Women’s Reservation: An Own Goal

 AS CONGRESS LEADER Rahul Gandhi walked out of Lok Sabha on the evening of April 17 soon after his speech opposing the Modi government’s proposals to imple­ment 33 per cent reservation for women in legislatures, accepting handshakes and congratulatory words of party MPs with a beaming smile, it was appar­ent the Gandhi scion was in a self-congratulatory mood. He seemed pleased with his performance in the House and there was an air of a conquering knight about him. Congress MPs, finely attuned to the predilections of the leader, lost no time in appreciating a speech that Rahul clearly felt had hit home and left a lasting impression on the House.

The speech had followed what has been a predictable pattern. In every session of Parliament, the Leader of the Opposition aims to provoke the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) benches and raise is­sues that attract attention to his actions, with regional parties who are part of the I.N.D.I.A. bloc playing the supporting cast. He does get attention from individual MPs and the April 16-18 Special Session of Lok Sabha saw some like Trinamool Congress’ (TMC) Mahua Moitra walk across to the Congress benches to engage Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi while others seemed to reserve their judgment. In previous sessions of Parliament, Rahul has held up posters of Lord Shiva to make a point, even though he would possibly be aware that Lok Sabha TV would not show the images. In the Budget Session, Rahul sought to use alleged references from former Army chief General (retired) Manoj Naravane’s book to question India’s response to India-China border tensions. Apart from the fact that the book had not been released pending defence min­istry scrutiny, plucking out a couple of lines without the context of a complex chain of events was more optics than substance.

Lord Shiva is clearly a recurring theme with Rahul Gandhi. This time too he dwelled on a childhood experience where grand­mother Indira Gandhi helped him conquer a fear of darkness that he said led him to realise the Lord’s true qualities. The leader was unapologetic about recalling a privileged childhood, acknowledg­ing as he did that government bungalows have large lawns, but whether his reminiscences have a popular connect is unclear. The expressions of women party MPs who sat in the row behind him did not reveal much but could not completely obscure a degree of puzzlement. The autobiographical references about getting the better of the fear of the unknown were a precursor to Rahul’s personalised attacks on Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This is a regular feature of the Congress leader’s speeches laced with claims such as the prime minister’s apparent reluctance to meet his gaze. This time, his allusions drew a firm response from Speaker Om Birla who said he would not permit derogatory language unsuited for Parliament. There is a difference, he said, between a street corner (chauraha) speech and one made in Lok Sabha.

While accusing the Modi government of trying to redraw In­dia’s electoral map in a manner that disadvantages South India and smaller states of the Northeast, Rahul did not much examine the specifics of the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill that sought to implement 33 per cent reservation for women in Lok Sabha and state Assemblies or the delimitation proposals linked to the legislation. Union Home Minister Amit Shah got to the heart of the matter when he spoke just ahead of the vote on the Constitution amendment the next day, pointing to the fallacy of the claim that southern states would lose out. BJP speakers like Bengaluru South MP Tejasvi Surya had strongly rebutted the allegation by pointing out that the population trends revealed by Census 2011 are bound to be further reflected by the ongoing 2026 count. Linking delimitation solely to population would invari­ably see a reduction in the representation of the south which has stabilised its population in comparison to North Indian states. Shah explained that the proposed ceiling of 850 seats for Lok Sabha—with 816 as the actual likely number—had not been whisked out of a hat. The number was meant to ensure a 50 per cent increase for Lok Sabha seats in all states without reducing the “open” seats from their current number in a House with 543 members. The south could not have hoped for a better deal.

Shah pointed to the obvious need for delimitation as the freeze on the number of Lok Sabha seats was ending and as per constitu­tional provisions the basis for a re­vision would be the results of the current Census. The delimitation exercise was more than overdue as the number of constituencies set decades ago for a population of 58 crore could not serve 140 crore people. Yet doing so on a population count alone would be seen to punish southern states which have met population goals and hence the 50 per cent formula for a Lok Sabha with a maximum of 850 seats was an elegant solution. Telugu Desam Party (TDP) MP Lavu Sri Krishna Devarayalu illustrated the situation in the context of Andhra Pradesh which “lost” population due to migra­tion and the creation of Telangana. The Centre’s proposals would help Andhra retain its proportional representation, he said. The proposed increase in Lok Sabha numbers had an added significant advantage as it would alleviate the fears of male MPs of a Russian roulette elimination, with their constituencies becoming re­served for women. The two-day discussion saw all the old argu­ments, including demands for a “quota within quota” for Other Backward Classes (OBC) women being dredged up by parties like Samajwadi Party (SP) that also spoke of quotas for Muslim women which Shah dismissed as constitutionally unviable. There was no suspense about the outcome of the vote—with two-thirds sup­port needed for the constitutional amendment—when division was called at 7.18PM shortly after the lobbies were cleared. The Bill fell 54 votes short, with 298 voting in favour and 230 against.

Inevitably, the battle over women’s reservation, centred on who was responsible for the deal not happening, moved to the electoral playground with electioneering in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal at fever pitch. The opposition framed its attack by asking why a Special Session was called in a hurry amidst elections, why the 2023 Bill passed by Parliament was revised, why the link between delimitation and the Census was broken, why the 50 per cent in­crease in seats was not part of the legislation, and how a ceiling on Lok Sabha’s strength could be set by the government. During the debate Shah had offered to write in the 50 per cent clause into the Bill but refused to withdraw the accompanying delimitation proposal. As a fierce battle of perception unfolded, Prime Minister Modi accused Congress and its allies of committing “bhrun hatya (female foeticide)” and warned that women voters would not for­give the opposition for its betrayal of the cause.

Modi took on TMC at rallies in West Bengal saying the party has betrayed women, with TMC leaders countering that the criticism does not cut ice with Mamata Banerjee as chief minister and the party having ensured over 33 per cent representation of women MPs. But the larger point BJP leaders made in the state and else­where was that the Modi government’s proposals would have increased both the overall number of seats for states and those for women too. At a roadshow in Tamil Nadu’s Erode, Shah accused the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and Congress of stalling women’s reservation and denying the state an increase in the number of Lok Sabha seats. BJP ally All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) also latched onto the issue, coun­tering DMK leader and Chief Minister MK Stalin’s aggressive oppo­sition to delimitation whereby he warned of a revival of the “spirit” of the 1960s language agitation against the “imposition” of Hindi, framing the issue as one pitting New Delhi against Tamil Nadu.

THE I.N.D.I.A. BLOC said it had demonstrated “opposi­tion unity” in defeating the Bills, arguing that women’s reservation should be implemented in keeping with Lok Sabha’s current strength. Congress MP from Chandigarh Manish Tewari said, “The government tried to mislead women. The Women’s Reservation bill was passed in 2023 unanimously. By all parties. What was brought before Parliament this time was a delimitation Bill and not a Women’s Reservation Bill. Women are not fools. They can see through the games. After the Special Session, I have held 15 meetings in my constituency which is 100 per cent urban, but not a single woman came up to me to ask why we voted against the Bill.”

Senior BJP leader and Patna Sahib MP Ravi Shankar Prasad said the “delimitation bogey” was humbug and the opposition has failed to consider the implications of its decision to oppose the constitutional amendment. “There can be no reservation without delimitation. Right now, it is based on the 1971 Census. In 2002, the south particularly had protested. A commitment was given to freeze it till 2026. Priyanka Gandhi is saying implement it in the current House. Who will decide which seats would be reserved for women? It has to be done by a Delimitation Commission. We will expose the opposition. Look at the way women voted for us in Bihar.

 They watch television, they are on social media and understand issues.” TDP’s Devarayalu said the narrative of the south’s “loss” was not true but rather an opportunity missed. “It’s a loss for South India. The formula was beneficial at least for Andhra Pradesh over the next 15-20 years. Parties from the south got spooked. A 50 per cent increase in seats would have prevented them from losing their relative share. Once the Census is out, will North India sit quiet if the government offers the same deal?” he asked.

I.N.D.I.A. leaders questioned the government over delays in bringing the Bills to Parliament. DMK’s Kanimozhi said, “BJP’s claim simply does not hold up. They came to power in 2014 with a full majority. Why didn’t they bring the bill then? By 2023, as their tenure was ending, they brought it forward, not to implement it but to claim credit for it before an election. That is not commitment. That is an insult to women. As for DMK, our record speaks for it­self. The Dravidian movement’s foundational principles include women’s empowerment. It was the Justice Party government that first gave women the right to vote. Kalaignar gave women equal property rights, enacted into law in 1989. Chief Minister MK Stalin ensured that in the 2021 urban lo­cal body elections, 11 of 21 mayoral positions were reserved for women. Fifty per cent of local body seats go to women.”

Kanimozhi argued that a uni­form 50 per cent increase would mean the Hindi heartland of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Haryana, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand would together command roughly 400 to 420 seats. “A two-thirds mark in such a House would be 544. Add BJP-aligned states like Gu­jarat and Himachal Pradesh, and this bloc moves dangerously close to a constitutional amendment majority on its own,” she said. The argument assumes that certain states will always vote BJP and dis­regards both the inevitable decline in the share of South India’s Lok Sabha seats if the 2026 delimitation, as required by law, kicks in and overlooks the fact that the Centre’s formula would have protected the proportional representation of southern states.

In the battle of narratives, the Modi government’s bid to coun­ter the effects of the population imbalance as revealed by Census 2011 is not acknowledged by opposition leaders who insist “pop­ulation-heavy” states will gain decisive power. The suggestion that the Centre could steamroller constitutional amendments ignoring the views of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Punjab, West Bengal, or the Northeast again assumes a permanent alignment of interests across party lines. DMK has led the federalism argument which also finds support from TMC, but none of the arguments can get around the basic question of an inevitable reduction in seats if population is the cri­terion and the obvious inadequacies of a House whose strength in frozen in time. TMC’s Dola Sen reiterated the point that the party is already “practising” women’s reservation. “After Independence, the Census was done every 10 years. The government is saying it was stalled because of Covid. But so many elections took place in that time. We are saying, let’s implement women’s reservation. We will expose their lies.”

DMK MP Thamizhachi Thangapandian also questioned the delimitation legislation. “There is also a larger political context that cannot be ignored. Why are such consequential steps being taken at a time when elections are underway in two important states governed by opposition parties? The attempt to portray the opposition as anti-women is therefore misplaced. Women’s reservation should be operationalised without delay and without being made contingent upon delimitation timelines.”

TMC Rajya Sabha MP Sushmita Dev criticised the delimita­tion proposals, saying, “Basically, it’s deep-rooted patriarchy. Men are not ready to let go of their seats. As far as delimitation is concerned, Assam and Jammu & Kashmir, where constituencies were redrawn along lines of where BJP is strong, have exposed their intentions.”

Aware that the conflicting claims need to be addressed con­vincingly, Modi delivered an address to the nation on April 19 expressing regret that the constitutional amendment on women’s reservation was voted down. “I deeply apologise to all the mothers and sisters of the nation for this unfortunate outcome,” he said and added that wom­en would hold the offending parties ac­countable. With Congress in his cross-hairs, the prime minister said there has been a persistent strategy of sweeping necessary decisions under the carpet, pointing to border dispute settlements, OBC reservations, and the One Rank One Pension scheme for the armed forces. He amplified Shah’s criticism in Lok Sabha that Congress has consistently opposed every political and economic reform decision of the Modi government, including the abrogation of Article 370 in J&K and the rollout of the Goods and Services Tax (GST). He posited the battle as between a “deeply negative, anti-reform mentality” and a positive notion of national progress. “I have no doubt that all the sisters and daughters of the country will give a fitting reply to this toxic mentality,” he said.

A state election rarely breaks the trend of being a referendum on the incumbent party and on regional issues. It is difficult to estimate how much of a factor women’s reservation will be in the results. A bid to revive the scheme is possible once the current round of elections is over but the heated debate over population, delimitation and reservations has served to highlight the limited options at hand. Despite the scope for tweaks, the formulation outlined in the Bills brought to Lok Sabha remains the only practi­cal solution to balancing regional interests and divergent popula­tion trends. The work of a delimitation commission followed by the Election Commission’s actions is time-consuming and would require a resolution soon. That would narrow the choices for all states and parties since a continued freeze on the strength of Lok Sabha might bring about another round of unrest—this time led by the northern states.