In the on-going monsoon-session of Parliament, the women's quota bill would be among the many issues that will be debated. Eventually, the saviours of the fair sex would ensure its smooth passage.
But the parliamentarians seem to have overlooked some very important issues. First, when a constituency is reserved for a woman candidate, it gainsays the right of an individual (read males!) to contest elections. This is a right guaranteed to an Indian citizen by the Constitution after some basic conditions are fulfilled. Second, how can anyone impose a (woman) candidate on the electorate. By restricting the playing field to one section of the society, the freedom to vote for the best possible candidate will be curtailed.
I do not in any way oppose the philosophy behind the movement, but my views only try to bring out the fallacies in the proposed Bill. There is a better way of achieving the same end. It should be made compulsory for political parties to choose at least one-third of the candidates from the fair sex. Reservation should be made at the party level and not at the constituency level. This would ensure adequate representation at the party level.
Anyway, if women candidates are more capable and deserving, they should win against their opposite sex, even without any reservation! Is it not double-speak to demand reservation when they claim that they are equally if not more capable than men?
