The Hindu, Sunday Magazine, March 1, 2015
On February 11, a day after the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)
thundered into power in Delhi, early morning walkers noted something
interesting. An elderly man, dressed in kurta pajama, a garland of
marigolds around his neck, a Gandhi topi and muffler and holding a jhadoo was
walking in the park. He was beaming. Most who saw him smiled, laughed,
shook his hand. This was in Mumbai, many miles from Delhi.
The
Delhi victory sent out waves of optimism around the country even if
this scenario will not be replicated elsewhere, at least not in the
immediate future. Most people accept that AAP should be given a fair
chance this time to demonstrate how different it is from other parties.
Yet,
even as I grant that, I still have a grouse. Thirteen months ago, when
AAP came to power for a brief period, I had asked why it did not
consider calling itself the Aam Aurat Party, or even the Aam Insaan
Party. The point I was trying to make then was that aadmi might
mean every person but its use is also a reflection of the automatic
assumption that terms like ‘man’ or ‘aadmi’ automatically include women.
Perhaps
this question is now redundant. Yet, we must still ask why women
continue to be absent in AAP. Where are the women, Arvind Kejriwal? How
is it that in your cabinet, even if it is small, you could not find
place for even one woman? Is making a woman the deputy speaker an
adequate token towards gender balance? I think not.
The
need to strive for gender balance — still a very long way off in most
institutions — is because it reminds us that one half of humanity
deserves representation. AAP could argue that it was so focused on
winning as many seats as it could that it gave tickets to people who
would win rather than ensuring that enough women got tickets. If that is
the argument, then how can we assume that AAP represents ‘alternative
politics’ as the wise men of the party continue to proclaim? Is this not
the excuse used by most mainstream political parties to deny tickets to
women?
In this respect, AAP unfortunately does not
represent any kind of alternative as this is virtually the norm. Apart
from Delhi, seven other states have no women in their cabinets —
Telangana, Puducherry, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram and
Arunachal Pradesh. Nagaland, Puducherry and Mizoram further distinguish
themselves by not having a single woman member of the legislative
assembly.
Not surprisingly, the three states with
women chief ministers — Rajasthan, West Bengal and Gujarat — have a
higher percentage of women in the cabinet. The excuse that there are not
enough women to choose from for the cabinet is also not sustainable
because even states with a higher percentage of women MLAs do not
necessarily have more women in the cabinet.
In the
final analysis, does any of this really matter? Is it not more important
to ensure that the people we elect — men or women — are not corrupt and
are sincere in their commitment to ‘serve the people’, a promise that
so ready rolls off their tongues during election campaigns? Yes, and No.
Yes, because that is stating the obvious. But No because if we are a
representative democracy, then all sections, including women, should
play a part in governance. If first time male MLAs, or even MPs, can
become cabinet ministers, what stops women from being appointed to such
positions? If the attempt to have a caste balance, for instance, ensures
that some men get cabinet posts, why not women?
Actually,
there are no excuses. The exclusion of women is not always deliberate;
it is unthinking. It happens because those who decide, usually men, fail
to accept that the inherent disadvantage that the majority of women
face in entering politics needs to be compensated by some amount of
preferential treatment.
In time, perhaps this kind of
preference will not be needed. In many countries around the world,
women are now making their way as equal partners and do not need a
leg-up. But in many instances, the initial space created did help.
So
to come back to Arvind Kejriwal and AAP in Delhi, I accept that the
huge mandate they got is a sign of people wanting change, and perhaps
even a different type of politics.
Having said that, I
still think if AAP really wants to pioneer an ‘alternative politics’ it
cannot overlook the importance of gender. Making promises to deal with
women’s safety, something that all parties do, does not address the
issue. The party needs to acknowledge that a gender perspective is
needed in all aspects of governance, that inclusive politics means
making an effort to include women in decision-making, and that the
perspective such an inclusion facilitates is good in the long run for
everybody, women and men.
No comments:
Post a Comment