Revisit the policy on women’s participation in elections

Fifteen seats were reserved for women in parliament in 1972. Gradually, this number increased, and by 2011 it had risen to 50. It took nearly 39 years for the number to grow from 15 to 50, despite the fact that women make up half of Bangladesh’s population.

Since independence, women’s participation in the labour market has increased. Yet many women working in the informal sector still do not receive proper wages, let alone the national minimum wage. Amid the fanfare over health improvements, women’s education remains buried at the bottom of priorities. In these circumstances, women continue to struggle, fighting on the frontlines, only to be forced into the back seat when it comes to politics.

Decades of experience have shown that when women’s reserved seats in parliament are allocated based on the number of seats won by political parties, the nominees tend to be the wives, daughters, or political favourites of party leaders. In many cases, large sums of money change hands to secure a nomination. This system fails to ensure genuine representation of women in parliament. Therefore, direct elections for women are necessary.

However, in the current unequal social, political, and economic system, suddenly making women compete directly with male candidates will not ensure fairness. Initially, elections should be held for a number of reserved seats exclusively for women, which would pave the way for their participation in politics. Gradually, women’s presence in general seats would increase, eventually making reserved seats unnecessary.

Following the widespread participation of women in the recent mass uprising, women across the country have become vocal about their role in post-uprising politics. Yet, one after another, we have also seen women withdrawing from the political arena. Their stories of leaving politics dishearten us, just as the use of social humiliation as a weapon to discourage women from participating in politics angers us. At such a time, we saw that the Consensus Commission failed to reach an agreement with political parties over women’s participation in elections.

After discussions with political parties, the Consensus Commission announced on 31 July that most parties had given a “note of dissent” to the proposal of increasing the number of reserved seats to 100. As a result, the commission decided to keep the number of reserved women’s seats at 50 and urged political parties to nominate women in at least 5 per cent of the 300 general seats.

Let us now look at what three different reform commissions have proposed on women’s political participation. The Constitutional Reform Commission has proposed a 400-member lower house, with 300 members directly elected from single regional constituencies and an additional 100 women directly elected from 100 designated constituencies nationwide, contested only by female candidates.

The Electoral System Reform Commission has recommended increasing the number of seats in the lower house by 100 to make a total of 400, with the 100 women’s seats filled through a rotating system of direct elections, enabling women to be elected on merit from specific constituencies and ending dual representation.

The Women’s Reform Commission has proposed increasing the number of parliamentary seats to 600, with each constituency having one general seat and one directly elected reserved seat for women. If a decision is made to create an upper house, seats would be allocated to political parties based on the proportion of votes they receive, with nominations alternated between men and women under a zipper system.

The proposal also includes reserving at least five seats in the upper house for women’s movement representatives. To ensure women’s participation in political parties, there must be democratic practices within the parties themselves.

It should also be stipulated that any party failing to comply with the provisions of the Representation of the People Order will be disqualified from contesting the next national election.

It is notable that the male-dominated Constitutional Reform Commission and Electoral System Reform Commission both proposed direct elections for 100 reserved women’s seats. The Election Commission also suggested filling these 100 seats through a rotating system of direct elections. While the Constitutional Reform Commission proposed direct elections from 100 designated constituencies, it did not specify how these constituencies would be determined.

In contrast, the Women’s Reform Commission proposed direct elections for 300 reserved seats for women. However, when these proposals were brought for consideration, the Women’s Reform Commission was no longer part of the process. Within the Consensus Commission, what remained was a “boys’ club.”

Among the five heads of the reform commissions who formed the Consensus Commission, there was not a single woman. While those present may have been sensitive to women’s issues, the fact remains that there was no woman in the room to make decisions in women’s favour. On the other side, the political parties they met with also had very few women present.

The Consensus Commission began discussions based on three different sets of proposals that had no prior agreement. Political parties then brought their own interests into the mix. The discussion turned to questions of implementation, with each party bringing its own concerns. It was inevitable that consensus would not be reached.

On matters such as increasing the number of seats, holding direct elections, and mandating political parties to nominate women candidates, parties showed little willingness to move from their entrenched positions. Recognising that such tendencies would persist, some decisions should have been based not solely on party consensus, but also on proportional representation of women according to population.

* Moshahida Sultana, Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, University of Dhaka

* The opinions expressed are the writer’s own

* The op-ed, originally published in the print edition of Prothom Alo, has been rewritten in English by Farjana Liakat