Partial correction

"Complete legal equality for women in all spheres will be made a practical reality, especially by removing discriminatory legislation and by enacting new legislation that gives women, for instance, equal rights of ownership of assets like houses and land."

This is what was declared by the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP). The UPA government, after moving legislation with far-reaching implications in the areas of rural employment guarantee and tribal land rights, last week turned to the issue of women's rights as well.

The NCMP promise has been redeemed partially, with the Rajya Sabha (with thin attendance telling its own story) passing the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Bill of 2004.

What has been addressed by the new legislation is a small piece of a large jigsaw, covering Hindus (including Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs), while leaving Muslim personal law untouched. Traditional inheritance laws in South India are more liberal than elsewhere.

What the Rajya Sabha has legislated (contrary to media reports, this is not just about Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act) in terms of equal inheritance rights for women is already the practice through state amendments in Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and even Maharashtra.

The latest changes will affect intestate succession in the Mitakshara and Dayabhaga systems in northern India, especially the former, where daughters were denied coparcenary rights in ancestral property.

Without denigrating the importance of what has been achieved, other statutes also need amendment and one cannot perpetually avoid the issue of a uniform civil code, although the perception that this uniform civil code has to be that of the majority community is invalid.

Nor can the question of granting women equal property rights avoid addressing land-related laws, a state subject. The legislative trigger is welcome. But it would have been more welcome, had an integrated view been taken of all the laws that reflect gender bias.

Also, ensuring legal equality for women is more than a matter of legal reform. Enacting the law is one matter, enforcement another.

For instance, unlike family courts, there is no statutory backing for women's courts as yet. Also, within law reform, there are central statutes, state-level statutes and administrative law or subordinate legislation.

Gender discrimination is so endemic that it cuts across all three strands. Even the examination of gender discrimination in laws has been ad hoc.

In April 2002, the report of a Task Force on Women and Children examined 23 statutes, with the focus being on labour laws.

Hence, the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 wasn't on the task force's agenda, although the National Commission for Women highlighted it, as did the 174th report of the Law Commission.

There are issues connected with violence against women and the law minister has promised a domestic violence Bill soon.

On gender biases in property and personal laws, the reform agenda should include reviewing the Guardians and Wards Act (1890), Indian Succession Act (1925), Hindu Succession Act (1956), Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956), Hindu Marriage Act (1955), Special Marriage Act (1954), Foreign Marriage Act (1969), Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (1937), Indian Divorce Act (1869), Married Women's Property Act (1874) and Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (1956).

In short, there is a long way to go.