Don’t link women’s reservation to delimitation
To cover up one mistake with another that has grave consequences for voters is unacceptable
Amidst the din of the women's reservation debate in the Special Session of Parliament, one core point is being overlooked. If women's reservation were linked to population count, women would be entitled to a quota of about 48-49%, which would be their demographic share. Since the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, 2023 reserves 33% instead, it can be implemented any time.
The government's attempt to tie women's reservation to an increase in the number of seats and fresh delimitation as per the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 is therefore wrong.
More worrying still, the Bill erases the link between seats' expansion and the Census, suggesting that a new Delimitation Commission be told to draw boundaries for 815 electoral constituencies. How can a decision on the number of total Lok Sabha seats be taken without a fresh population count? Even more pertinently, how can specifically 815 constituencies be drawn?
The government's trick is to use the 2011 Census since the results of the ongoing Census, which began on April 1, will only be available in 2028-2030, too late for delimitation, before the 2029 election.
But the constitutional changes proposed in the Bill would leave it entirely to whichever party is in office to decide the strength and composition of the legislature. That is deeply concerning.
Since the government delayed the Census until 2026, we are being told that it is better to simply accept an arbitrary figure decided upon by the ruling party, backed by no real data and, therefore, giving no fair representation. But to cover up one mistake with another that has grave consequences for voters is unacceptable.
This Special Session should not be used to distract attention from women's reservation by focusing on increasing seats and delimitation. Unlike women's reservation, expansion and delimitation are linked to population count. Any increase in seats and fresh delimitation should only be undertaken after the ongoing Census' results are published.
What this Special Session can do is restore the focus on women's reservation. It should amend the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, 2023 to delete all references to the Census and delimitation, since it can be done based on the current strength of the legislatures too, if Parliamentarians agree on doing it before the 2029 General Election.
Secondly, any increase in the number of seats reserved for women depends on overall increases: that is to say, number of reserved seats will automatically increase when the total number of seats rises in future. Any proposal to replace the 2026 Census with the 2011 Census is, thus, infructuous.
The next glaring gap in the 2023 women reservation Act is the failure to specify that the 33% reserved women's seats will be allocated to states in proportion to each state's existing seat share. Maintaining a balance between equal elector weight and fair representation of states is essential to the federal nature of the Indian Union.
The principle of ensuring that states which have invested in human development, especially women's welfare, education and financial independence are protected rather than penalised had led to the freezes on Lok Sabha expansion in 1976 and 2001.
The Constitution Amendment Bill omits any protection for the demographically and economically well-performing states; there is no clause that even freezes the current states' seat shares at the same proportion.
That clause is missing in the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam too. It needs to be inserted, saying that the 33% allocation in the Lok Sabha will be distributed to states as a one-third proportion of their current seats' allocation.
Similarly, though 8 per cent of the 33 per cent women's seats are reserved for SC/ST women, there is no provision to provide state funding for their election campaigns. Women from other vulnerable and marginalised groups might need funding too. This is another clause which must be inserted in the existing 2023 Act.
Finally, the Special Session should resolve to introduce a new Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 for 33% reservation of women's seats in the Rajya Sabha too, in the Monsoon Session. When Lok Sabha reservation was agreed to in 2023, why is Rajya Sabha reservation lagging behind?
These points and others have been raised in a petition to MPs that was coordinated by an ad-hoc group called the Women's Coalition for Women's Representation.
The petition has been signed by over 500 people from over 65 civil society groups, ranging from individuals to organisations working in diverse areas like women's rights, LGBTQI demands and child rights across municipal councils, panchayats and mahila mandals.
The concerns and proposals of these groups deserve to be heard just as much as those of Opposition parties. Government and ruling party spokespersons are trying to present any criticism of the Bills as a failure to uphold women's rights. But the points made by these 65+ civil society groups are not merely opposition to the Bills, they are suggestions from women on ways in which women's reservation can be strengthened as well as implemented.
Their proposals are points that the Opposition parties can accept, rather, should accept. If the government allows a discussion on their suggestions, then the much-desired parliamentary unity that the government talks about might be achievable. Without showing openness to views of the Opposition and civil society, the government sends the message of arbitrary high-handedness. The ball is now in its court.
