`Debate on women's Bill is 2 yr old, it's going nowhere'

`Debate on women's Bill is 2 yr old, it's going nowhere'

With the women's reservation Bill caught in an impasse, the ElectionCommission has proposed that all political parties should mutually agree onthe percentage of seats where they will field women candidates inParliamentary and Assembly elections. Failure by a party to give thepromised number of seats would invoke action from the EC, resulting even inderecognition of the party. Having stirred up a political hornet's nest,Chief Election Commissioner M.S. Gill plans to throw the debate opento all the major national and regional political parties at an all-partymeeting on April 29. Yet another long-pending issue that needs to beclinched: the EC's disciplinary jurisdiction over government staff assignedto the Commission for electoral duties. Gill spoke to NIRMALA GEORGE,on why these corrective steps are imperative to keep the democracy trainon track.

The women's reservation Bill has been hanging fire for some years now. Doyou see a way out of this impasse?
The EC's proposal is very simple. Instead of reserving constituenciesexclusively for women, reserve adequate space for women in the politicalarena. The debate on following the reservation route for women is two-threeyears old, but we find it is leading nowhere.

Why do think the reservation route wont work?
After 50 years of independence, we clearly see that the reservation routewhich India adopted had some negatives. We have not been able to rotateseats as perhaps it was meant. Even Nehru could not.

Soon there will be demands for reservation for other reasons, religious,ethnic, etc.... is this where India in the 21st century really wants to go?I also see that the major political parties are all paying lip service towomen because they dare not lose even one woman's vote. But the Bill is notgoing forward, and perhaps is not likely to go forward.

So what is the EC proposing?
We are only putting forward a proposal for political parties to debate upon.It is for Parliament to accept or reject it. We are saying amend theRepresentation of the People Act, to say that all the parties which haverecognition from the Commission, including a party symbol, in order toretain that symbol, every Parliamentary or Assembly election you have to putup `X'percentage of women.

Do you think this would work?
A host of bright young women and girls will come forward soon as theyrealise that the doors have been opened for them. Today there are about 8per cent women in Parliament and the state assemblies. If even 30 per centof them stand for elections, overnight the percentage would have jumped to15 or 20 per cent.

It has been calculated that in all parliamentary elections held since 1952,the winning percentage of male candidates fielded by recognised politicalparties was 26. For women the winning percentage was 32.

We would be distorting our system if we went the reservation way. Such asystem could be the way to go even for scheduled caste and tribereservations.

One doubt that has been raised is that parties will put up women inconstituencies which they would lose anyway? Or that they would put up allthe women in one state and not in the other?
The party would have to put up the same percentage of women in every statethat they are contesting. I am not pushing any specific percentage. That isfor political parties to decide. But once they agree on percentage, thenthey have to put up that many women candidates.

Any party which has recognition and therefore has been allotted a symbol,shall retain them only so long as in every Parliament and Assembly election,that it fights, it fields the requisite number of women candidates.We are pushing the political parties to come to a decision on the questiongiving space to women.

If Parliament passes this section, it becomes law. No one will defy it,because if they do, or if they ignore it, the Commission will take action.We will apply the law as passed by Parliament.

For the vibrancy of Parliament, and the long-term interests of women, thismay be the way out. Let the majority parties decide. we are only suggestingthis solution. If it doesn't pass, we are not losing any sleep over it.

The Election Commission's authority to take disciplinary action againsterring staff on electoral duty has never been resolved. What is the statusnow?
This is a serious issue. The Commission feels very unhappy about it. Article324 (Clause 6) of the RPA says that the Governor of a state or the Presidentof India shall make available staff as are necessary to the EC for electionwork.

While most staff on electoral duty do a good job, there are instances whereofficials lean away from the law. In 1989, Parliament in its wisdom, passedtwo sections of the RPA which said that all officers, including police,designated by the state government on deputation to the EC on electoral dutywould be subject to the control, superintendence and discipline of the ECfor the duration of the poll period.

So what has happened now?
In 1993, the former CEC T.N. Seshan, tried to censure a few persons out of40 lakh EC staff in a parliamentary election. Seshan is a former CabinetSecretary. And if he wants to censure somebody it must be seen as reasonableaction. But the Government of India and the then Cabinet Secretary S.Rajagopal, blocked the application of the very law passed by Parliament,saying the CEC cannot discipline them, he can only make recommendations.Emboldened by the GOI's stand, some state governments also told Seshan hewas powerless to take action against erring officers.

Sadly, the national and state governments were thwarting the law passed byParliament.