Abhijeet Pimparkar1] Introduction
The question of women’s political representation has long been salient in Indian democracy. Although women constitute half of the Indian population, they hold only 14% of the seats in the Lok Sabha.
Thus, to boost women’s political participation and to make Indian legislative bodies more representative, the Indian Parliament enacted the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 – popularly the “Women’s Reservation Act” or Nari Shakti Vandan Act 2023.
The Act brings major structural reform in Indian politics. It reserves one-third of directly elected constituencies in the Lok Sabha and all State Assemblies for women (including SC/ST women), for an initial period of 15 years (extendable by Parliament).
The Bill’s passage with near-unanimous support in both Houses is being hailed as a progressive step toward gender justice in the country.
2] Historical and Political Evolution
The constitutional drive for women’s political representation in India has deep roots. A precedent came with the 73rd and 74th Amendments, which mandated that one-third of seats in local governments be reserved for women. That reform was championed on the rationale that grassroots democracy needed more female leadership.
Inspired by its success, policymakers began considering a similar quota at higher levels. The idea was first introduced in 1996 when Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda’s United Front government put a Women’s Reservation Amendment Bill in Parliament. However, the bill lapsed with collapse of the government. Two subsequent attempts (in 1998 under the Vajpayee government and 1999) likewise expired when elections were called.
A fresh push came in 2008 by the UPA government. The bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha. But before it could be taken up in the Lok Sabha, general elections intervened, and the bill lapsed.
The issue, however, remained pertinent. Successive election manifestos of major parties (both the BJP and Congress) reiterated their commitment to a women’s quota. Activists, too, continued to organize demonstrations and engage legislators.
The idea finally came into fruition in 2023 when the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government, spurred by internal commitments and public pressure, framed the new amendment bill. The bill passed both the houses unanimously. President Murmu’s assent finally consummated a decades-long struggle in the form of the Constitution (106th Amendment Act).
3] Constitutional and Legal Analysis
The Constitution (106th Amendment) Act, 2023 formally enshrines the women’s reservation.
The Act inserts Article 330A (for Lok Sabha) and Article 332A (for State Legislative Assemblies). Article 330A(1) states simply that “Seats shall be reserved for women in the House of the People”. Clause (2) of 330A specifies that roughly one-third of the seats reserved for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes under Article 330(2) are themselves to be reserved for women of those categories. Clause (3) of the same article then provides that one-third of the total seats to be filled by direct election shall be reserved for women. Similarly, article 332A mandate similar provisions for state assemblies.
The Act also adds Article 334A, which governs the timing and duration of the reservation. It provides that the women’s reservation will come into effect only after a delimitation exercise based on the first census conducted after the Act’s commencement. The implementation is expected around 2027–2029, only after the next census figures are available. This delay has been criticized by many detractors. The government justified this arrangement on ground that since constituency boundaries are currently fixed, one cannot simply insert reserved seats without re-delimiting seats by population.
The act also contains a 15-year sunset clause. It means that the reservation would automatically lapse after 15 years unless Parliament extends it. Supporters argue that the sunset forces periodic review and eventual integration of women into the normal system. But sceptics worry that this clause signals an expectation that the measure is only a temporary “aid” rather than a permanent right. However, under the act, the Parliament retains the power to extend the reservation beyond 15 years if desired.
4] Theoretical Frameworks
The Women’s Reservation Bill can be analyzed through multiple theoretical lenses- from political representation, justice, and feminist thought.
A starting point is Pitkin’s distinction between descriptive and substantive representation. Descriptive representation means the legislature “makes present” the voices of women by having members who are women. In contrast, substantive representation focuses on actions: whether elected women legislators advocate for women’s interests regardless of their identity.
Critics of mere descriptive quotas worry that simply adding women from elite backgrounds might not change policy priorities. Anne Phillips argues in support of descriptive representation (more women), whereas Young stresses that representation must also address group-specific injustices, not just symbolic presence.
Linked to this is the broader question of affirmative action and justice. From a Rawlsian viewpoint, quotas might be justified if they help correct social disadvantages faced by women as a group. Iris Marion Young, in Justice and the Politics of Difference, directly supports group-based remedies for structural bias. In her view, reserving seats for women is a corrective measure that acknowledges gendered power relations.
Another relevant concept is the critical mass theory in representation. This theory posits that a minority group (women) needs to reach a certain “critical” percentage (often cited as ~30%) to break token status and influence policy effectively. Dahlerup suggested that once women reach around one-third of legislators, they can form coalitions and shift issue priorities.
In practice, India’s local experience hints at critical mass effects: even at 33% in panchayats, women’s voices on certain issues became audible. But scholars caution that critical mass is a policy tool, not a guarantee.
5] Implications for Indian Democracy
The enactment of women’s reservation has far-reaching implications for Indian democracy.
On one hand, the law holds promise for inclusivity. By guaranteeing women’s representation at the national and state levels, India is expected to strengthen the “voice” of women in law-making.
Empirical work from other democracies shows that higher female representation often leads to more legislative attention to issues such as health, education, child care, and gender-based violence. For example, in Rwanda – which constitutionally reserves 30% of seats for women – women now hold over 60% of seats and have driven reforms on land rights, labour equality, and anti-violence laws.
In India, local experience already indicates that women leaders tend to prioritize community goods (water, roads, welfare) that benefit marginalized groups. The new quota could similarly orient national and state agendas more toward social welfare and gendered concerns, contributing to substantive equality.
The reservation also has symbolic power. It signals that politics is not just a “man’s domain.” With more women participating in electoral politics, political parties across the spectrum will cultivate and promote women leaders.
However, there are legitimate concerns about tokenism and elite capture. One fear is that the benefits of reservation will accrue mainly to women from already-privileged backgrounds. In practice, political parties often nominate women who are wives, daughters, or relatives of existing politicians (a phenomenon termed “proxy representation”). Mary John highlights that without safeguards, seat reservation could skew representation toward upper-caste women.
Countering these risks requires vigilant implementation and complementary reforms. The Act itself partially addresses one intersectional issue by including SC/ST quotas. This “reservation within reservation” means that Dalit and Adivasi women are guaranteed seats alongside general-category women. At the state level, some additional reservations already exist for OBCs in legislative assemblies, subject to a “triple test”. But the Act does not extend the one-third rule to OBC women. This has drawn criticism.
Federal dynamics are also in play. The Act equally covers the Lok Sabha and each State Assembly, but implementation will depend on delimitation which is a national exercise. Once the census is done, a Delimitation Commission (as mandated by Articles 82 and 170) will redraw constituencies for Parliament and assemblies.
6] Comparative Perspective
Worldwide, numerous countries use quotas to boost women’s representation, though the forms vary. One international database of gender quotas reports that as of the 2020s, about half of the world’s countries use some form of electoral gender quota.
Some African and Latin American countries have constitutional or legislative quotas like India’s reserved seats. Other African countries like Uganda (reservation for women’s seats in Parliament) and South Africa (party quotas) also report high women’s representation.
In contrast, many Western democracies achieve gender balance through voluntary party quotas or cultural norms rather than legal reservation. The Scandinavian countries, for instance, have some of the world’s highest levels of women MPs (typically 40–47%), without constitutionally mandated quotas. In those systems, political parties adopt internal rules (e.g. requiring alternating genders on party lists) that produce near parity. The United Kingdom and United States, however, have no formal quotas and the representation of women is also lower (under 30%).
South Asia provides instructive lessons. Nepal, after its 2006–2008 democratic transition, instituted a mixed electoral system with strong quotas. In Bangladesh, the Parliament reserves 50 out of 300 seats for women (elected by members of parliament), yielding about 17% women in the national legislature. Pakistan too reserves 60 out of 336 National Assembly seats for women (around 17.9%), plus each provincial assembly has reserved women seats. These quotas however are indirect since women are elected by party MPs, not directly by voters. In contrast, India’s approach will make women’s seats directly contested by women candidates, similar to how seats are filled in Nepal and Rwanda.
7] Criticisms and Counterarguments
Even as the Women’s Reservation Bill marks a milestone, it has attracted various criticisms and proposals for alternative approaches.
On of the major criticism is the exclusion of OBC women from the reservation. OBCs constitute a large segment of many state electorates, thus this omission is controversial. Proponents of the Act note that introducing OBC reservation in legislatures raises constitutional and political complexities: any OBC legislative reservation might require meeting the Supreme Court’s “triple test” (demonstrating backwardness, adequacy of existing policies, and political consensus). Critics argue that without OBC inclusion, the quota may disproportionately empower upper-caste or socially advantaged women.
A further set of debates contrasts party-based quotas versus constituency-based reservation. Some political analysts and parties have proposed that instead of constitutionally reserving seats, India could adopt mandatory candidate quotas for parties (e.g. requiring each party to field one-third women candidates).
Major parties like the Congress and Aam Aadmi Party have vowed to enforce internal quotas for nominations. While this approach offers more flexibility, critics say it lacks the enforceability and clarity. Also, party quotas can be subverted (e.g. by placing women low on party lists), whereas a reserved seat system legally guarantees an electoral contest for women.
Some skeptics also label the quota as potential tokenism. The act ensures that at least one woman wins every third seat, but it does not guarantee that those women will be empowered to act.
Whether the women elected under this Act are tokens or genuine agents of change may depend on broader factors: the internal democracy of parties, the parliamentary system’s treatment of women MPs, and societal attitudes. Advocates urge that the new female legislators must be supported with training, party cooperation, and even measures against gender-based harassment in politics, if the reservation is to transcend tokenism.
Finally, some feminist critics have contended that quotas address only symptoms of gender inequality, not root causes. Quotas alone cannot solve underlying family-care responsibilities or patriarchal social norms. Parallel reforms are needed (education, workplace equality, childcare). While these critiques are valid, supporters of the bill respond that representation quotas are a necessary first step that can catalyze broader change.
8] Conclusion
The Women’s Reservation Act is a major step toward “transformative constitutionalism” – it uses constitutional amendment to steer society toward greater equality. It acknowledges democracy’s promise that all citizens, regardless of gender, should have an equal say. It stands as a historic commitment that one-third of India’s legislatures will, in time, truly belong to its women – a long-awaited move to bridge democracy and justice in this deeply plural society.
