Archives

Many disparities in society require intervention and the representation of women in Parliament, Provincial Councils and local government bodies clearly one of them. In a society in which approximately 50 per cent of the population is female 83 per cent of the women are literate, and approximately 49 per cent of all university entrants are women, there is a need for a direct intervention to redress this huge disparity in political representation.

Gender equity will not necessarily follow from statistical parity. Yet statistical disparity - especially a disparity that is this large - calls for some degree of intervention. Whatever the reason, the reality is that women have been unable to enter mainstream political life in a significant way despite fifty years of self-government and 70 years of universal franchise.

When the Youth Commission recommended the adoption of youth quotas at local government level they observed that this would lend greater credibility to the local bodies. The Youth Commission also observed that it would give the youth confidence that the democratic process is open and that they can participate in the processes of decision making in society.

These factors apply equally in the case of women. It would enhance the credibility of the electoral process by drawing representation from a segment of society that previously had little representation in political institutions. It would also provide women with the opportunity to participate more effectively in political decision making.

For democracy to be truly representative it is important that all groups have an input into the formulation of laws and policies. Law and policies must draw inspiration from a variety of experiences, including the experiences of women. The inclusion of women's experiences into law and policy making will lead to solutions which benefit the whole of society.

Democracy is not simply about majority rule. It is fundamentally about representation, and the representation and participation of diverse interests. Where a system of governance is unable to generate significant numbers from one of its biggest social groups, then clearly that system of governance is seriously flawed.

Sri Lanka's proportional representation system is better suited for the introduction of quotas than the Indian- first-past-the-post system. Where the Indian proposal, if it comes through, will see 'women only' constituencies and women pitted against women, the proportional representation system allows for women to contest with men in the same constituency and avoids some of the paternalism that the Indian bill exhibits.

The system of quotas for women is not without dangers. There is the possibility that the women nominated by parties may just be token nominations. This is sometimes the case with the youth quota at the local government elections.

There is also the danger that the women who are nominated may be the wives, mothers and sisters of existing or pervious candidates with few opportunities for 'fresh blood'. There is no way of preventing 'puppets' or what Indian activist Maduhu Kishwar calls 'proxies' from being elected to Parliament. Yet this danger is there whether the candidate is a man or a woman. At the same time a system of quotas for women will also provide an opportunity for well informed, articulate and committed women members to emerge.

Most people react negatively to the application of quotas or reservations. People strongly resist any departure from the 'merit' or 'most efficient' principle, even if these standards are not applied in practice and even though the playing field may not be even. To most, equality means identical treatment. A concept of substantive equality founded on the idea of disadvantage has not captured the popular imagination.

Many are also confused or ambivalent about quotas. A leading women's activist was candid when she told a public seminar in February 2000 that she was 'confused' about the relevance of quotas for women in politics.

Quotas have caused the most controversy in employment and university admissions - where competition for places is severe. In the Sri Lankan context, where the state has a monopoly over university education and only about 20 per cent of those who qualify get admission, the tensions have been severe.

It has been argued by those who oppose quotas that merit should be the sole criterion in the case of university admissions and public sector employment. (Merit in some cases may include seniority as in the case of promotions within the public sector). Merit would ensure that the 'best' candidate gets the job or the university admission.

This argument is harder to make in the case of quotas for political institutions.

It is harder to argue that the current system necessarily attracts the 'best' or 'most equipped' for political life. On the contrary there is a growing consensus that the quality of political life, politicians and political debate, has dropped appreciably in the fifty years of independence. The introduction of a 'national list' for parliamentary elections was seen as a way of attracting those persons who had a contribution to make to political life, but who were unwilling to get involved in the hustle, intrigue and now violence, of an election.

The rising levels of violence associated with elections, and the resources that it now takes to contest an election, are obstacles to attracting 'the best'.

In the case of women and governance, merit and reservations are not antithetical. Merit in the case of governance is closely connected with the issue of who should be in government.

If government is to be representative of all groups in society then a scheme of reservations which brings into government a group which had previously been unrepresented is enhancing the value of merit.

The introduction of quotas for women raises a fundamental and difficult issue. If one accepts that under represented groups should have an increased share of the decision making processes, then where should one draw the line? What about other under represented groups such as plantation Tamils and Muslims? What criteria should one adopt in defining a group? And would statistical disparities be sufficient to show that groups are under represented or discriminated against?

In the case of women though, the statistical disparity is so huge that the inequity of the existing system is startling. Here is a group that constitutes 50 per cent of the population but has less than 5 per cent of the seats at all levels of political participation. Few groups, defined with such precision, can lay claim to such a monumental imbalance.

An excerpt of the book "Gender and Politics in Sri Lanka - preferring women' by Mario Gomez and Shyamala Gomez. This is a publication of Shakti Gender Equity Project by Canadian International Development Agency.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager