#12 Representation of Ideas, not just Identities
Founding Mothers of the Indian Republic. Gender politics in the framing of our Constitution. The question of representation.
When it comes to the founding moment of the Indian Republic, we often get to read about the prominent men in the Constituent Assembly, their quotes and speeches, and the positions they took. But, we rarely get to hear about the women in the Constituent Assembly. Even when it comes to the gender progressive clauses in the constitution such as “no discrimination based on gender” or regarding reforms in Hindu law, the credit is often given to men, almost as if they were the ones who ensured gender rights in the Indian constitution. Sometimes, we also hear the feminist criticism that the Indian constitution itself is a part of the problem because it is not a gender-just document as it was predominantly written by men.
Founding Mothers of the Indian Republic by Prof. Achyut Chetan is a book that tries to dispel many of these misconceptions. It is a book that attempts to ‘unforget’ the stories of these extraordinary women by shining light on archival material—notes, letters, petitions, and documents written and exchanged by them. And what is the picture it reveals? While the women were few in numbers, and relatively quiet in the assembly, they were making significant contributions in shaping the Constitution through their participation in the committees and subcommittees they were part of. In fact, a lot of groundwork for creating the rights framework for the Constitution was already put in place through the work of the organised women’s movements such as the AIWC.
The future constitution of the country will affect both men and women equally.
Women, therefore, have as much interest in it [Constituent Assembly] as men have,
perhaps more, for women would like to see that the new constitution is based on
democratic principles and that no disability attaches to any citizen on the grounds
of caste, creed or sex and that it provides equal rights and equal opportunities for
women in all spheres of human activities.
—Hansa Mehta, 1946
Who were these women?
The 1920s was an era of a truly global feminist movement; women in India were not left out of it. Many elite women had started to come together to work on women’s issues. One of the organisations that emerged at this time was the All India Women’s Conference. Many of the women in the Constituent Assembly were connected to the AIWC—Hansa Mehta, Amrit Kaur, Renuka Ray, Aizaz Rasul, Ammu Swaminathan, Purnima Banerji, and Sucheta Kripalani.
G. Durgabai was a promising lawyer of the Madras High Court. Dakshayani Velayudhan, the only dalit woman in the Constituent Assembly, was India’s first Schedule Caste woman graduate, and an independent minded woman who often had distinct views that even contradicted those of Dr. B.R.Ambedkar. Hansa Mehta was a vice-chair with Eleanor Roosevelt on the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights Committee. She is credited with having influenced the phrase “All human beings” instead of “All men” in the article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
These were courageous and capable women, who were quite influential in their time. These women had distinct feminist leanings and were representatives of the feminist thought in the process of constitution-making. The seats in Constituent Assembly were highly coveted and the women members had not reached there by tokenism, as is often perceived, but because of their capabilities, and after winning in a well-fought election. The women members did not necessarily agree with each other on all issues, but when it came to the issue of gender equality, they spoke in solidarity. They also found solidarity with other oppressed classes and often advocated that no disability was caused on the grounds of caste, creed, religion, and sex.
How did they shape our Republic?
In our discussion on the book, Prof. Chetan tells us that “there is not a single article of the Constitution of India which does not have an imprint of the women’s presence in the Constitution Assembly.”
Hansa Mehta and Amrit Kaur were a part of the fundamental rights committee. The women members stressed on ensuring that every right that was given was enforceable. When it was decided that there would be some rights which will be enforceable (Fundamental Rights) and some that won’t (Directive Principles), they made sure that they pushed the rights that they considered important into the fundamental rights category. They also added the words “nevertheless fundamental” to the Article 37 which makes the otherwise unenforceable directive principles important in the governance.
The women in the Constituent Assembly were against giving reservation to women. However, they were aware of the structural issues with the Indian society and made sure that if certain special provisions were required for the women to overcome these shortcomings, then the Constitution would allow that. This was done through clause (3) of Article 15. Prof. Chetan’s reading is that the women were in favour of affirmative action for women, but not in a paternalistic manner (through the means of reservation in the parliament).
The women members, mainly from the AIWC, were in favour of limiting the role of religion in determining the lives of women. They were in favour of secularisation, but were against the “freedom to practise religion” because they thought that this would allow for justification and perpetuation of many religious practices which were detrimental to women.
The women members objected to adopting compulsory military conscription and managed to convince the Constituent Assembly that India did not require such a compulsion. Instead, they supported the idea of compulsory social service, out of which the National Service Scheme was launched. The women members were also in favour of a voluntary common civil code which imbibed the progressive aspects from amongst all religions. They envisioned that people would gradually and voluntarily adopt such a common law.
Lessons for today: Representation of Ideas, not mere Identities
One of the questions that was raised in the discussion was on the topic of representation. Was the Constituent Assembly truly representative when the electorate was so limited at the time? To this, Prof. Chetan replies that while the Constituent Assembly did not have adequate representation in a strict sense (for e.g. there was only one tribal member), it had representation from diverse ideas.
While there were just 15 to 11 women in an assembly of 389 members, these were women who were representative of the feminist thought. While some may accuse that a majority of them were belonging to an elite class, one can see that in the positions they had adopted, they were advocating for the rights of women and oppressed people of all classes.
Prof. Chetan takes the idea further with the question,”Let’s say, we form an assembly made of 50% women, is it necessary that it will come up with a gender-just constitution?”. I think the answer would be a vehement NO. This is not to say that representation of identities is not important. But to reduce representation to come from a strict class identity is to limit the expectations from our political representatives. We need political representatives who would represent and look after the interests of people from all classes of society, and not just of the class they belong to. Prof. Chetan stresses that we need representation of ideas and not mere identities. We need more feminists in the parliament, not just women. For me, this was a big take away from the discussion.
If you want to listen to the detailed conversation with Prof. Achyut Chetan, here’s the link. This session was conducted as a part of the OpenTakshashila Book club which is a monthly, free, and open-for-all event.
This book has certainly cleared many of my misconceptions about the founding moment of our Constitution. I do feel a sense of pride in knowing that rational, capable, and progessive women were helping shape the Indian Republic. I also feel sadness about how we have forgotten them from our collective memory. I write this article with the hope that it will ignite your interest in knowing more about them.
Upcoming Book—We, the Citizens
I have an annoncement to make! A project that I was working on for the past two years has culminated into the upcoming book ‘We, the Citizens’-a cartoon guide to active citizenship in India. It is a unique collaboration between public policy researcher Pranay Kotasthane, economics professor Anupam Manur, and myself.
It is illustrated in a graphical narrative with a lighthearted tone. It explains policy fundamentals, busts common misconceptions and offers simple frameworks to a non-specialist audience of all age groups, while maintaining a uniquely Indian perspective. Do check out the book on Amazon: https://amzn.eu/d/ij9dtmg
Thanks for reading!
P.S: We also had a Puliyabaazi with Prof. Achyut Chetan. For those who can understand Hindi, do watch: