After his dramatic introduction of the women's reservation bill in the Rajya Sabha on the last day of the budget session, the Union law minister, Hans Raj Bhardwaj, hailed it as a 'landmark step in India's history'. It might have been more correct if he had said that the repeated 'introduction' of the bill in the last 12 years or so had itself become a 'landmark' of Indian parliament. Now, that dubious 'landmark' may be left behind because a bill has been introduced in the upper house of parliament which does not have a fixed life like the Lok Sabha.

But for a carefully worked out strategy by the treasury benches it was still possible that nothing more than the formality of introducing the bill would have been achieved. It was probably in tune with the occasion that the women's brigade of the ruling party stood as guards to protect the minister as he hurriedly completed the exercise. This strategy frustrated the design of those who oppose the bill to physically prevent the minister from introducing it. The champions of the women's reservation thought they had scored a great victory. The opponents have renewed their threat to halt any further progress of the legislation without which it cannot become an act of law.

In practical terms the celebrations by the Congress, the BJP and the Left parties-the three most visible supporters of the women's reservation bill-may well turn out to be premature. Even if the bill manages to get clearance from members of the Rajya Sabha-by no means an easy task-it will still have to be passed by the Lok Sabha where opposition to it has always been stronger and louder.

There are reasons to believe that despite the 'landmark' achievement of tabling the women's 'quota' bill in a house where it will not lapse, time is not near when women will constitute 33 per cent of Parliament and state assemblies. Make no mistake. Elected bodies in India do need a fair representation of women; perhaps more than 33 per cent. But achieving that goal very much looks like a distant dream.

The women's reservation bill has never crossed the first stage of 'introduction' in parliament---five times since it was first brought in by the United Front government in 1996. On each occasion there were chaotic scenes with the opponents trying to physically prevent the minister in charge from doing his duty. About the only change that has taken place since then is that one or two parties that were open and loud in opposing the bill are now less trenchant in their criticism but their attitude towards the bill is still ambivalent. They still want some amendments in the original bill before they could mull over extending their full support.

The supporters of the bill are equally adamant. They want the bill passed in its original shape. Under no circumstances will they allow even a comma or a full stop to be changed. The hiatus in the approach of the opposing sides is an indication that no progress can be expected under the present circumstances.

It is, of course, quite likely that even if the women's reservation bill incorporates the changes demanded by the opponents it can face fresh hurdles in future when they may press for some other additions or alterations in the bill. The reason for opposing the bill is not that it is unacceptable unless it provides for 'reservation within reservation' or something like that; the fact is that India is still a male dominated society and the equal or emancipated status enjoyed by Indian women is an urban myth. Politicians in the country who thrive on the politics of divisiveness have no interest in the eradication of some of the ills of the tradition-bound society.

The Indian women's journey on the path of emancipation has not reached any significant milestone despite some of them having risen very high in life and occupied positions that women in the so-called advanced world have not. In the world's oldest democracy they are still uncomfortable with the thought of a woman president. It is common to hear that in urban and 'shining' India male colleagues of a woman in high position squirm with unease when they are not downright resentful.

The job of a member of parliament need not be compared to that of a position in an office, big or small. But it will not require much effort to see that the entire Indian political class has been rather hypocritical in approaching the matter of women's reservation in elected chambers. The demand for 33 per cent reservation for women candidates in parliament was raised more than a decade ago. Since the necessary law to help that has not been passed the least that would be expected from political parties, especially the ones that claim to champion the cause, is that they would put up a higher number of women candidates for fighting elections than before. That has clearly not happened and the inaction is justified.

The number of women candidates nominated by various parties at the time of the last Lok Sabha election was not impressive. Look at the number of women MPs party-wise. The Congress has 15 women out of a total of 152 party members in the Lok Sabha-about 10 per cent. In terms of percentage, the CPI (M) does better with a 12 per cent representation as it has five women MPs (out of a total of 43). The BJP has 11 women MPs among its 129 MPs-9 per cent. The DMK has the highest percentage (19) of women's representatives in the Lok Sabha, three out of its total of 16. These are the four parties that claim to firmly support the women's reservation bill.

At the time of 2004 Lok Sabha election, there was a view that the supporters of the women's bill should voluntarily nominate more women even if it was not mandatory. The opinion was ignored, if not ridiculed, by most parties. As a result the Lok Sabha has a total of 50 women members out of 543-nine per cent. It is almost certain that the story will be repeated in the next Lok Sabha. There will be no large nomination of women candidates and ultimately the house will again have not more than 9 or 10 per cent women members. Because, 'winnability' is the criteria for parties. It is not clear whether the 33 per cent quota alone would help women elevate their status in the society, the aim of the law. Champions of women quota have pointed out that some of the neighbouring countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan have laws that give women a higher representation (about 25 per cent) in their parliament.

Even at the cost of sounding jingoistic one would like to say that women in these two countries are lot more disadvantaged than they are in India even without any 'quota' for women's representation in elected bodies. But it is also true-though it may irk the supporters of the bill--- that women in 'real' India, the vast rural backyard, continue to lead a kind of primitive life despite the reservation of seats for them at the Panchayat level. The conclusion here is not that women need no reservations. The problem seems to be that there is too much stress on symbolism when the need is for substantive achievements. Women activists, champions of all good causes and the lawmakers, all will say they have done their duty the day the reservation bill becomes part of the statute. What happens on the ground will be of lesser concern to them subsequently. As in the case of many of our laws.

-Syndicate Features