The bill, tabled three years ago, has riled some vocal supporters of lower castes The Indian parliament adjourned in chaos yesterday after it began debating yet again a controversial bill reserving one third of all parliamentary and regional assembly seats for women. The Women's Reservations Bill has been pending since it was first tabled three years ago. It enjoys the support of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party and sections of the opposition. But most of the parties that claim to represent the low castes are fiercely opposed to it. They are demanding that within the 33 per cent of seats reserved for women, a percentage should be guaranteed for lower castes. Their boisterous opposition has stymied the bill in the past. The last time the debate arose, an MP snatched the bill from a minister's hands and tore it to shreds. If this kind of conduct stalls the passage of the bill again, it will cause the government acute embarrassment because it keeps promising women's groups that the bill will be passed, but fails to do so in every session of parliament. Given that India had Indira Gandhi as prime minister and the current opposition leader is Sonia Gandhi, the demand for a quota of parliamentary seats might appear odd on the face of it. Ten per cent of MPs in India are women, a higher figure than in some European parliaments. But the bill's advocates say that Indian politics is male-dominated and that opposition comes from the kind of male politicians who support dowry, child marriage and sati, a tradition in which a woman burns herself alive on her husband's funeral pyre. They say that political parties are anxious to woo India's 282 million women voters, yet when it comes to choosing candidates they act on the principle that women candidates cannot win seats. The argument in favour of reservations runs something like this: Women are disadvantaged and downtrodden. Their lot will not improve unless their representation in parliament reflects their numerical strength in society. This has not happened owing to politics being top-heavy with males. Only a guaranteed quota will get them into parliament and only then will women's rights be protected. Non-political critics of the bill refer to developed countries, such as the US and Britain, where women have made huge strides despite the proportion of women in parliament being the same as, or even lower than, in India. Politicians whose strength is based on low-caste and Muslim support attack the bill on different grounds. They say that if the word 'women' in this argument was replaced with 'Muslims', it would be equally true, so why not have quotas in parliament for Muslims, too, if the idea is to help those who suffer discrimination and oppression? India's Muslims are a poor, ill-educated minority and suffer appalling discrimination. Statistics also show that few government jobs are held by Muslims. There is not one Muslim-owned unit in the top 500 industrial companies in the country.
