The government aims to advance three legislations that connect the introduction of 33% reservation for women with a new delimitation exercise intended to enlarge the Lok Sabha to 850 seats. However, with the necessity of a two-thirds majority and uncertain support, this initiative has sparked intense political and legal examination.
In an interview with CNBC-TV18, BJP spokesperson Neoma Gupta expressed confidence, asserting that the government would acquire the necessary backing. She remarked that the purpose of the legislation was being misconstrued, emphasizing that “when the intention is so noble, and focused on Nari Shakti, we genuinely hope the opposition will recognize the sense in it and refrain from belittling it.” Gupta also allayed fears regarding seat redistribution, referencing assurances from top leadership that delimitation would proceed with safeguards in place and “will not affect any state’s representation.”
At the core of the opposition’s worries lies the ambiguity within the legislation. Advocate and researcher Alok Prasanna highlighted that the commitment to a uniform 50% increase in seats for all states may not hold under the current constitutional framework. “As long as Article 82 remains unchanged, no one can guarantee, whether in writing or otherwise, that every state’s share will experience a 50% increase,” he stated, emphasizing that seat allocation hinges on population proportions based on the principle of “one person, one vote, one value.”
Prasanna also raised concerns about outdated data, cautioning against utilizing the 2011 census for a future delimitation process. “By the 2029 elections, that data will be 18 years old… Governance should be based on current data, not outdated statistics,” he remarked, suggesting that India should wait for the subsequent census before redrawing constituencies.
The postponement of the 2021 census has further complicated the discussion, with opposition factions questioning the legitimacy of any seat redistribution conducted without current data. The lack of updated population figures has prompted worries that any exercise undertaken now would not accurately represent present demographic realities.
DMK spokesperson Salem Dharanidharan went further, claiming that the proposed legislation extends beyond women’s reservation and poses a risk to the nation’s democratic structure. He contended that the women’s quota was already enacted in 2023 and didn’t necessitate a new connection to delimitation. “This bill, instead, seeks to alter the democratic fabric of the country,” he asserted, questioning the timing of the initiative just before elections.
Dharanidharan also emphasized the potential implications for southern states, reflecting concerns voiced by his party’s leadership that population-based seat allocation might disadvantage regions that have successfully managed population growth. He maintained that if the government’s true objective was to implement women’s reservation, it could be done promptly without tying it to delimitation.
The political environment remains charged, as opposition parties, including the Congress, accuse the government of attempting “gerrymandering”—an allegation the BJP has firmly denied. Home Minister Amit Shah reassured Parliament that southern states would not experience a decrease in their proportional representation and has promised a uniform increase in seats, although the bill itself does not detail such a formula.
Also Read | Govt may fail to muster numbers on women’s quota bill; risks deepening North-South divide, say experts
Adding to the complexity, the government has already announced the 2023 women’s reservation law while Parliament continues to debate amendments concerning its implementation, prompting inquiries about legislative sequencing and intent.
With conflicting narratives regarding constitutional validity, data sufficiency, and political motives, the delimitation debate is emerging as a pivotal issue, even as the government positions the legislation as a move towards empowering women within India’s political framework.
