Mohna Ansari is the country’s first female Muslim lawyer. Hailing from Banke, she’s created a name for herself as a women’s rights activist. Although she was nominated to the National Women’s Commission by the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum-Loktanntrik, Ansari claims she is not a politician, just a lawyer. In conversation with the Post’s Bidushi Dhungel, Ansari spoke about the progress in the women’s movement since 2006, her reflections on the inclusion policy, property and citizenship rights. Excerpts:
The National Women’s Comm-ission was formed in 2002. What has it achieved?
Our society is based on conservative and patriarchal ideals. Accordingly, the laws that govern our society are also incredibly conservative and patriarchal. The Commission has focused on suggesting reforms for unequal laws and policies which are disadvantageous for women. On that note, the Commission has taken the participation of women in the dissolved CA as an achievement. Prior to that, there was only a 5 percent reservation for women. The 33 percent reservation for women in all state mechanisms is certainly a step forward. The problem has been that the government’s commitments and policies do not match.
What are you working towards in concrete terms?
There are various laws which need reform. We also need new laws to meet new demands of women. For example, in the Muluki Ain, even today there are such clauses which use phrases like Swasni poilo gaako (wife has eloped). These kinds of discriminatory phrases are spread throughout our national laws and legal documents. So we have been working to reform these terminologies.
Another huge issue has been that of citizenship. The laws surrounding citizenship don’t give women the right to citizenship—it is determined by marriage. For example, if you get married, regardless of how many years you have lived in Nepal or dedicated yourself to the country, your citizenship right expires once you are married. On this issue, the Women’s Commission has been advocating legal equality on citizenship right. Likewise, due to the patriarchal, conservative nature of our society, women are often alleged of witchcraft. They’re tortured, exiled from their villages or even the country.
Have your recommendations been implemented?
That’s the sad part. Most of the recommendations we hand in are not taken forward and translated into policy. For example, it’s been over a year and a half since we handed in the witchcraft allegation law and nothing has been done.
Why do you think the Commission’s recommendations are not implemented?
Ending the violation of women is simply not a priority for the political parties and the government. These legal reforms and new laws we propose would not be that difficult to pass as they are not that controversial in terms of garnering verbal support, but when it comes to getting legislation changed, there is no commitment. Burning som-eone alive, torturing someone, poking out one’s eyes or exiling one from a community are serious offences, but the parties don’t see ending such atrocities as a priority on their agendas. In the same way that the women population is undermined, the National Women’s Commission’s work is also undermined. There is no reason why legislation in favour of gender equality shouldn’t pass, but there’s no will.
Another huge issue has been surrounding sexual violence in the work place. For some reason, the government doesn’t even see it as an issue. Unless there is will and personal commitment, violence and exploitation of women will not end. We have policies but the means, including legislation, to make these policies efficient are lacking.
Why form a commission if its recommendations areignored?
The Women’s Commission was created simply for the sake of it—to say that we have such a commission. That’s it. To be frank, it should have been created as a constitutional body, in such a way that it would be around for a long time with constitutional status. Likewise, the way that members are nominated into the Commission needs revision. It should be a fair selection of experts. The members should be able to examine national policy and programmes freely. The other commissions are constitutional bodies, but not us.
To change the topic, let’s talk a little about women’s inclusion after 2006. How do you evaluate the inclusion policy in terms of women’s empowerment?
When we talk about women’s inclusion in all state mechanisms, I immediately think of the Public Service Commission. It was last year that 14 women passed the Foreign Service exam at once. But inclusion and quotas are not always fair for the marginalised, with the most privileged among those eligible for the quotas benefitting. For example, within the Dalit community, there are those who are far more marginsalised than the rest, and in the Madhesi community, there are those like the Musahar community. Who will think about their inclusion?
The same goes for Muslims. How many Muslims are there in government services? There are the gaps in the inclusion policy. The policy is there, but the government has been unable to develop efficient mechanisms to make the policy really work. The civil service is just one example of course. There has also been apathy in terms of building capacity to take advantage of women quotas.
Are there policies focused on the private sector as well?
In terms of the private sector, the government can allocate tax breaks and other perks for private firms that adopt government policy. That’s how you can motivate the private sector—through bargaining.
Dalit and Muslim women are the most marginalised in society. What kind of progress has been seen in these communities with the inclusion policy in place?
In terms of awareness, there has been a lot of progress. With the Dalit community, the untouchability problem persists—especially when it comes to marital issues. Society isn’t able to own such marriages yet. People have even been taking advantage of the Rs 50,000 the government allocated for those marrying Dalits. Likewise, in these communities lack of education has meant that they are often swindled of the reservations allocated to them. Education and health are key issues and those are definitely improving.
For Muslim women, co-education remains a difficulty. Though the government has certified madrasa education, Muslim girls are not always sent to co-educational environments for school. Likewise, there is a problem with uniform as Muslim girls should be covered and wearing skirts is often frowned upon. That’s why they are often stopped from going for higher education and boarding school. Education should be the priority, not uniforms, but we still aren’t able to internalise this.
What about the issue of claiming citizenship through the mother’s identity?
The Supreme Court ruled to make it easier to grant such citizenships. But even today, for those who claim citizenship based on the mother’s identity, it’s simply written babu patta napako (couldn’t find the father). Just imagine how humiliating this is. There are so many cases where problems have arisen over the issue of father still being mentioned in the citizenship cards. We are reviewing the law to see how we can remove this part and will send a recommendation.
Do you think globalisation will change the situation of women?
Modernity or gloablisation can bring change in the society only when the policies and programmes are clear. Wearing short skirts or being modern and eating KFC is meaningless without laws which promote equality. The state has to realise the discriminatory nature of laws and practice and work to change that. But the government—the leaders— show little interest. It’s not a big deal to change the laws to stop witchcraft allegations or grant equal citizenship rights. But these laws aren’t changing and that’s where the discrimination begins.
When I questioned a leader why there were no women nominations for ministers from his party in the latest reshuffle, he said to me “the top politicians haven’t gotten their share yet.” Without will power and the feeling of equality among our leaders, it’s not going to be possible to make women equal citizens.
Post a Comment