news details |
|
|
| Defining moment in Indian Parliament | | | SUSHILA SWAMY
THE election of the 64-year-old Meira Kumar as the first woman Speaker of the Lok Sabha is a defining moment in India’s parliamentary democracy and in the empowerment of women and Dalits. The Speaker holds a constitutional position with substantial authority. In terms of the government’s hierarchy, the office ranks sixth along with the Chief Justice of India.
The Speaker represents the Lok Sabha in public fora and international bodies and is the ex-officio member of a committee which nominates the chairman of the Press Council of India. The Speaker has a casting vote in case of a tie, which, if we go by the British practice from where we borrowed this institution, would imply voting with the opposition so as to allow the reconsideration of the issues raised in a no-confidence motion. The task of the Speaker is not to save the government but to maintain the sanctity of the parliamentary system. Other than the casting vote, the Speaker can intervene in the event of oversight in parliamentary procedure.
Ms Kumar is not the first woman to be elected Speaker. Rajasthan had a woman Speaker in Sumitra Singh in 2004 when Vasundhararaje Scindia was the chief minister. According to the Inter Parliamentary Union, Austria was the only state to have elected a woman to the presidency of one of the Parliament’s chambers, the Bundesrat. Between 1945 and 1997, there were 78 occasions when 42 of the 186 states selected a woman to preside over Parliament or a House of Parliament.
The break-up of these 42 is as follows: 18 European countries, 19 of the Americas, three African countries, one Asian country and one country in the Pacific. As on 31 May 2009, in 33 of the 187 existing parliaments of which 76 are bicameral, women preside over one of the Houses. These are Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, the Bahamas, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dominica, Estonia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Hungary, Iceland, Lesotho, Netherlands, Pakistan, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Serbia, Swaziland, Switzerland, Turkmenistan, the United Kingdom (House of Lords), the USA, Uzbekistan, Venezuela and Zimbabwe.
India is the 34th country to have joined this league of women Speakers. Meira Kumar’s election has been unanimous. Some MPs have expressed doubts as to whether she will be impartial. The BJP, citing the examples of Shivraj Patil and Balayogi, wants Ms Kumar to quit her party to prove her impartiality.
It bears recall that Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy had severed his connection with his party after being elected as Speaker (17 March 1967). However, most of the other Speakers have continued to be members of their respective parties. As Dr KV Rao has pointed out, they have on many occasions acted in the interests of their party.
Last year, Mr Somnath Chatterjee had refused to tender his resignation, stating that as a Speaker he belonged to the House although he continued to retain his party membership. Ironically enough, his name was the first in the list of 43 MPs in the Lok Sabha, which the general secretary of the CPI-M submitted to the President, when the party decided to withdraw support to the UPA government.
The office of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha is modelled on that of the Speaker of the British House of Commons with some nuanced differences. In India, every Lok Sabha has had a new Speaker whereas in Britain, the Speaker remains a Speaker until his resignation or retirement or death. Initially, the office of the Speaker of the House of Commons was contested but subsequently, the Prime Minister in consultation with the leader of the Opposition names the Speaker who is then elected unanimously. This takes place after every general election or the death or retirement of the previous Speaker. He remains in office till retirement and is automatically re-elected.
In the House of Commons, the Speaker, post-election, severs all links with his parent party to emerge as an independent person in order to conduct the proceedings of the House. He continues to maintain his separate identity even after retirement. On retirement, he is admitted as a member of the House of Lords. Hence he is regarded as the “first commoner of the land”. The Speaker, however, deals with his constituents’ problems as any normal MP.
The basic characteristic of the Speaker’s position in the House of Commons is his impartiality. Both inside and outside the House, he has to maintain this neutral and independent position. It is because of this impartiality that he gets elected unopposed in subsequent elections. Any change in the government does not alter his position.
Usually no one else is fielded in the Speaker’s constituency. In 1939, the Labour Party fielded a candidate against Spencer Fitsorce and again in 1945, against Speaker Cliffton Brown. On both occasions, the Labour candidates were defeated by huge margins. In 1955, an independent socialist candidate contested the election against the then Speaker but lost by a huge margin.
Like a host of other constitutional practices, the British have been able to preserve the tradition of re-electing the Speaker. The office is as respected as that of a judge. It is the failure to build up such healthy traditions that the Speaker’s election in India is usually a contested one. Even if elected unanimously, there are doubts about his ability to act above party lines.
Ms Kumar’s election as Speaker is a message of double empowerment ~ that of women and Dalits. It vindicates what many see as a limitation to gender representation. Gender, like class, is a mega category. Though an important social division, it cannot be the sole basis of mass political identities. The universality of the gender category makes it less cohesive and hinders collective identification and mobilisation. A person in modern society and in a complex diverse global economy is one with multiple identities that includes religion, caste, language, region, ethnicity and class. These multiple roles prevent the perpetuation of any single identity as decisive and underline the need to stress on a multiplicity of diverse roles, individualities and split subjects.
Ms Kumar’s election signals the need to bring together all the marginalised and oppressed segments with the purpose of building a society that will highlight inclusiveness rather than separateness. It also proves that group identities are better preserved within a constitutional and liberal democratic order based on individual rights and the rule of law.
The challenge before Indian democracy, however, is to see that ordinary persons who are self-made and come from humble backgrounds can achieve the success that Ms Kumar has achieved. Her elevation to this pedestal marks an important milestone. For real empowerment and equality of opportunity of the oppressed sections, the journey has just begun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
