Women's Reservation Bill - The end of U turn

Women's Reservation Bill - The end of U turn



Some scholars believe that in ancient India, the women enjoyed equal status with men in all fields of life. However, later (approximately 500 B.C.), the status of women began to decline with the Smritis (esp. Manusmriti) and with the Islamic invasion of Babur and the Mughal empire and later Christianity curtailing women's freedom and rights. The Indian woman's position in the society further deteriorated during the medieval period. Sati, child marriages and ban on widow remarriages became part of social life in India. The Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent brought the purdah practice in the Indian society. Among the Rajputs of Rajasthan, the Jauhar was practised. In some parts of India, the Devadasis or the temple women were sexually exploited. Polygamy was widely practised esp. among Hindu Kshatriya rulers. In many Muslim families, women were secluded to Zenana.

Thanks to Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Jyotirao Phule etc. for igniting the thoughts of equal rights to women. Today, everyone of us (at least most of us) have a compassionate feeling about women's rights. But it has to be in both letter and spirit. Women's Reservation Bill can be the first step towards equality of women envisioned by our forefathers. I am glad that UPA government finally made its mind to introduce Women's Reservation Bill (2008). I hope that at least this time Women's bill will finally get president's assent. If it does, it will be a historic day in the democratic world and it would complete the U turn of women's status beginning with equal status in the ancient times to the oppressed state of women in medieval India and finally marching towards equality of woman in the modern democracy.

The idea of providing the legal status to the women's rights began with the historic Panchayati Raj Act, 1992 (73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment). Its quite interesting to note that 'Mannina Maga (son of the soil)', the former prime minister Mr. H.D. Deve Gowda made the actual promise for reservation of seats for women in Parliament and State Assemblies in 1996[...]. Here is the journey of Women's Bill so far[source],

1. Women's Reservation Bill [Constitution (81st Amendment) Bill, 1996] was first introduced in the parliament on 12th September, 1996 by H.D. Deve Gowda's government. The bill did not get pass the hurdles of parliament. Mr. Gowda's government reduced to minority and subsequently 11th lok sabha was dissolved and hence the bill lapsed.
2. In 1998, Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government made another attempt by introducing the Women's Bill [Constitution (84th Amendment) Bill, 1998]. Ironically, this time too, the bill was lapsed because 12th loka sabha had to be dissolved prematurely; Vajpayee's government reduced to minority!
3. Yet another attempt was made on December 23, 1999 with the introduction of the Bill in the Lower House. But this bill also could not be pursued due to lack of political consensus.


The present Bill has been introduced in the Rajya Sabha (May 06th, 2008) for the first time with the consequence that it will not lapse. We can only hope that UPA government can see this bill pass through both the houses of parliament. If it does, it will be interesting to see that a matriarch of the state will be signing the Women's Reservation Bill!

What will happen if this bill is passed and becomes a law?

1. Reservation for women at each level of legislative decision-making, starting with the Lok Sabha, down to state and local legislatures.
2. One-third of the total available seats would be reserved for women in national, state, or local governments.
3. At least 180 seats in the parliament will be reserved for women. That means at least 180 male members will not be able to contest election.Also, there is to be a rotation of seats, i.e., a male member of Parliament can not represent the same constituency for more then two consecutive terms.

Some noises against the bill

Rashtriya Janata Dal and Samajwadi Party are the main opponents of the bill. "Lalu says the Bill 'would deny adequate representation to other sections of society.' He favours 10 to 15 percent reservation for women. 'My party is not opposed to women's reservation, but the case of Dalits, backward classes, Muslims and other religious minorities should not be overlooked,' is his argument. Mulayam favours making it mandatory for political parties to give 10 percent of election tickets to women"

Possible consequences

1. Though this bill can promise the brighter future, initially it can bring some rubber stamp women MPs to parliament, some of whom (not all, mind you!) might not be capable of handling political pressures. It is evident from the Panchayat Raj experience that some of the elected women in Village Panchayat's are dictated by husband/close relatives/some influential person in the village.Political Parties can very well use these elected MPs like a rubber stamp![some examples here and here]
2. On the other hand, it can reflect the gender equality in parliament, "Increased political participation of women will help them fight the abuse, discrimination, and inequality they suffer from."

Are there any alternatives to women's bill?

1. One is to amend the Representation of People’s Act 1951, to compel political parties to nominate women for one-third of their seats or lose recognition (Interesting to note that the main opposition party, BJP, has decided to reserve 1/3rd of the seats to women). This, according to Rajindar Sachar, former Chief Justice of Delhi, is flawed, as it would violate the Constitution of India, which guarantees its citizens the right to form association under Article 19(1)(c) as a fundamental right.
2. Another alternative is to increase the number of seats in the Lok Sabha, which is currently based on the figures of the census of India, 1971, when the population of India was 54 crores. The numbers of seats were limited to 530 till further amendments. Now the Delimitation Commission has been asked to take the 2001 census as the basis for delimiting constituencies. According to 2001 census, the population of India has risen to 102 crores, therefore the number of seats are bound to increase before the next general elections. This should be reason enough to pave the way for the safe passage of the Women’s Reservation Bill.

Well, women reservation bill has been the middle of controversy with male politicians having big egos. Many exploit feminism and its power too. However, there has been certain level of reservation given to women in the cabinet and elsewhere too.

My personal opinion is that women always want it easy. At one end they say, they are empowered and smarter then men. They also claim to be versatile and smart. However, on the other hand they say that they need support and reservations. When you are smart enough and feel you have enough qualities, why cant you comman power rather than demanding? Why hypocrisy? Why? Sarah Palin in the US presidential campaign went up the ladder all by herself. There are many others too who have gone up by themselves, Mayawati, Sushma Swaraj, Renuka Chaudhary, Geeta Reddy, Jayalalitha, Mamata Banerjee, Rabari Devi, Shiela Dixit, etc

If the women reservation Bill implemented what happened in india? I think nothing Change. just we can see 50 percent women in parliament. They cannot take their own decisions, their husbands or other relative (male) decide, they follow. We have 50 percent reservation in local bodies. What happened here? Can a woman sarpanch take a decision?. Her husband is the leader. His decision will be implemented. Is it output of women Reservation? Is it necessary?

__________________
sheets

What about legalising the rights of men? If we are in an equal society, why reservations for women? Women should stop taking this undue advantage of men by claiming to be equal and better than men and then moving on to seeking concessions and reservations. Stop taking the advantages of tradition and modernity.

Women's reservations in parliament and state legislatures is meant primarily to pass more and more anti-male laws such as IPC 498A, domestic violence act, alimony and maintenance act, sexual harassment act and so on wherein in the name of protecting women, the laws help wicked women to loot men and their families by using the laws to extort after threatening. Many men have lost their houses, their income because of these draconian laws. Once there are more such laws passed in parliament and state legislatures, these women feminist MPs would pass laws to reserve 50% of all govt. jobs for women! Then, they would make corporates and private business establishments to reserve 50% of jobs. But same time, they would continue to support alimony and maintenance laws for women wherein working women can file alimony and maintenance suits against their husbands after divorce or during separation. This is nothing but female domination in the name of gender equality.

I disagree with you when you say men in parliament oppose women's bill because of their bloated egos. I need to ask you a simple question. Would you sign your own death warrant? Would you sign your own pink slip? No! Then, isn't it natural that men in parliament are opposing women's bill? I support the men because women are not restricted or prohibited from contesting. Let them contest and win on merit. But women want it both ways. They claim to be equal when it suits them and then claim that they are weaker than men and need reservation. Basically, they want men to adjust to their whims and fancies and its all about their convenience. Principles of equality and fair play are thrown to the winds. I need to warn you and all other men out there that the women's bill is just to pass more and more anti-male laws such as IPC 498A, DV act, sexual harassment act etc. and then 50% reservation would be made mandatory in all govt and private jobs. It means that because you are a man, you cannot get a job and have to compete within the 50% general category. Further, women would also be given out of turn promotion and tax exemptions. Already women have lesser tax slabs. Is this gender equality? The feminists have ill-intentions and women are going totally over board.

History has been distorted and the women's perspective alone has been shown. Nobody has ever thought for a moment what was the role and status of man in the past. Men's welfare and feelings/emotions have no value and hence nobody ever cares to talk about men's status.

Men have always been the protectors and providers of women in the past and even today. This is something ridiculous but a hard fact. After industrialisation and mechanisation, the feminists suddenly demanded "equality" in the roles of the sexes and started accusing the very men who protected and provided women saying that "men forced women inside the four walls". In reality it is the men who were forced to protect and provide society against the vagaries of nature, fighting wild animals etc.