Moa Jamir
At the height of debates over the Nagaland Municipal Bill, 2001 (amended in August 24, 2006) inserting a provision for 33% reservation of seats for women in Municipal and Town Councils, a well-known individual directed a series of incongruous posers justifying his opposition to reservation by referring to biblical, customary and physical endowments.
Devoid of any rationality, the posers contained a series of misplaced notions on reservation. It, however, must have found consonance with others, including organisations (male-centric). The Nagaland State Assembly on September 22, 2012 by a voice vote rejected the 33% reservation of seats for women (Part IX (A) of the Constitution of India) on the ground that it infringed upon the Article 371(A) of the Constitution of India. Since then, the JACWR (Joint Action Committee of Women Reservation) has taken a legal recourse and the matter is still in court and sub judice.
Against this backdrop, the 2016 International Women’s Day celebrated under the theme "Pledge for Parity" and calling for providing global opportunity for men and women to accelerate gender parity has brought the issue back into the public domain. All sides need to objectively dialogue to arrive at any rational decision.
One side has sought Constitutional refuge by arguing that the reservation is against the time tested traditions and culture of the Nagas and would be detrimental as “it would amount to erasing our age old ethics, values and traditions and also impinge upon the democratic rights of men.” This stems from a misplaced notion and a patronizing assumption that the egalitarian Naga society has always protected, loved and cared for the women, thus negating their foray into the political arena.
On the other hand, the argument justifying women reservation cites “historical suppression” as the cause for marginalizing women from political decision making processes. However, this position can be seen as misrepresenting the historical reality of society at diverse points of time. Furthermore, the argument that women being equally literate as men and therefore should be given opportunity is incorrect. Literacy does not necessarily translate into political capabilities.
But if we rationally analyze the matter, there is only one reality - that women are not represented in decision making and political arena and the existing mechanism does not provide any platform to correct this reality. Consequently, reservation is justified, pertinent and should be adopted as a measure to rectify the same.
None can negate the fact that the reservation policy has had a positive impact in progress of a marginalized section of a society. In an unbiased environment, women have time and again proven themselves to be far more capable. A state’s policy enabling such mechanism is therefore imperative to facilitate and allow them to participate positively in the progress of the society.
Culture is not simply reliving the past and reducing it to a static entity. It should evolve pragmatically in tune with time. Falling back on culture and tradition to justify a recognised deficiency is simply untenable. The contradictions and dichotomy of this argument is conspicuous if we compare our present society to time past realities.
Finally, the debate on reservation and women 'empowerment' should not be seen as an aggressive fight over dominance between two competing entity, but as a process of creating an enabling platform for the making of a progressive, vibrant and inclusive society. Let us not allow our worldviews to be blurred by biased assumptions, but sharpen it on reasoning and pragmatic reality.
For any comment, drop a line to moajamir@live.com
