Panchayati Raj: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
Education criteria for elections
SC upholds minimum education criteria s
The Times of India, Dec 11 2015
AmitAnand Choudhary SC upholds law fixing edu criteria for panchayat polls
In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the Haryana government's law mandating minimum educational qualifications as a prerequisite for contestants in panchayat polls. A bench of Justices J Chelameswar and Abhay Manohar Sapre said education is an essential tool for a bright future and plays an important role in the development and progress of the country and elected representatives must have some educational background to enable them to effectively carry out their duties.
This is the first time that the court has upheld that minimum educational criteria can be fixed for candidates and illiterates debarred from the electoral arena. The order validates a similar law passed by Rajasthan, the first state to do so. The apex court rejected a bunch of petitions filed by some women contestants challenging the validity of the law mandating educational qualifications -Class 10 pass for men, Class 8 pass for women and Class 5 pass for Dalits -for contesting panchayat polls Haryana. The law also disqualifies those who don't have toilets at home and had not repaid agricultural loans or defaulted on electricity bills and other arrears to government authorities. The court upheld the law despite noting that a major chunk of the people would be disqualified from contesting the polls. More than 83% of rural wom en above 20 years and almost 67% of women in urban areas are likely to be disqualified under the law while 68% of the SC women and 41% of SC men would be ineligi ble. In a big boost to the NDA's sanitation drive, it also ruled that Haryana's decision to bar candidates without toilets at home from contesting panchayat polls is a “good decision“.
A critique of the Rajasthan and Haryana laws
The Times of India Dec 20 2015
Rema Nagarajan
About 90% of women and 95% of Dalit and tribal women in Rajasthan can't become sarpanch or zilla parishad members as they are not educated enough. And yet they're eligible to become an MP, minister or even PM.
Haryana has a similar law that's been upheld by SC I magine a law that bars over 94% of women of eligible age from contesting a local election in a democracy . Or, one that bars almost 97% of Dalit and tribal women from contesting for a public office.Strange as that sounds, that's exactly what a law passed by the Rajasthan government has done.Similarly , in Haryana, the government has passed a law that has made almost 70% of its women unfit to contest. And this law has been upheld by the highest court.
If this large a proportion of the population being excluded from contesting for the posts of sarpanch, or zilla parishad or panchayat samiti posts seems alarming in a democracy , then a closer look at the data from the 2011 census on age group-wise educational qualifications for different communities in each state reveals an even more worrying picture of extreme exclusion of Dalits and tribals, especially women in these communities, who are doubly damned. The biggest irony is that every one of those being excluded from these local elections would be eligible to be a Member of Parliament or even the Prime Minister of the country as no educational qualifications are necessary for these posts.
Anyone contesting for these panchayat posts has to be above 21 years. But only a small fraction of those contesting these elections would be in their 20s, especially among women. Across all communities, the higher the age group, the lower the average educational level and, hence, the lower the proportion of people who can contest.
Thus, in Haryana, among all women above 20 years, 68.4% would be ineligible. However, if we were to consider women aged 40 or more, over 90% would be excluded including among Dalit women, for whom the educational cut-off is lower -class 5 -against the class 8 cut-off for others. Among Dalit men, for whom the educational requirement is class 8 pass, 70% of those aged 35 or more would be excluded.
In Rajasthan, the picture is even more dismal in the non-scheduled areas. (In scheduled areas, the minimum qualification to contest for a sarpanch's post is lower, at class 5.) To contest for a zilla parishad post, one has to have a minimum qualification of class 10 pass. That excludes 86% of the overall population and 94% of women in the state.Among men and women aged 50 and above, 90% and 99% respectively, are now barred.
When it comes to the post of sarpanch, the educational cut off is completion of middle school or class 8 pass in Rajasthan. This means that three-quarters of the men aged 40 and above and over 95% of women aged 35 or more are disqualified. Among Dalits, this criteria leads to exclusion of 99% of 40-plus women and over 80% of 35-plus men. In rural Rajasthan, the literacy rate is about 76% for men and 46% for women. Literacy being merely the ability to read and write, the proportion of those who have completed primary or any higher level is extremely low, especially among those over 20 years of age.
Several activists point out the unfairness of penalizing an older generation that had little or no access to education, adding that it is their great knowledge and experience of local needs and circumstances that has made so many of them such outstanding perform ers in their panchayats.
“Our case challenging the con stitutionality of the Rajasthan law is pending in the high court. Bu with the Supreme Court judgment in the Haryana law case, we have lost all hope. In one fell swoop, large sections of the population have been put out of the race.Their democratic rights are being attacked and this will spread to other states. The worst affected will be women and other weaker sections. Since the right to educa tion came up, has the government managed to fulfil its obligation? If they did not, what right do they have to bring in such a law?“ asked Satish Kumar of the Centre for Dalit Rights in Rajasthan.
Incidentally , the level of education is just one of the criteria for exclusion in the two states. They have additional criteria for exclusion such as a two-child norm, functional toilet at home, and no pending power bills or loan payments. If these criteria are also taken into account, the exclusions would be even bigger and would be from among the poorest and most disadvantaged communities.
While Panchayati Raj was supposed to be an exercise in deepening democracy, these extremely high exclusions at the grassroots, especially of the most disadvantaged, seem to be moving rural Haryana and Rajasthan towards a plutocracy , defined as a society ruled or controlled by a small minority of the wealthiest citizens.
Women: representation of
The position in 2008, 2016
From: Radheshyam Jadhav, 25 yrs later, route from panchayat to Parliament still blocked by patriarchy, December 10, 2017: The Times of India
On Women’s Day in 2017, Ramilaben Gamit, a member of the Taparwada gram panchayat in Gujarat’s Tapi district, received the Swachh Shakti Puraskar from PM Narendra Modi for making her village free of open defecation. So when the election dates were announced, she was sure a party would offer a ticket but nothing came her way.
Twenty-five years after Constitutional amendments were passed to reserve one-third seats for women in panchayati raj institutions in December 1992, data shows it’s unlikely that women like Ramilaben will ever fulfill their dream of making it big in politics. Most of the 13.45 lakh elected women representatives in panchayati raj institutions, comprising 46% of the elected grassroots leaders, acquit themselves well as leaders, but never get to state assemblies or Parliament. In fact, only 11 of 64 women MPs have worked at the grassroots level in the panchayat system. A study commissioned by the Maharashtra election commission has recommended guidelines directing parties to give 5% of the tickets in an unreserved constituency to women.
The study, conducted last year by Pune-based Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, found that 86% of women said they contested zilla parishad or panchayat samiti elections only because the seat was reserved for a woman. At the same time, 73% said they wanted to contest a second time. The survey found proxy women members who contested because they belonged to a political family, but there were also women without a political background who wanted to make it big in politics, said Manasi Phadke, the project coordinator. The panchayati raj ministry’s 2008 study drew similar conclusions.
It said that women representatives had low prior association with politics, and for most women the act of contesting an election signalled their entry into active politics. This study found that 90% of women candidates contested panchayat polls at the ward level for the first time, only 7.9% jumped into the fray a second term, and a mere 1.4% contested for a third term.
Women:'Reservation’ for
Tamil Nadu: 50% quota
The Times of India, Feb 21, 2016
Jaya's parting gift to women: 50% seats in all local bodies
B Sivakumar
Focusing on women empowerment ahead of the state election, the Tamil Nadu assembly passed two bills guaranteeing 50% reservation for women in all local bodies in the state. The bills were introduced to make necessary amendments to Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 and various City Municipal Corporation Acts to increase reservation for women from the present 33%. The state is slated to have local body polls in October this year. Tamil Nadu, which has a relatively better sex ratio of 995 women for 1,000 men, is the 17th state to provide 50% representation for women in local bodies. Some states have provided 50% reservation for women in rural local bodies, but not in urban bodies like municipalities and corporations. The Centre is considering an amendment to the Panchayati Raj Act to introduce 50% reservation for women in all urban local bodies across the country . Members of key opposition parties - DMDK, DMK and PMK - were not present in the House when the legislation was put to vote. The parties have been boycotting the session protesting against what they call denial of democratic rights to opposition members to express their views in the assembly .
