In a significant move, the Union Cabinet, as per media reports, approved the long-debated Women’s Reservation Bill—a historic piece of new legislation aims at reserving 33 per cent of seats in both the Lok Sabha and state assemblies for women. The bill has been introduced in the Lok Sabha. This stride towards gender parity in the political arena has been a subject of political discourse since the legislation was first introduced in 1996, culminating in a watershed moment in 2010 when the Rajya Sabha passed it, albeit not without vehement opposition.
However, as the nation applauds this progressive leap, it is imperative to scrutinise an oversight that remains glaringly conspicuous—the omission of provisions for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) within the ambit of this women’s quota.
The absence of OBC reservation within this framework threatens to undermine the very essence of inclusivity, intersectionality and fairness that should underscore any legislative initiative of this magnitude.
In any case, after the rise of the BJP and Narendra Modi OBC representation in the Lok Sabha has decreased. This has been marked as an era of the return of the upper castes. This is an important fallout of the Hindutva politics which claims to be the harbinger of Virat Hindutva, but in reality sidelines the backward classes. Interestingly, the Narendra Modi cabinet has only two women representatives and both, Nirmala Sitharaman and Smriti Irani, belong to the upper caste.
Also read: Congress hasn’t changed. It’s still socialist, Manmohan Singh was just a flash in the pan
OBC-blind
Over the past 75 years, the OBC community has strived tirelessly to secure their rightful place in various spheres of Indian society, including politics. OBC representation in the Lok Sabha peaked at 26 per cent in 2004 and since then it is in decline. The absence of OBC quotas within the Women’s Reservation Bill not only disregards their historical struggle for representation but also undermines the progress they have achieved since Independence.
Without OBC reservation, there is a risk that the women elected under this bill may disproportionately come from privileged backgrounds, further skewing the already unequal distribution of power. This could lead to a scenario where a select group of women, primarily from upper-caste and economically advantaged backgrounds, dominate political spaces, thereby negating the very purpose of affirmative action.
Many women in India belong to multiple marginalised groups, such as being both women and an OBC. By not including OBC reservations within the women’s quota, the bill ignores the unique challenges faced by these women and potentially compounds their disadvantages, making it even harder for them to access political representation.
The absence of OBC reservation within this bill has the potential to stifle social mobility for individuals belonging to these communities. Political representation is a crucial avenue for marginalised communities to voice their concerns and influence policies that directly impact their lives. By excluding OBCs from this opportunity, the bill may inadvertently impede their progress and perpetuate historical inequalities.
The bill first emerged on India’s the political landscape in 1996, and has resurfaced twice before in 2010. On both occasions, apprehensions were raised regarding its potential to inadvertently hinder the chances of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) securing representation. These concerns, rooted in a genuine commitment to safeguarding the rights and opportunities of marginalised communities, still linger today, underscoring a persistent flaw in the bill’s design. Without specific provisions to ensure OBC representation within the proposed women’s quota, there is a risk of exacerbating the existing disparities in political access.
Also read: 4 years on, Kashmir is changing. All because of Modi-picked Manoj Sinha’s healing touch
A missed opportunity
Regrettably, despite these valid concerns being raised in the past, Modi government has opted to reintroduce the bill in its original form. This decision reflects a missed opportunity to rectify a glaring imbalance and acknowledge the unique challenges faced by the OBC community in their pursuit of political empowerment. It also highlights a failure on the part of the government to adapt the bill in light of the genuine concerns raised by stakeholders who seek to uphold the principles of equity and inclusivity.
The need for comprehensive and inclusive legislation that accounts for the interests of all marginalised communities, including OBCs, is paramount. The current iteration of the Women’s Reservation Bill, by neglecting this critical aspect, falls short of its potential to be a truly transformative and equitable force in Indian politics.
At the local level, in various urban and rural local bodies, provisions have been made for OBC reservation within the framework of the women’s reservation. This signifies a recognition of the unique challenges faced by OBC women and an acknowledgment of the need for their representation in these grassroots governing bodies.
However, it raises a pertinent question: why does this provision not extend to state assemblies and Parliament? The contrast in approach between local bodies and higher levels of governance raises doubts about the rationale behind the bill’s current form.
Also read: Indians spending beyond their means. Don’t just fix it with freebies, bring policy changes
The other provisional drawbacks
The provision for seat rotation within the women’s reservation system introduces an additional layer of complexity and potential drawbacks. Under this system, a constituency that previously elected a male Member of Parliament (MP) or Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) may see the seat reserved for women in the subsequent election cycle. While this mechanism aims to ensure that women have a fair chance at political representation, it inadvertently raises concerns about the incentives for sitting representatives.
This scenario introduces a potential dilemma for the incumbent MP or MLA. Knowing that they will be ineligible to contest elections in that constituency in the following cycle, there may be a risk of complacency or reduced motivation to actively serve their constituents. This complacency could stem from the realisation that their political future in that specific constituency is effectively predetermined, regardless of their performance or efforts during their tenure.
Furthermore, this seat rotation system may also lead to a lack of continuity in governance. Effective policies and initiatives that require sustained efforts over multiple terms may face disruptions if representatives are aware that they have a limited window of opportunity to make an impact. This can hinder the long-term planning and execution of projects that are crucial for the development and well-being of the constituency.
Additionally, the potential for seat rotation may discourage experienced and effective leaders from investing significant time and resources in their constituency, as they may anticipate being replaced in the next election cycle. This could result in a loss of valuable expertise and leadership, ultimately affecting the quality of governance.
In essence, while the Women’s Reservation Bill is a significant step towards gender equality, it is imperative to acknowledge that its current form neglects the interests of the OBC community.
Dilip Mandal is the former managing editor of India Today Hindi Magazine, and has authored books on media and sociology. He tweets @Profdilipmandal. Views are personal.
(Edited by Anurag Chaubey)