7 Citizenship, Political Representation and Reservation for Women

Sumit Saurabh Srivastava

epgp books

 

 

 

 

Introduction

 

The Module begins with introducing the notion of citizen & citizenship. It locates these two in the emergence of modern nation-state. Thereupon it highlights significant international / global conventions which attempt to bring in the women in political sphere. The Module then shifts to the Indian context and chronicles some of the major initiatives taken during the colonial times to engage women in politics and thereby ensuring their political participation and representation. The post-independent India enacted several key legislatives measures in this regard. The Module looks into the historicity & rationale of 73rd & 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts resulting into the democratic revolution at the grassroot level for women. At the State and Central level, the Women’s Reservation Bill (WRB) aiming at 33% reservation for women both in State legislatures and the Parliament is still to be a reality. The Module outlines its key signposts from inception till its approval in the Rajya Sabha. The Module also looks into the caste & class dynamics of the same operating within the framework of patriarchy. The Module in conclusion strongly argues for the Women’s Reservation Bill.

 

1.   Backdrop

 

Citizenship entails political rights and entitlements which are inalienable to any individual either man or woman. These are guaranteed by the supreme sovereign political body i.e. the State. These rights, duties and entitlements though primarily political in nature, have their social & economic underpinnings also. Women’s political participation and representation entails a wide range of activities starting from becoming politically aware of their rights and responsibilities, participating in the electoral process (voting and contesting in elections) and further maturing to emancipation of women. The political empowerment of women is a necessary condition for any kind of political system to function properly and efficiently. As a corollary of the same, it also minimizes the existing gender imbalance in the society. In this regard, initiatives world over have been taken to promote political participation of women in respective countries. In this context, Mary John (2000: 3822) has argued that “securing the participation of women in the institutions of democracy and governance is now an important item on the global agenda”. Article 7 of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly instructs State Parties to “take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the political and public life of the country…”. It ensures women, “on equal terms with men, the right: (a) To vote in all elections and public referenda and to be eligible for election to all publicly elected bodies; (b) To participate in the formulation of government policy and the implementation thereof and to hold public office and perform all public functions at all levels of government; and, (c) To participate in non-governmental organisations and associations concerned with the public and political life of the country.”1 Report of the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 4th-15th September 1995) states that “without the active participation of women and the incorporation of women’s perspective at all levels of decision making, the goals of equality, development and peace cannot be achieved” (pp.79) and spells out two important strategic objectives to be achieved. These are i) to take measures to ensure women’s equal access to and full participation in power structures and decision-making; and ii) to increase women’s capacity to participate in decision-making and leadership.2 The need for increased political participation has been also given due space in Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and especially in GOAL 3 which speaks of ‘promoting gender equality and empowering women’ by taking into account ‘proportion of seats held by women in national parliament’.3

 

2. Asserting Citizenship & Political Rights: Women in Colonial India

 

In India, according to Sen (2004: 188-189), “women’s participation in the political life of present day India dates back to the early twentieth century, when organizations such as the Women’s India Association (WIA), the National Council of Indian Women (NCIW), and the All India Women’s Conference (AIWC) were formed in 1917, 1926 and 1927, respectively.” The struggle for freedom from British rule provided further impetus to the women’s emancipation in pre-independence period as “the gradual transfer of power from the British to Indian hands gave women experience in participating in the democratic process” (Srinivas, 2002: 298). Mass mobilization and participation of women in the public arena gave birth to a vibrant chain of women activists who soon crossed the boundary of nationalism and seriously focused on women issues (Jones, 1996: 145-154). A significant event was formation of Indian National Congress in 1885 and participation of women in its meetings. The earliest record mentions delegates like Swaran Kumari Ghoshal and Kadambari Ganguly attending the Indian National Congress meeting. Women along with men protested against the partition of Bengal in 1905. In December 1917 Sarojini Naidu along with other women met Mr. Montague on constitutional reform demanding voting rights for Indian women. As a result of conscious efforts by such women the All India Women’s Conference (AIWC) was formed in 1926-27. Among its many agendas, the issue of women’s suffrage was the prime one (Chaudhuri, 2004: 117-124).

 

The Indian National Congress in its 45th Session at Karachi (1931) adopted ‘Fundamental Rights of Citizenship’ wherein it committed itself to ‘women’s equality’ “was largely an outcome of the mass participation of women in the national movement as well as the activities of several women’s organizations, notably the AIWC, the WIA, and the NFIW, who had pioneered the first women’s movement in India” (Kasturi, 2004: 136). Consequently, A.I.C.C. passed a special resolution marking women’s contribution in 1930 Satyagraha. Although the British Government turned down the demand for women’s franchise in 1931, the Karachi session of Indian National Congress resolved in favour of women’s franchise and representation.

 

During this period, various women’s organizations were formed. D. Jinarajadasa along with Annie Besant and Margaret Cousins established the Women’s Indian Association in 1917. Later on the National Council of Women came into existence in 1925. The All India Women’s Conference in 1927 focused on women’s education and recognized child marriage as the root cause of women’s status in India. It was the most visible organization among these. Thus, on the whole, “the women’s and social reform movements of the late-19th and early-20th century …. also included political rights (to franchise and representation)” (Kumar, 2005; Chatterjee, 1980: 241-254). The Government of India Act 1935 did provided a wider section of women right to vote and contest elections but it was still limited demarcated by various eligibility criteria as literacy, property ownership or marriage to propertied men.

 

3. Women, citizenship & political representation in post-independent India:

 

The constitution of India through its Preamble, Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles aims for socio-political empowerment of women. Some of these are Equality before law for women (Article 14); the State not to discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them (Article 15 (i)); State is to make any special provision in favour of women and children (Article 15 (3)) among others. Article 16 states that, “There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State.” Section 16(2) further states “No citizen shall on the grounds only of . . .sex. . .be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the State.” Thus, the issue of enhancing women’s representation in the legislatures is very much in the line of constitutional provisions. Although Articles 325 and 326 of the Indian Constitution guarantee political equality to all, yet women have not benefited from this right to the optimum. The National Policy for the Empowerment of Women (2001) also commits to “affirmative action such as reservations/quotas, including in higher legislative bodies, will be considered whenever necessary on a time bound basis.”4

 

In 1967 the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. On 22nd September, 1971 national Committee on the Status of Women in India (CSWI) was appointed by the Ministry of Education and Social Welfare, Government of India. The Commission had Phulrenu Guha, Lotika Sarkar, Urmila Haksar and Vina Mazumdar as its Member Secretary. This move was a response to United Nation’s initiative regarding status of women report for International Women’s Year in 1975. The Committee in its report titled “Towards Equality: The Report of the Committee on the Status of Women in India” (1974-75) among many things “drew attention to some of the alarming facts with regard to employment, political participation, and health status of Indian women” (Desai, 1986: 295). Additionally, it “called attention to existing gender inequality…. in education, income, access to health care and political representation” (Kazenstein, 1989: 61). Mazumdar in her Memories of a rolling stone (2010) has pointed out how “Towards Equality” Report had also highlighted the issue of continued underrepresentation of women in the decision-making process of the country and states that the same can be seen as a “sufficient indicator of the reluctance of our society to accept the principle of equal representation for women” (2010: 76).

 

4.   73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts: Practicing Citizenship at Grassroots Level

 

The National Perspective Plan for Women (1988-2000) acknowledged the problem of women’s under-representation in political sphere and strongly recommended a 30 per cent reservation in the local governance i.e. panchayat, zila and in local municipal bodies. The government of India thus initiated affirmative action in this regard and mooted the 30 per cent reservation for women in these bodies. The 64th Constitutional Amendment in Parliament for Reservation in all Panchayats introduced in 1984 was defeated by united opposition. However, in 1993 the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments which aimed to give the rightful share to women in grassroots democracy were enacted. The 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act introduced not less than 33 per cent reservation for women in the Panchayat Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the rural areas. Similarly, the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act introduced similar reservation for women in Nagara Palika and Municipalities in towns and urban areas. As a result of which there are about one million elected women representatives in Panchayats and Municipal Bodies in India. However, one needs to note that such provision still does not exist at State and Central levels.

 

5. Women’s Reservation Bill (WRB): A Chequered Journey

 

One of the key feature of women’s movements in India was the continuous demand of reservation for women in State legislatures and the Parliament as “the inclusion of women in the political structure and their proportionate electoral participation will not only correct the existing gender gaps in the electoral arena and remove barriers and obstacles confronting them, but also bring gender issues to the forefront leading to women’s empowerment and advancement in the society in the long run” (Rai, 2011: 54). The National Commission for Women (NCW) along with several other women’s organizations revived a more systematic struggle for introduction and passing of Women’s Reservation Bill (WRB hereafter) in 1995.

 

Several organizations like National Alliance of Women, National Federation of Indian Women, Joint Women’s Program, All India Democratic Women’s Association among others jointly struggled for women’s equal political participation. The National Alliance of Women’s Political Manifesto (March 1996) included demand for “33 percent to 50 percent allocation of seats at all levels of decision-making bodies, from Gram Panchayat/Nagar Panchayat to the Lok Sabha, Cabinet, with priority to Women, SCs, STs, OBCs, urban poor and minorities” and “33 percent to 50 percent seats in political parties for women” among others.5 It was more in line with arguement given by Hasan (2002: 419) that “recognising women as a disadvantaged group…… reservations are necessary to expand equality of opportunity and to make real the formal equality given by the constitution”.

 

The demand for WRB was again visible in Women’s Charter for the 16th Lok Sabha Elections – 2014 (Thorat et. al., 2014). Regards the political representation of women, there still exists ‘Glass ceilings in State Cabinets’ (The Hindu, 16th February 2015). According to the column, just 39 of the 568 Ministers in State governments are women. Furthermore, with all State Assemblies put together, 360 of the country’s 4,120 MLAs – which equals to nearly nine per cent — are women. For instance, out of 30 women contestants, who fought the 2014 Assembly elections, only two have made it to the Jammu & Kashmir state Legislative Assembly. Twenty women (which is 7.2% of the State Assembly) were elected to Maharashtra’s legislative assembly in 2014 Vidhan Sabha elections held in 2014. The only solace is Haryana State Assembly wherein 13 women candidates out of 116 won in 2014 State Assembly Election. In the 2005 assembly poll, 60 women candidates contested and 11 got elected, while in 2009, 68 women candidates were in the fray and nine of them won. Table 1 presents the ‘disadvantaged’ representation of women Members of Parliament in House of the People (Lok Sabha) since independence.

 

Table 1: Representation of Women in House of the People (Lok Sabha) (1st-16th)

* Including one nominated member. ** appointed 2 members.

 

The less proportion of political representation and participation as evident in Table 1 can be also understood in terms of various problems faced by women in electoral arena both as the contestant as well as a campaigner. Basu (2010: 176) argues that “a major impediment to women’s effective exercise of power in the panchayats is the growing violence, harassment and corruption that pervade the political process. Violence and killings, especially against Dalit women, have been on the rise”. It has been found that “one of the key factors that determines their (women) high level of participation in casting their votes is women’s interest in politics” (Rai, 2011: 52). According to India Report, there are various constraints that prevent women from effective participation at local level.6 Most serious one is “deeply entrenched patriarchal political structures” (UNDP).7 According to Baseline Report (1998: 24), “……. main areas have been identified and presented as the disadvantages faced by women leading to their low levels of political participation: access to resources and information; awareness; control over resources and information; personal/familial support; socio-economic factors; organisational infrastructure; cultural barriers and law and policies.”

 

To correct the gender imbalance in the political arena, the 81st Constitutional Amendment Bill, popularly known as the Women’s Reservation Bill (hereafter referred to as WRB) was introduced in the Parliament on 12th September 1996 to insert 330A (1) having provision of 1/3 Seat to be reserved for women in the House of the people. As a consequence of which, 181 of the 543 seats in the Lok Sabha/ Lower House would be reserved for women which will be in addition to the 22.5 % reservation of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe candidates. The passing of Bill will be both a means and aim of empowerment of women and will lead to greater political participation by the women. The Joint Select Committee in its report on 9th December 1996 recommended that the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) reservation for women be considered by the government.

 

The proposed Bill lapsed due to the the dissolution of the 11th Lok Sabha. The Bill was again brought before the House in the 12th Lok Sabha on 14th July 1998, as the Constitution (84th Amendment) Bill (WRB), 1998. This also could not be materialised due to the dissolution of the 12th Lok Sabha. On 8th March 1999, several women’s organizations demonstrated for immediate passage of WRB. Subsequently, the Constitution (85th Amendment) Bill, 1999 was introduced on 23rd December 1999 but was shelved due to lack of support for it. Mahila Maha Adhiveshan organized by All India Democratic Women’s Association in New Delhi in 1999 demanded fair political representation. “No alternative to women’s quota Bill” became the rallying point of women’s groups in 2000. A new front ‘Joint Action Front for Woman’ emerged out of union of forty women’s organizations to further struggle for WRB. After its re-introduction on 5th May 2003, the passage of Women’s Reservation Bill was protested by many opposition political parties like Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Samajwadi Party (SP), Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and some sections of the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) as it had “no provision for reservations on a caste basis for Other Backward Classes (OBCs)” (Basu, 2010: 178).

 

It was only on 09th March 2010, as a result of continuous struggle by the women’s movements and women’s organizations, the Constitution (108th Amendment) Bill (WRB) was passed in the Rajya Sabha. Of the votes polled, 186 were in favour of the Bill and only one was against. In the 245-member House with an effective strength of 233, the Bill required support from at least 155 members and the United Progressive Alliance had the clear support of 165. In the present form, its major provisions are the Constitution (One Hundred and Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2008 seeks to reserve one-third of all seats for women in the Lok Sabha and the state legislative assemblies. The allocation of reserved seats shall be determined by such authority as prescribed by Parliament. One third of the total number of seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be reserved for women of those groups in the Lok Sabha and the legislative assemblies. Reserved seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in the state or union territory. Reservation of seats for women shall cease to exist 15 years after the commencement of this Amendment Act. Still, WRB has to see its successful passage in the Lok Sabha.

 

Impediments to the passage of WRB in spite of notable Women Parliamentarians can be understood through the paradoxical situation wherein “….. female participation at the higher levels of the political process seems to be confined to women from families with a political tradition …. except who enjoys reservation in both state and central legislatures” (Srinivas, 2002: 298). Similar arguments have been posed by Basu (2005: 31) for whom “the power of women MPs is generally very limited. Because they are expected to support the party line rather than formulate their own agendas, they have accorded low priority to issues concerning women.”8 Similarly, Rai (2011: 54) has pointed out that “Though women head a significant number of national and state level political parties as party leaders, their representation within the rank and file of prominent political parties is not in significant numbers” (2011: 54)

 

6. Locating Women’s Reservation Bill in Caste & Class Milieu

 

The debates surrounding WRB not only bring out the way patriarchy operates in Indian society but also brings the citizenship of women into question. As Kannabiran and Kannabiran (1997:197)    have argued that “the crux of the matter is that if women actually manage to push the legislation through what is at stake is (a) the political bases of male politicians across the board, and (b) the socio-political hegemonies in the existing social order”. Similarly, Menon (2004: 171)    has argued that “there are feminist (or at least, pro-women) arguments for and against reservations for women, and (implicitly or explicitly) caste-based arguments for and against.” Needless to say, such deliberations are also marked by the deep caste and class factionalism as well as chasm between urban and rural divide. The opposition to the proposed WRB does not comes from the ‘outside’ only but also has its fair share of ‘insiders’ i.e. academicians and activists engaged in the feminist thinking. The provisions of reserving the seats not taking into account the OBC population is one point. Additively, the rotation of the reserved constituencies every five years is also critiqued as it is “a major obstacle to the establishment of a nurturing relationship between elected women and their respective constituencies” (Lama-Rewal, 2001: 1435).

 

It is very interesting to note that there were very few protests and resistance to the successful passage of 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments in comparison to WRB. In this regard Sonalkar (1999: 27) has argued that as “the logic of decentralization of power does not apply to the issue of reservations for women in the national and state level elected bodies”; it is very difficult to convince the opposition to arrive at the consensus for successful passage of WRB. The introduction of WRB has led to debates across socio-political spectrum and “once again throws up questions of certain kinds of identity, specifically caste and religious identity, the intermeshing of gender identity with caste and religion and their articulation in the public realm, in the field of politics” (Raman, 2002). At the same time, it needs to be underlined that almost all the political parties have supported WRB right from 1996 onwards either including it in their Common Minimum Programme or Agendas for Election.

 

Menon has argued that “….. positions on the WRB throws into belief a set of inter-related questions about (a) ‘women’ as the subject of feminist politics, (b) citizenship in postcolonial democracies, and (c) the idea of political representation” (Menon, 2008: 97). Similarly, Research Paper by PRS Legislative Research titled Legislative Brief: The Constitution (One Hundred and Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2008 by Kaushiki Sanyal (2008) states that “The issue of reservation of seats for women in Parliament can be examined from three perspectives (a) whether the policy of reservation for women act as an effective instrument for empowerment (as stated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill); (b) whether alternate methods of increasing representation of women in Parliament are feasible; and (c) whether issues in the Bill need to be examined” (pp. 2). Gupta (2010) has briefly summarised the views both for and against WRB. Caste-based arguments against WRB take positions for and against reservations explicitly or implicitly in terms of caste as “the source of much of the opposition were the men from the ‘backward castes’. Their male leaders feared that reservation for women would give many of their seats to upper caste women” (Omvedt, 2005: 4749) and called for ‘quotas within quotas’ arguing that “since women are not a homogenous mass, quotas within quota could meaningfully include the more disadvantaged among women” (Kasturi, 2007: 336). Quota within quota broadly means sub-reservation for STs, SCs, OBCs and Minority communities within the 33 percent quota. However, the position of ‘quota within quota’ is seen by Hasan (2002: 421) as “the politics of competing identities of caste/community and women”.

 

Pointing out to the class dimension, WRB “has been questioned on the grounds of whether or not it would simply provide more room for elite women to gain seats or would encompass women from a range of backgrounds. Political leaders, even from supposedly liberal parties, and the media have tended to present the debate as one of ‘gender vs. caste’” (UNDP, 2010: 92). For Randall (2006), “explanations of the failure to pass the bill pinpoint a number of relevant factors, including problems with the quota proposal itself, divisions and elitism of the women’s movement and the distance between women politicians and women at large, and the simple reflexes of ensconced patriarchy” (Randall, 2006: 79).

 

7.  Women’s Reservation Bill: Barriers & Alternatives

 

In last two-three decades there is an argument outlining the ‘second democratic upsurge’ wherein “the huge gap that existed earlier between male and female turnout has been nearly closed now” (Yadav, 2010: 354). Similarly, the study done by Kapoor & Ravi (2014: 67) also reveals “a sharp decline in gender bias in voting over time, across all states, including the traditionally backward states.” Yet, such an upsurge still needs to be translated in women being elected as “most women continue to lack effective political power in parties and the state. Women’s access to power is still mediated by their relationship to male kin, and is often indirect and symbolic. Parties have done little to provide access to the networks and resources that would enable them to ascend the ranks of party hierarchies” (Basu, 2010: 1680). The same argument has been also forwarded by the Millennium Development Goals: India Country Report 2005 wherein it says that “although increasingly women have stood for elections and have got elected as members of State Legislative Assemblies and Parliament, the number of women Parliamentarians is not of expected level” (GOI, 2005: 45).

 

Under the broad rubric of civil and political rights, there has emerged an alternative to WRB proposed by Forum for Democratic Reforms.9 Forum for Democratic Reforms terms it as ‘An Alternative to the Government Bill for Women’s Reservation’ which Hasan (2002: 419) has termed as ‘pro-woman but against reservations’. Some of its provisions are i) to make it mandatory for every recognised political party to nominate women candidates for election in one-third of the constituencies; ii) Each party can choose where it wishes to nominate women candidates, duly taking local political and social factors into account; iii) Among seats reserved for SCs and STs also, one-third of the candidates nominated by recognised parties shall be women.10 In proposing this, the Forum argues that in this, any woman candidate will not be seen as a proxy of her political affiliation rather she will be contesting the election purely on her merit. This will increase her ‘acceptance’ in the larger body politic. However, the suggestion of amending Representation of the People Act (RPA) and making mandatory for political parties to give a fixed percentage of seats for women candidates was refused by several women’s organizations as women candidates might be fielded from ‘defeat-prone’ and ‘violence-marred’ constituencies.

 

Another alternative proposed in July 2003 intended to create dual-member constituencies in one-third of all electoral districts. In this process will increase the total number of seats in parliament by 181. This will result in election of one man and one woman from these particular constituencies. Nanivadekar argues that “the new proposal for converting one-third Lok Sabha constituencies in to dual-member constituencies assuring men their existing share of the pie seemingly holds a much-needed promise for resolving the dead lock over women’s reservation. The new proposal has yet another advantage: that of increasing the number of representatives without lifting the freeze on delimitation” (Nanivadekar, 2003: 4509-4510). Additively, creation of dual-member constituencies will not restrict the choice of the voters as they will have two candidates to vote for. This might lessen the heart-burn of the male candidates as they will not feel being discriminated. However, one of the strong critique of this system is that given the socio-political setup in Indian society, women candidates may become ‘second fiddle’ to the male candidates. However, the creation of dual-member constituencies will take time as due to the 84th Constitutional amendment the number of Parliamentary seats has been frozen until 2026. All-India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) in its ‘Memorandum From Women’s Organisations to the Prime Minister on Reservation for Women In Parliament & Legislatures’ (August, 2003) “strongly oppose the proposal of double member constituencies” on various grounds.11

 

8.  Conclusion

 

In India, the Women’s Reservation Bill clearly delineates the situation and scenario of Indian polity wherein active & informed women politic are very few in numbers. It leads to the crisis in the representation and recognition of women as a political group. It has been argued by the proponents of the Bill that it will make women more responsive towards their political rights and duties. The dynamics of citizenship is reflected not only in being a citizen of any nation-state but also actively participating in the political process through campaigning, contesting and voting in elections. Women’s Reservation Bill affirms that with the increased number of seats both at national and state levels we can witness more women in politics. However, their demands are stifled by arguments which are both patriarchal and caste-based. The State still being welfare in its nature needs to provide mechanisms for women’s political empowerment and thus ensuring safe passage of WRB at the earliest.

you can view video on Citizenship, Political Representation and Reservation for Women

 

References

  • Basu, A 2010, ‘Gender and Politics’, in Niraja Gopal Jayal & Pratap Bhanu Mehta (eds), The Oxford Companion to Politics in India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp. 168-180.
  • Baseline Report 1998, Women and Political Participation in India. International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific (IWRAW Asia Pacific) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
  • Chatterjee, B 1980, ‘A Century of Social reform for Women’s Status’, The Indian Journal of Social Work, October, XLI(3): 241-254.
  • Chaudhuri, Maitrayee 2004, ‘The Indian Women’s Movement’, in Maitrayee Chaudhuri (ed), Feminism in India. Kali for Women & Women Unlimited, New Delhi, pp. 117-133.
  • Desai, Neera 1986, ‘From Articulation to Accommodation: Women’s Movement in India’, in Leela Dube, E. Leacock & S. Ardener (eds), Visibility and Power: Essays on Women in Society and Development. Oxford University Press, Delhi, pp. 287-299.
  • Government of India 2005, Millennium Development Goals: India Country Report, Central Statistical           Organization,          New            Delhi.            [Online]            Available            at: http://www.unicef.org/india/ssd04_2005_final.pdf
  • Gupta, Vaijayanti 2010, ‘Women ’s reservation Bill – the 2010 story’, India Together, 30 th March, [Online]. Available at: http://www.indiatogether.org/2010/mar/wom-reserve.htm
  • Hasan, Zoya ‘The ‘Politics of Presence’ and Legislative Reservations for Women ’, in Zoya Hasan, E. Sridharan & R. Sudarshan (ed), India’s Living Constitution: Ideas, Practices, Controversies, Permanent Black, Delhi, pp. 405-427.
  • Hindu, The. 2015. ‘Glass ceilings in State Cabinets’. 16th February.
  • John, Mary E. 2000, ‘Alternate Modernities? Reservations and Women’s Movement in 20th Century India’, Economic and Political Weekly, October 21 – November 3, 35(43/44): 3822-3829.
  • Jones, D.M. 1996, ‘Nationalism and Women’s Liberation: The Cases of India and China’, History Teacher, February, 29(2): 145-154.
  • Kannabiran, Vasanth & Kalpana Kannabiran 1997, ‘From Social action to Political Action: Women and the 81st Amendment’, Economic and Political Weekly, February 1-7, 32(5): 196-197.
  • Kapoor, Mudit & Shamika Ravi. 2014. “Women Voters in Indian Democracy: A Silent Revolution”, Economic and Political Weekly, XLIX(12): 63-67.
  • Kasturi, Leela 2004, ‘Report of the Sub-Committee, Women’s Role in Planned Economy, National Planning Committee Series (1947)’, in Maitrayee Chaudhuri (ed), Feminism in India, Kali for Women & Women Unlimited, New Delhi, pp. 136-155.
  • Kasturi, Leela 2007, ‘Greater Political Representation for Women’, in Rehana Ghadially (ed), Urban Women in Contemporary India: A Reader, Sage, New Delhi, pp. 327-339.
  • Kazenstein, M.F. 1989, ‘Organizing Against Violence: Strategies of the Indian Women’s Movement’, Pacific Affairs, Spring, 62(1): 53-71.
  • Kishwar, Madhu 1996, ‘Women in Politics: Beyond Quotas’, Economic and Political Weekly, 31(3): 2867-74.
  • Kumar, Radha 2005, ‘The Main Point of the Women’s Movement was to Gender Human Development’.                        January.                      [Online]                         Available                        at: http://www.infochangeindia.org/devp_dictionary_08.jsp
  • Lama-Rewal, Tawa 2001, ‘Fluctuating, Ambivalent Legitimacy of Gender as a Political Category’, Economic and Political Weekly, April 28 – May 04, 36(17): 1435-1440.
  • Leydet, Dominique. 2014. ‘Citizenship’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/citizenship/>.
  • Mazumdar, Vina. 2010. Memories of a rolling stone. New Delhi: Zubaan.
  • Menon, Nivedita 2004, Recovering Subversion: Feminist Politics Beyond the Law, Permanent Black, Chicago.
  • Menon, Nivedita 2008, ‘The Elusive ‘Woman’: Feminism and the Women’s Reservation Bill’, in Mary E. John (ed), Women’s Studies in India: A Reader. Penguin Books, New Delhi, pp. 91-97.
  • Nanivadekar, Medha 2003, ‘Dual-Member Constituencies: Resolving Deadlock on Women’s Reservation’, Economic and Political Weekly, October 25-31, 38(43): 4506-4510.
  • Narayan, J. Prakash, Madhu Kishwar et al. 2000, ‘Enhancing Women’s Representation in the Legislatures: An Alternative to the Government Bill for Women’s Reservation’, Manushi, January-February, no. 116.
  • Omvedt, Gail. 2005, ‘Women in Governance in South Asia’, Economic and Political Weekly, October 29 – November 4, 40(44/45): 4746-4752.
  • Rai, Praveen 2011, ‘Electoral Participation of Women in India: Key Determinants and Barriers’, Economic and Political Weekly, 46(3): 47-55.
  • Raman, Vasanthi. 2002, ‘The Implementation of Quotas for Women: The Indian Experience’, Paper prepared for workshop hosted by International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) on 25 September 2002 in Jakarta, Indonesia.
  • Randall, Vicky. 2006, ‘Legislative Gender Quotas and Indian Exceptionalism: The Travails of the Women’s Reservation Bill’, Comparative Politics, October, 39(1): 63-82.
  • Sanyal, Kaushiki. 2008. Legislative Brief: The Constitution (One Hundred and Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2008. Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.
  • Sen, Amartya. 1995, Inequality Reexamined, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
  • Sen, Ilina 2004, ‘Women’ s Politics in India’, in Maitrayee Chaudhuri (ed), Feminism in India, Kali for Women & Women Unlimited, New Delhi, pp. 187-210.
  • Sonalkar, Wandana. 1999, ‘An Agenda for Gender Politics’, Economic and Political Weekly, January 2-15, 34(1/2): 24-29.
  • Srinivas, M. N. 2002, ‘The Changing position of Indian Women’, in M.N. Srinivas (ed), Collected Essays. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp. 279-300.
  • Thorat, Vimal et. al. 2014. “Women’ s Charter for the 16th Lok Sabha Elections – 2014”, Economic and Political Weekly, [Web Exclusives], March 15, XLIX(11).
  • United Nations Development Programme 2010, Power, Voice and Rights: A Turning Point for Gender Equality in Asia and the Pacific, Macmillan Publishers India Ltd., New Delhi.
  • Yadav, Yogendra 2010, ‘Representation’, in Niraja Gopal Jayal & Pratap Bhanu Mehta (eds), The Oxford Companion to Politics in India. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, pp. 347-360.