Creating a quota for woman in Indian parliament is a flawed manner in which to handle the situation
Debate Rounds (3)
of the paucity of women in parliament.
Main Entry: quo�ta
Pronunciation: \ˈkwō-təFunction: noun
Etymology: Medieval Latin, from Latin quota pars how great a part
1 : a proportional part or share; especially : the share or proportion assigned to each in a division or to each member of a body
2 : the number or amount constituting a proportional share
3 : a fixed number or percentage of minority group members or women needed to meet the requirements of affirmative action.
The quota in Indian politics has been affectionately named as as affirmative action, a chance to bring forth the rich diorama of Indian diversity in every places of work and education, amongst others. A quota has been provided with a statutory requirement that 27% of the vacancies be filled by SC/ST (Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe, as mentioned in schedules in the COnstitution of India), OBC's (Other Backward Classes), etc.
But recently, a move to introduce a quota of 33% for women in parliament has been passed by the upper house of the Indian parliament amidst much commotion and chaos.
The quota system, in its intrinsic self, recognises areas (the term constituency should be used here for clarity, since the debate is primarily anchored in politics) wherein there is the dense concentration of the population stipulated under the schedules mentioned in the Indian Constitution exceeds that of any other group which might be present and thus allots the chance to contest from that constituency to a person belonging to that reservation.
In India, the sex ratio at average is 946 females per 1000 males, the lowest per state being 846 and the highest per state being 1058.
The quota mechanism works on the paradigm that a place wherein the population of the people stipulated exceeds that of the remainder of the population, that constituency shall be contested by none but those stipulated under the reservation.
The constituencies wherein such a scenario exists is slim.
The number of women participating in the contest for a seat in parliament, be it from party or a constituency does in fact, reflect the de facto number of women who are keenly interested in politics.
Creating a quota not based upon this fact while providing no means of providing or fostering any interest in politics amongst the women of India is quite futile, as it shall open the doors to a whole host of women entering politics for the sole purpose of filling the number of allocated seats.
Something political parties shall by all means exploit in their pursuit of power.
There have been documented cases in several of the mofussil governing bodies in Indian villages (village or gram panchayats), wherein the chief has been falsely accused of corruption charges, has had no confidence motions passed against her, and a wide gamut of other such acts being carried out against her.
The root cause is unfortunately based more in human psychology; a sense of entitlement amongst the other committee members who feel that by the virtue of being a woman, she has become chief. In some cases, that being the sole criterion for her ascension to power.
In the Indian parliament even, such a case in all probability shall arise, causing seemingly irreparable damage to the dignity of the lower house, for whom alone the quota is stipulated.
a more balanced approach perhaps, one which shall begin at the grass root level should come into effect instead of suddenly labelling women under a quota.
Women for ages have fought for equal rights throughout the world, in India even. Has it now come to this, wherein the fruits of their fight is such a condescending act? What more can they extrapolate from this act, if not that the members of parliament feel that without a quota, women have no chance of getting fair recognition in the supreme lawmaking body of India.
siddarth_pai forfeited this round.
siddarth_pai forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: FF
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.