- Share This Post
- submit
- 3
-
Sparkle (0)
What a week it has been for Indians: euphoria, nervous excitement, and some serious skepticism.
Pratibha Patil (www.agri-history.org)
After 60 years of independence, the country is likely to get its first woman President.
Pratibha Devisingh Patil, the 72-year-old Governor of the western border state of Rajasthan and currently the only woman Governor in the country, has emerged as the consensus “surprise” candidate for the multi-party ruling coalition, the United Progressive Alliance, and the communist Left.
The chief opposition coalition in Parliament -- The National Democratic Alliance -- has turned down the Prime Minister's request for support, and has vowed to put its weight behind the incumbent vice-president Bhairon Singh Shekhawat. However, barring some serious cross-voting or last-minute political machinations, Patil is likely to take the top job as the country's 12th president once President APJ Abdul Kalam's five-year term ends on July 24.
For the uninitiated, the President of India – or Rashtrapati, as he (she?) is referred to -- is the highest elected member of the executive, but, much like a state Governor, is largely a titular head with limited powers. The President and Vice-President are indirectly voted to their offices by an electoral college made up of elected members of Parliament and State legislatures.
But former presidents have impressed with their personalities, intellect, and penchant to raise red flags in legislations, kicking off national debates and discussions. Patil will be expected to do no less if not more.
A lawyer by training, Patil is no newcomer to governance, but hasn't been a hard player in popular politics either.
Her candidature has drawn celebrations and scathing criticism alike. Some see her choice, however symbolic, as the right thing to do. As an editorial in The Hindu puts it:
The office of the President may be a largely ceremonial one, but those who occupy it send a strong message to the people of the country and elsewhere. The fact that a woman is likely to occupy the highest office in the land is a matter of pride for the country... She [Patil] may have a relatively low profile, but her background in politics and social work would suggest she is the right symbol of the idea of the Indian state — one that is liberal, secular and progressive.
But the air is thick with skepticism as well. Seen as loyal to the family of Congress party president Sonia Gandhi, Patil's competence as a president or champion of women's causes is being questioned.
An Indian Express editorial termed her nomination as “unfair”:
All the celebratory statements about the possibility of the ‘first woman president’ — they are unfair to Pratibha Patil, the UPA’s presidential candidate and unfair to all those who work for gender sensitivity in this still largely reflexively male chauvinist society. Unfair because politicians have discovered the virtue of having a woman president post facto. Unfair because such tokenism in public statements from political leaders imply they take genuine gender issues far less seriously than they should. And not just unfair but indicative of a larger malaise — the use of the concept of group disadvantage as a camouflage for any number of political manoeuvres.
Business Standard's Aditi Phadnis says (as many others have) Patil's choice was nothing more than a safe political compromise.
More than any other election, this election is a national shame—because it represents everything that is regressive about the Indian system. Patil-Shekhawat is being supported by the Congress for one reason and one reason alone: that she has the right name. That she is uncontroversial and non-threatening is being described in Congress circles as her biggest strength. The Congress did not go out purposefully in search of a qualified, appropriate woman candidate for Presidentship who could become a consensus candidate. They chanced upon Patil-Shekhawat when the Left and the DMK put their foot down and nixed three other names they were offered.
Both, CNN-IBNand NDTV have raised the issue of the ruling coalition fielding a “nice” presidential candidate, a second choice, rather than a strong one.
New York-based Amrita Rajan writes on Desicritics:
This isn't a blow for women's rights, it's an act of condescension. It's the political equivalent of getting a pat on the head, handed a couple of sweeties to eat, and then being told to run along and be good.The point wasn't to send a woman to Raisina Hill. The point was to elect the best person for
