There are only three women in the 25-member council of ministers of the federal government, only 12 percent, nearly three times lower than 33 percent. Representation of women is low, in some cases only one or even nil, in the provincial council of ministers. Women’s representation in executive structures has always been much lower than envisaged by the constitution and laws of the federal republic. Why is the under-representation of women in political and government structure a recurring theme in post-federal Nepal? The DMN News asked Binda Pandey, CPN-UML leader and the writer of books on women’s rights and representation, who has been fighting for gender justice and equality inside and outside the party.
Despite leaders like you persistently fighting for and advocating for equal representation of women in political and social sectors, their representation remains always low. Why does this happen?
Women representation was the issue established by the political movements. We rooted for 50 percent representation of women in the National Assembly as far back as in 1990 while the then constitution was being drafted after restoration of the multiparty democracy. We demanded 50 percent. But the leadership agreed on five percent. We have never given up on our fight for equal representation but the truth is, except where there are legal and constitutional compulsions, top leadership in all political parties appears extremely reluctant to provide equal space to women. They talk nicely in public, advocate for equality even more than women do, but when it actually comes to elevating women to the top and executive posts they always hesitate.
Look at the local elections. In the 1992 local elections, very few women were made candidates. So, we realized that quotas should be reserved for women. We raised this issue in the party and lobbied in parliament. Then in 1997 local elections, the quota of one member in each ward was reserved by law. Then, more that 40 thousand women were elected at once as ward members. After the Beijing conference of 2005, we could speak up for one third representation. In 2006, just before the people’s movement, women across the party lines stood united for the cause and all the political parties committed to it. As a result, parliament owned this agenda in 2008, responding to the new political context as well.
So, if you see this evolution of struggle for equality, you will see one noticeable trend. During the times of revolutions when the leaders need the support of women, they promise equality and equal representation but soon after reaching their comfort zones, they forget their promises. This is the question of dishonesty on the part of the leadership. Sadly, this tendency is strongly rooted in nearly all the political parties as well as state mechanisms. Thus the biggest gap lies between the words and actions of the political leaders on the question of equality and justice for women.
The idea of proportional representation was introduced in 2008 to ensure more representation of women in politics. Why could it not be effectively implemented?
Proportional representation system was more effectively implemented in the first and second Constituent Assembly elections of 2008 and 2013 respectively. The representation of women and those from the marginalized communities was historic in 2008 as well as in 2013. But again, most of the PR seats were distributed to political elites instead of those historically oppressed and marginalized in the real sense because the top leadership could tamper with the PR list because we used to have an open list system then. To correct this, we opted for a closed list system in the 2015 constitution. But even the closed list system has been tampered badly. Leaders began to make a list of PR candidates based on how close they are with whom and whether they are the relatives of or loyal to influential top leaders. Now the majority of those who have access to resources and power make it to the PR list. Here again comes the question of honesty. Unless there is honesty, law alone does not ensure fair allocation of PR seats and inclusion.
Attempts have been made to constrain women’s participation by using the legal and constitutional loopholes. So, we have both president and vice president as men. Both mayors and deputy mayors are males in 263 local levels. Fifty percent ward members are women but ward chairs are only one percent (69) of total. And there are only 25 women mayors in 753 local levels. Deputy mayors are 568, whereas it was 700+ in 2017. You may say that this is an impressive representation. But wait, first this is not impressive and second this could be possible because of the constitutional compulsion, not out of political will of the leadership having executive power. Patriarchy fears women. Males are in dominance in decision-making positions, institutions and leadership and they have been misusing powers with abandon. They fear that with women with perspective in those roles, power cannot be misused much. So, women are often barred from reaching the top.
It was expected that the situation would change in the federal set-up.
Federalism has empowered the women and the marginalized communities to a considerable extent but that alone does not represent change. Those in the mainstream should also change their mindsets. Compared to the past, women have been empowered but the traditional elites who enjoyed power for a long time in the past still conduct themselves by the old mindset. Those in the mainstream also need to change themselves so that those in the margin can taste the fruits of change. We adopted a federal system as a new form of governance. But, the centralist mindset is so powerful and strong. Look at the provinces. Why should the government change in provinces when the coalition changes at the federal level? The spirit of the constitution was not this. The spirit and sensibility of the constitution was that three spheres of government of the state should have a certain level of autonomy and that provincial governments would not be the shadows of the federal government.
In addition, the situation today is so many laws are yet to be made by the federal parliament to ensure fundamental rights, especially the rights of women. More than 42 existing laws in Nepal contradict with Article 38 (rights of women) of the constitution but political leadership takes no initiative yet to amend them, while the constitution mandated making required laws within three years of its promulgation. Nobody, neither politicians nor CSOs nor the media, seems to take it seriously. This shows where we stand.
What should be done then?
Top leadership in each party needs to review the commitments made during the time of revolution to women, to check what was fulfilled and what was not. Often when it comes to distributing election tickets, women are not considered at all because women are not in the position to decide who to give first past the post-election tickets. FPTP tickets are often given to those who are supposed to have a lot of money or who can provide huge funding to the parties or top leaders. This is where change should start. Limiting women to PR quotas means not trusting their agencies and importance.
If you count from 2008, the number of women elected in the role of local level chiefs and deputies, or MPs in provincial and federal level, is 2300. Now these 2300 women are the women with experience, learning, knowledge, skill and expertise. Why cannot these women be given another chance? For example, somebody who served as the deputy mayor can be given an election ticket for the post of mayor or FPTP ticket in provincial assemblies. Or somebody who was a lawmaker at the provincial and federal level, can be given a FPTP ticket at any level. Five years of service has given these women a lot of experience. They have mingled with people, faced the problems on the ground, understood politics and become more mature. Why can’t they be prioritized for FPTP seats in the next election? They most likely won’t be because the world has changed but men in the leadership in our country have not. The election bill is in the drafting process now. If it could be made compatible with Article 38 of the constitution, more women would be able to give candidacy in the next election.
Political parties should internalize the spirit of feminist movement and structural reform should be initiated to ensure gender justice on all fronts. Finally, the key to achieving women’s rights and social justice is wider coordinated solidarity, collaborative efforts and collective actions on a common agenda among and beyond the women’s movement.
Comment