In addition to reservation

The Rajya Sabha passed the Women?s Reservation Bill amid some of the most shameful scenes in India?s parliamentary history. Still, some political leaders are already hailing the Bill?s progress as a historic step for

Indian women. But their praise is premature. Reserving parliamentary seats for women may well create a major social and political transformation. However, it stops short of making the major changes that Indian politics really needs.

Women are severely under-represented in national politics in India. Only 11% of Indian MPs are women, half as many as in Bangladesh and Pakistan (both of which have more female MPs than quotas dictate). Despite the presence of many prominent women in politics, the country still has some way to go to achieve a more representative mix of legislators.

Some would argue that quotas are not the way to fix this imbalance. They argue that male MPs will put female relatives forward as place-holders for seats that become reserved for one election cycle, or that favoured female candidates will be parachuted into constituencies against local wishes. This will no doubt happen in a system with women-only seats. But then again, it already takes place in the system as it stands today.

In the short term, reservations may well be the best way to begin to correct one of the major imbalances in Indian society. America?s experience of affirmative action since the 1970s has shown how dramatically even tacit quotas (especially in university education) can change the balance of power, influence and success in a society over the course of a very few decades. But quotas have to be handled carefully: US courts have begun to strike down affirmative action laws now that the balance of opportunities has become more equal. The reservation Bill?s suggestion that quotas for women MPs remain in force only for a limited period is, therefore, eminently sensible.

That the passage of the Bill caused such ugly scenes in the Rajya Sabha is not just a regrettable symptom of communitarian power-grabbing and political grandstanding. It is also a symbol ?albeit an ugly one?of the broader Indian desire to have all voices heard in the halls of power. The Women?s Reservation Bill fails to fulfill this wish?not because it doesn?t reserve enough seats for women or make generous enough provision for minorities. Instead, it stops short of the complete overhaul that the electoral system needs, a shortcoming that is all the more damaging given the number of years the Bill has been in the public eye.

The lengthy career of the Women?s Reservation Bill has been a lost opportunity to turn attention and passions away from the lightning-rod issue of quotas for women towards wider questions of democratic representation and participation. Electoral reform is one of the most difficult processes in any democracy, which is why very few governments manage to muster the political will to carry it out. The level of opposition to this Bill shows how difficult even simple changes can be. But it also raises the question of whether Parliament might not have done better to raise the stakes and provoke a wider national debate on the nature of politics in India.

Political power has become something that politicians see as an entitlement rather than a privilege to be earned. This sense of owning power by right has led to the practices of standing for more than one seat at a time or contesting elections in a constituency to which the candidate has no real connection. Parliament should end the first practice and consider more nuanced solutions to the second, either more stringent requirements for candidates to demonstrate ties to constituencies or open primaries to select all parties? candidates before the election campaign begins. Open primaries would allow voters to choose whether they prefer a local candidate or a celebrity outsider, regardless of which party they eventually decide to vote for. They would also help candidates in reserved seats to avoid allegations that they weren?t up to the job.

The most important reforms would change the relationship of MPs and Parliament with the electorate. Parliament needs to abolish MPs? constituency development fund (MPLADS), which perpetuates a skewed relationship between local representatives and their constituents and an unhelpful vision of the Indian state. MPs should not be doling out money to their constituents like feudal rajas?a practice that implies that the nation state is incapable of addressing people?s needs at the local level. MPLADS is a form of patronage that creates a warped relationship between Parliament and the people, and it is unsuited to 21st century India.

The key reform would be for Parliament to agree to be truly responsive to the changing needs of the people it serves. Instead of making electoral reform a difficult process that most governments balk at carrying out, Parliament should bind itself to reforming the system again after a set timeframe?say 30 years. This would go a long way towards preventing special interests from becoming entrenched enough to militate against electoral changes as they did this week.

India?s democracy is unique in Asia for its strength, its long history and the consistently high levels of the electorate?s participation. Extending the spirit of the reforms in the Women?s Reservation Bill to make the electoral system even more responsive to the people would turn India into the country that the freedom struggle sought to create: a beacon not just for Asia but for the whole world.

The author has taught Indian history at Oxford and Cambridge Universities