.
Sunday, 28 September 2008