We have crossed the first hurdle

Brinda Karat is a member of the CPI(M) Polit Bureau.-K. GOPINATHAN Brinda Karat is a member of the CPI(M) Polit Bureau.

Interview with Brinda Karat, vice-president of the All India Democratic Womens Association.

FOR those who form the bulwark of the womens movement in the country, the introduction of the womens reservation Bill in the Rajya Sabha is no mean achievement. Brinda Karat, vice-president of the All India Democratic Womens Association and Rajya Sabha member, along with representatives of other national womens organisations, has been at the forefront of the struggle for 33 per cent representation for women in Parliament and State Assemblies. In an interview to Frontline, she spoke on the long-standing demand and related issues. Excerpts.

The issue has been hanging fire for nearly one and a half decades. You along with the seven sisters (the seven national womens organisations who have fought jointly on several issues since the early 1980s) played a crucial role in having the Bill introduced in the Rajya Sabha. How do you view this development?

Yes, the issue had been hanging fire since 1996 even after the Select Committee report by the late Gita Mukherjee went into different aspects of the Bill in great detail. Even though the supporters of the Bill had the majority, its opponents managed to create hurdles to prevent even its introduction. Now the introduction has ensured that weve crossed the first hurdle. We should be very clear that only the first hurdle has been crossed. We have a long way to go. As far as the Standing Committee is concerned, it is important that all the political parties give concrete suggestions.

The opposition to the Bill has been so far in general terms, and grounds have shifted over time. The Standing Committee gives an opportunity to everyone to put their point of view forward. However, there should be a time frame worked out because we do not want the Bill to get refrigerated. I personally feel that if there is a political will to ensure womens representation in Parliament, this is the best opportunity to get it through. What we require is assured political will, and at the same time, we do need to take on board the suggestions and see how they can be included in the Bill.

What has basically changed since the time the Bill was drafted in the mid-1990s? The issues raised by those opposing the Bill remain very much the same.

What has become apparent is that India lags so far behind as compared to other countries. In the last 10 years, while India was hesitating to bring forth any change to ensure adequate representation for women, weve seen Pakistan reach 22.5 per cent as far as the extent of representation for its women is concerned, Afghanistan has reached 27 per cent and now Nepal in its proportional representation category is going to ensure one-third reservation for women. India, which took the first step through the 73rd and 74th amendments has fallen far far behind not only in this region but in the whole world. The political parties who have opposed the Bill have maintained their opposition, and so the issue needs to be discussed.

Would you say its introduction in the Rajya Sabha is a milestone in the struggle for reservation?

I wouldnt call it a milestone. We have crossed the first hurdle, and to that extent it is a step forward in our struggle. We do need to congratulate the United Progressive Alliance government. During the tenure of the National Democratic Alliance government, only because the Janata Dal (United) was opposing it [the Bill], they refused to bring it to the Standing Committee. They sabotaged the Bill the very first day.

In contrast, the UPA government got the Bill introduced and convinced the Rashtriya Janata Dal, which is an important partner in the coalition government. This is an important development in coalition politics. The government persuaded the RJD, which had voiced strong opposition right from the beginning, to let the Bill be introduced and sent to the Standing Committee.

The fact that the RJD agreed to it is no mean achievement. This is a positive step. As far as the Left is concerned, we feel that the government has accepted our reasoning that there must be a concrete discussion on this. This is the only democratic way.

The main issue now is that the Bill has to be discussed in a parliamentary forum. Let all the suggestions come. It is not necessary that the Bill be accepted in its present form, but it is necessary that there is 33 per cent reservation for women in Parliament. Whether it is a question of quota within quota or rotation, we are completely open to a discussion on these issues. We have maintained this right from the beginning.

What is your stand on the demand for a quota within a quota? The Left and the womens organisations have always supported affirmative action for Dalits, the Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes and have campaigned actively for the rights of minorities, including women from the minority communities.

We have never said that it [a quota within a quota] is not acceptable. We are saying that the constitutional provision for this does not exist. Where there is reservation on the basis of caste, men and women have got elected to such reserved seats. Even at the panchayat level, as there is a constitutional provision for reservations for OBCs, women OBCs have got elected. These discussions have to go on, especially the form in which they [those demanding a quota within a quota] want it. As far as minorities are concerned, reservations, not just in politics, even for employment and educational institutions, have been through the OBC quota mostly, except in one or two States.

I entirely agree that if there is one glaring weakness in our democratic system and the pattern of representation, it is the absence of representation of elected members from the minority community, particularly Muslims. It is there in the Rajya Sabha too. That is a very serious problem. The community is conspicuous by its lack of representation.

But the question is, whether this problem should be overcome through the womens reservation Bill or whether the Bill should be put on hold till such issues are resolved. So my plea to those who make such arguments is that, do not link the solution of every weakness in our democratic system to the womens reservation Bill. That, in other words, will amount to sabotaging the Bill. Let the parties put their points in a concrete form, and bringing the Bill to the Standing Committee gives them an opportunity to do so. We should and must find a way to ensure that the Bill gets the widest support.

Is there any merit in the oft-repeated argument that the scions and relatives of upper caste and rich people would get elected to Parliament and that genuine peoples representatives would not get the party ticket to contest reserved seats?

If political parties are going to sell their tickets, it is not relevant whether a man or a woman gets it. Those with money will get in anyway in this kind of a political culture. The allotment of the party ticket lies entirely in the realm of the decision-making process of the political leadership. It depends on the culture of political parties, on how they allot tickets. For example, we have seen in the Assembly elections in Karnataka, in the profiles of some of the candidates of the main contending parties, the declared assets of some of them are to the tune of Rs.300 crores and, so on. Even in the Rajya Sabha, we have seen political parties fielding prominent industrialists.

What about the suggestion made by the Election Commission a few years ago that more women be fielded by political parties?

That has worked in those countries where there is a system of proportional representation. This is known as the List system. For example, in the recent Constituent Assembly elections in Nepal, one portion of the seats was set aside for the first-past-the-post system and one portion for the proportional representation system. Here, it officially makes out a list and declares that if it gets a certain number of votes, such and such a person on the list will be its first or second choice, and so on.

The number of votes decides the number of MPs. So, if a party decides that every third [person on the list] will be a woman and if the party gets the requisite votes, many women get elected. The first, second or third candidate on the list can be a woman. So if these political parties decide that one-third of their representatives will be women, then this ensures that there will be similar representation in Parliament too.

In India, we dont have the system of proportional representation. So, to say that political parties give one-third representation for women within their party structures will not ensure that one-third of their elected representatives will be women or that one-third women will get elected to Parliament and State Assemblies. Women will be fielded in seats where they are not likely to win. In most cases, they will be taking on sitting MPs who are more likely to be men. In the first-past-the-post system, the only way to guarantee that women get elected is to reserve seats for them. The other problem is that of rotation of reserved seats. Many MPs feel that if there is going to be a change every five years, it will cause a certain problems. The original idea was that there should be a horizontal spread for 15 years, allowing women to come up from different constituencies. But if only a certain number of seats are frozen for the purpose of reservation, then it would mean that women from other constituencies would not be able to benefit from reservation.

In some of the local body elections, seats are reserved for 10 years. We have to see what kind of suggestions are finally made. At the moment, people feel that this is a major problem, and this will have to be worked out. So far we have not had the opportunity to discuss these issues. The problem is that we never had a discussion on the contentious issues of reservation within reservation and rotation. Let the suggestions come in and the democratic process begin. The problem is we havent had any opportunity to have discussions in a meaningful manner. For example, on the issue of proportional representations, the idea was suggested by several commissions. The Left parties have always supported proportional representation, but it has never been accepted. There are so many issues that need to be discussed, but they have to be done within a time frame. I feel that the UPA government, having taken up the first step to cross the hurdle, will go through with this.