Globally women MPs on the rise, but not in India

July 8, 2012

fair_MP

New Delhi, July 8: Here's one area where India is at variance with the global trend. While worldwide more women are calling the shots in parliaments and shaping laws, in India the growth in the number of women legislators has virtually been flat. Here are the numbers. Globally, there has been a 75% increase in the number of women parliamentarians in the seven-year period between 1995 and 2012. But India, where our male MPs have doggedly nixed all attempts to bring in women's reservation in Parliament, in a 11-year period between 1991 and 2012 their presence has gone up marginally from 9.7% to 10.96%.

According to the Millennium Development Goals Report 2012, released by the United Nations, while 11.3% of seats were held by women worldwide in 1995, the number had increased to 19.7% by 2012. Despite 15 general elections, the number in India is much lower.

As on November 2011, India, the world's largest democracy, has only 60 women representatives out of 544 members in Lok Sabha while there are 26 female MPs in the 241-member Rajya Sabha. According to data released by Inter parliamentary union (IPU), India ranks 98 in the world for proportion of parliament seats held by women.

UN's MDG Goals report adds that although the number of countries with women as head of government, head of state or both has more than doubled since 2005, in absolute terms the number - 17 - remains rather modest. The percentage of women ministers worldwide also improved only slightly, from 14.2% in 2005 to 16.7% in 2012.

Across the world, the most common ministerial portfolios held by women ministers have tended to be in social affairs, family and youth, women's affairs or education. According to the UN, the use of special measures or quotas were an important factor helping women to enter parliaments. Of the 59 countries that held elections in 2011 for lower or single houses, 26 had implemented special measures favouring women, and electoral quotas were used in 17. Where quotas were used, women took 27.4% of seats as opposed to 15.7% of seats in countries without any form of quota.

UN says "While trends point to an increase in women's parliamentary representation, the rate of representation remains low overall and progress is spread unevenly. The highest level is found in the Nordic countries, especially following recent gains in Denmark and Finland. Among developing regions, Latin America and the Caribbean continue to rank the highest, with a 23% average." Sub-Saharan Africa holds the second-highest regional ranking in women's representation in parliaments, 20%. Progress here was sustained thanks to the existence of quotas — mainly reserved seats. In Asia, women made gains in only one country — Thailand in the 2011 elections.

More than a third of the countries with 30% or more women MPs are in transition from conflict. Women are elected in greater numbers in systems of proportional representation than they are in majority electoral systems. The data collected on elections in 2011 indicates that women were not vying for seats in sufficient numbers to make a large electoral impact. But notably, once they run for office, they are elected at about the same rate as men.

Times View

The gender skew in Indian Parliament is something that needs to be corrected. Quite clearly, the figures here build a strong case for reservation for women in legislatures. Parties say that they don't put up more women as candidates because their 'winnability' is poor. This is a specious argument. First, if it were true, it actually makes the case for reservation stronger since that would ensure that their winnability is assured in at least one-third of the constituencies. Secondly, how does that account for the fact that even in the Rajya Sabha, where only MLAs and not the general public vote, women constitute only about 10%?


Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 30,2020

Seventy-seven per cent children below five years of age in Jammu and Kashmir were not able to access basic healthcare services like immunisation during the lockdown imposed to curb the spread of COVID-19, CRY said on Monday citing a study.

The 'Rapid Online Perception Study about the Effects of COVID-19 on Children' was conducted during the first and second phases of the lockdown based on responses of parents and primary caregivers from all across the country, including Jammu and Kashmir, the NGO said in a statement.

It said a total of 387 respondents from Jammu and Kashmir participated in the study.

"Seventy-seven per cent children of age 0-5 years were not able to access basic healthcare services such as immunisation during lockdown - necessarily imposed to curb the spread of COVID-19 pandemic in Jammu and Kashmir," Child Rights and You (CRY) said.

It said as immunisation programmes witnessed a major setback during the lockdown across the country, the results of the survey across 23 states and Union Territories found nearly 50 per cent of parents with children below five years of age unable to access immunisation services.

"Worryingly, the figure was considerably high in Jammu and Kashmir with 77.14 per cent children below five years unable to get immunisation services," it added.

According to the study, in Jammu and Kashmir, nearly 35 per cent of the respondents said their children did not receive medical help during the lockdown, resulting in difficulties to cope with their children's illnesses and health hazards.

The study also talks about more systemic arrangements and logistical preparedness to ensure that children with no or compromised digital reach are not deprived from their Right to Education.

With online classes introduced as a substitute of schools during the lockdown, access to education for children remained a major issue of concern, as many of them, especially the ones from marginalised and financially poorer backgrounds found it difficult without smartphones and internet access.

The survey's findings revealed that nationally only 41 per cent households with children of school-going age could access online classes on a regular basis.

"Almost 90 per cent parents and primary caregivers reported that the lockdown has increased the screen time of their child to great or some extent. About half of the households recorded an increase of children's exposure to online activities during lockdown," it said.

The NGO said around 76 per cent parents agreed that they could keep a watch of their children's online activity to some extent.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 10,2020

New Delhi, Jan 10: The Supreme Court while hearing petitions challenging restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir on Friday stated that the right to access the internet is a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

"It is no doubt that freedom of speech is an essential tool in a democratic setup. The freedom of Internet access is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution," a two-judge bench headed by Justice N V Ramana stated while reading out the judgment.

The top court said that Kashmir has seen a lot of violence and that it will try to maintain a balance between human rights and freedoms with the issue of security.

It also directed the Jammu and Kashmir administration to review the restrictive orders imposed in the region within a week. “The citizens should be provided highest security and liberty,” the apex court added.

The top court made observations and issued directions while pronouncing the verdict on a number of petitions challenging the restrictions and internet blockade imposed in Jammu and Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370 in August last year.

The Supreme Court had on November 27 reserved the judgment on a batch of petitions challenging restrictions imposed on communication, media and telephone services in Jammu and Kashmir pursuant to revocation of Article 370.

The court heard the petitions filed by various petitioners including Congress leader Ghulam Nabi Azad and Kashmir Times editor Anuradha Bhasin.

The petitions were filed after the central government scrapped Article 370 in August and bifurcated Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories -- Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Following this, phone lines and the internet were blocked in the region.

The government had, however, contended that it has progressively eased restrictions.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
August 6,2020

The Indian Defence Ministry, which had in its document that China intruded into the Indian territory in eastern Ladakh in early May, on August 6 took down the page which it had uploaded on its website.

According to a report by news channel NDTV, the ministry, in its document, had said the Chinese aggression has been "increasing along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and more particularly in Galwan valley since May 5."

"The Chinese side has transgressed in the areas of Kungrang Nala, Gogra and north bank of Pangong Tso Lake on May 17-18," the document, titled 'Chinese Aggression on LAC' stated.

The document revealed that "... a violent face-off incident took place between the two sides on June 15, resulting in casualties on both sides."

After the clash, a second corps commander level meeting took place on June 22 to discuss the modalities of de-escalation. "While engagement and dialogue at military and diplomatic level is continuing to arrive at mutually acceptable consensus, the present standoff is likely to be prolonged," it said.

A defence ministry spokesperson told the news channel that the document "did not go through him".

The opposition Congress, meanwhile, asked the government why the report was taken down with party leader Rahul Gandhi alleging that removal of the document from websites would not change facts.

"Forget standing up to China, India's PM lacks the courage even to name them. Denying China is in our territory and removing documents from websites won't change the facts," Gandhi tweeted.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.