Tag: delimitation

Why Naidu, Stalin’s Calls for ‘More Children’ Smack of Patriarchy, Apathy

Experts say that such calls deprive women of their bodily autonomy and threaten to undo decades of progress in population stabilisation and women’s empowerment

New Delhi: As the delimitation exercise approaches, and fertility rates in southern India remain below the national average, two chief ministers – Andhra Pradesh’s Chandrababu Naidu and Tamil Nadu’s M.K. Stalin – have sought to solve the impending demographic crisis by urging people to have more children.

While an ageing population poses risks of a shrinking workforce, slower economic growth and reduced political representation in parliament, the clarion call to have more children raises concerns of depriving women of their bodily autonomy. These statements have also belied deeply patriarchal attitudes of the political class that places the burden of family planning on women alone and threatens decades of progress in population stabilisation.

In his speech on October 20, Naidu urged people living in South Indian states to have more children and also announced that the Andhra Pradesh government is mulling reversing a law that barred those with more than two children from contesting local body elections, in a bid to incentivise larger families. He then went a step further to state that having larger families is a “responsibility” and a “service to society”.

“We have a demographic advantage only till 2047. After 2047, there will be more elderly people than young in Andhra Pradesh. It is already happening in Japan, China, and many countries of Europe,” he was quoted as saying. “Having more children is also your responsibility. You are not doing it for yourself, it is also for the benefit of the nation, it is a service to society.”

Two days later, his counterpart in Tamil Nadu, Stalin, concerned about the South’s potential loss of parliamentary seats in the upcoming 2026 delimitation exercise quipped: “Why not aim for 16 children?”

Poonam Muttreja, executive director, Population Foundation of India, told The Wire that statements urging women to have more children in the name of national duty reduce women to their reproductive roles, infringing on personal choice and agency. 

“This rhetoric ignores women’s health, economic burdens and aspirations beyond motherhood. It also reinforces outdated gender stereotypes, putting pressure solely on women, while overlooking male responsibility in family planning,” she said.

“Global experience shows that telling women to have more children simply doesn’t work. The number of children a woman has is influenced by many factors such as education, economic opportunities, social context and access to healthcare. It is not a switch that can be flipped at will. Southern states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Andhra Pradesh have achieved lower fertility rates thanks to investments in education, healthcare and women’s empowerment. The chief ministers’ and political leaders’ calls threaten decades of progress in population stabilisation and women’s empowerment.”

Why the call for more children

Total fertility rate (TFR) – which is the average number of children a woman is expected to have over her lifetime – in southern states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh are well below the replacement level of 2.1, with projections showing TFRs stabilising around 1.5 by 2036. In comparison,  northern states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh have higher TFRs (ranging from 1.85 to 2.38).

The Wire has reported that as a result, these southern states will experience rapid ageing, declining productivity, a higher dependency ratio and increased burden on social services like healthcare and pensions. Politically, this demographic challenge can have an electoral impact: South Indian states stand to lose parliamentary seats in the next delimitation exercise. 

In 1976, based on the 1971 census figures, a freeze on delimitation was imposed to protect states, which had reduced their population growth rates through family planning, from losing seats to states with higher population growth. In 2001, the freeze was extended to 2026. 

Also read: Whose Womb Is It Anyway?

The impending delimitation exercise has also sparked concerns as a state’s population significantly influences the allocation of central funds, directly impacting its financial health – a concern that has already been a point of contention between Southern states and the Union government.

According to women activists, these concerns, while important, cannot be resolved by making it a cross for women to bear.

Burden of family planning on women

Mass sterilisation, mostly of men, as a part of family planning measures was seen during the Emergency under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The vasectomy drive or nasbandi was seen as one of the contributing factors to her government’s fall in 1977. Estimates say that 6-8 million people were sterilised in India in 1977.

In the following decades, the burden of family planning shifted to women. This is clear from the Union government’s own data which shows that female sterilisation is the most common means to prevent unwanted pregnancies. According to the Union government’s National Family Health Survey (NFHS)-5 (2019-2021), female sterilisation in both urban and rural areas for currently married women between 15-49 years is recorded at 37.9% against male sterilisation at 0.3%. The use of other non-surgical means is recorded even lower with condoms (9.5%), pills (5.1%), IUDs (2.1%) and injectables (0.6%). 

The NFHS-5 data also states that more than one-third of men believe that contraception is women’s business and that men should not have to worry about it. It adds that only 10% of women make independent decisions about their healthcare, against 33% men.

In 2014, 18 women were killed in a sterilisation camp in Chhattisgarh’s Bilaspur district where tubectomies were conducted in conditions that would be unacceptable in a veterinary hospital. The incident spotlighted India’s aggressive family planning measures and its disproportionate impact on women’s health, particularly those from poor socio-economic backgrounds, including incentives to get such sterilisation procedures. 

“Social, political and economic systems reinforce male authority, limiting women’s financial and reproductive independence,” said Muttreja.

“Women face maternity penalty in the form of economic and professional discrimination for becoming mothers, with many employers hesitant to hire or promote women due to perceived costs and disruptions of maternity leave.”

‘Smacks of patriarchy and apathy’

Zakia Soman, a women’s rights activist, said that the call given by two seasoned politicians, “smack of their own patriarchy, apathy towards women, towards those from poor socioeconomic backgrounds.”

“While their concerns about ageing populations and getting marginalised are valid, is this the way forward? When you ask people to have more children it is of course women,” she said.

“As though they are not aware of the burden that falls on women. If 85% of India’s labour force is in the informal sector, all women are working women. They work inside the house and outside the house without any government support. Such statements deprive women of their agency further as they are already [in] second class positions even in a marital relationship and male entitlements include dowry as a continuing demand along with domestic violence – particularly women from deprived socio-economic backgrounds. Even if these southern states are relatively more advanced, it is not as though there is no poverty, or malnutrition or lack of education or instances of the girl child not being able to fulfil their human potential,” Soman said.

Economists Ashwini Deshpande and Rajesh Ramachandran have found that children from historically marginalised communities like Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) are 50% more likely to be stunted than children from forward castes.

In 2016, the Supreme Court banned mass sterilisations after a petition was filed following such surgeries being performed under torchlight on at least 53 Dalit women in Bihar’s Araria in 2012.

Shalin Maria Lawrence, a Dalits rights activist and author, said sterilisation and population measures have disproportionately affected Dalits while maternal mortality, teenage pregnancies, poverty in pregnancies, malnutrition and postpartum depression remain grave concerns. 

“Questions about delimitation can be taken up legally in the courts of law and constitutionally in parliament. Instead, you are turning to women and saying produce more children. It is very irresponsible of two chief ministers and party heads who are men. Women are already being moral policed to give birth – not having children is a problem and not having more children is also a problem. 

“At the end of the day, patriarchy finds a way to sustain itself. Here it wants to use delimitation as a base to sustain itself and thrive in it. Instead of finding a solution to liberate women from the burden of bearing a child they are burdening them more by saying have more children – this is state oppression,” she said.

Women friendly policies

Instead of simply pitching for larger families, population experts believe that India could benefit from implementing policies that support women.

“India could benefit from policies that genuinely support women and families, similar to approaches in countries like Japan, South Korea, Denmark and Sweden which also face low fertility rates,” said Muttreja. 

“These countries focus on women-centric policies such as childcare support, parental leave and financial incentives for families. Denmark and Sweden have stabilised fertility rates by promoting gender equality, shared childcare responsibilities and strong social support systems. By prioritising policies that make parenthood more manageable, India could create an environment where families feel empowered to have children by choice rather than through electoral pressures.”

In an International Monetary Fund (IMF) paper titled ‘She is the Answer’ in 2016, Yuko Kinoshita and Kalpana Kochhar, wrote that women can help offset the problems of an ageing population and a shrinking workforce.

“Although greater participation by women is crucial for countries regardless of where they fall along the path of demographic transition, for those whose population is rapidly ageing, the female labour supply is indispensable,” they wrote.

The paper states that when more women earn, households can support more children which can also reflect changes in social attitudes towards working mothers, child care and fathers’ involvement. Public policies such as better parental leave and availability of child care also help.

“In the early phase of a demographic transition, women who join the labour force may choose to have fewer children. As the population shrinks, a further decline in fertility is no longer desirable or sustainable over the medium term, so policies and society at large must help support conditions that enable more women to balance work and family,” they add.

‘Different but valid considerations’

According to former chief election commissioner S.Y. Quraishi, while both Stalin and Naidu have called for larger families, their considerations have been different.

“Both chief ministers’ reasons are valid but different. For Stalin it is delimitation and political considerations, but for Naidu it is economic and social consideration,” he said. 

“The reason why parliament imposed a freeze on delimitation in 1971 is still valid – that northern states are still recording higher TFR than southern states. So in my view, the freeze on delimitation should be extended.”

“If people do not do family planning, it is unfair to women who are subjected to repeated pregnancies. Concerns around high birth rate for women’s health and safety is definitely a very valid question and that is also relevant for northern states where birth rates are already high. I would say, in a mission mode, work should be done to reduce populations in states like Bihar and UP and bring their TFR to 2.1,” he added.

Whose Womb Is It Anyway?

Rooting for more and more children should be seen as a fundamental infringement on young mothers’ reproductive rights and physical autonomy.

“At one time I had called for observing family planning, but I am now making an appeal to people to increase the population by producing more children.”

– N. Chandrababu Naidu, chief minister of Andhra Pradesh

“… Today there is a scenario of decreasing Lok Sabha constituencies. It raises a question: why should we restrict ourselves to having fewer children? Why shouldn’t we aim for 16 children?”

– M.K. Stalin, chief minister of Tamil Nadu

With their recent statements, the two powerful male chief ministers have recently questioned the birth limits encouraged by India’s family planning programme launched in the ’50s. Both rule two of the richest and most progressive of our southern states that have rigidly held to the two-children-per-family norm and have far higher economic and social indices than most northern states.

Stalin has two children and his Andhra counterpart Naidu has one son. It is interesting to know why they are now demanding a return to larger families. It is just as interesting to note that neither seems to focus upon the repercussions of the expansion on females, the actual bearers of children. Pregnancy as well as the birth risks associated with repeated child-bearing are likely to swell along with a swell in population.

Naidu and Stalin are not the first ones to question small families, nor are their main reasons (fewer seats in the Lok Sabha, less allocation of central funds and a swell in the numbers of retired and ageing people in their states) the only reasons for opting for larger families.

Mrinal Pande

Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty.

A number of Hindu and Muslim leaders have also repeatedly stated that their tribe must increase their numbers quickly lest they risk becoming voiceless minorities. Not too long ago, in 2016 to be precise, at a convention of newly married couples, a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) worker named Darpan quoted the RSS chief’s plea for Hindus increasing their fertility rates “for the sake of society, our culture and our civilisation.”

A video about the purported population explosion of Muslims in Europe and elsewhere in the world was reportedly shown thereafter.

BJP MP Sakshi Maharaj and associates of the controversial godman Yati Narsinghanand have also gone on record urging Hindus to produce more children to avoid India becoming a Muslim-majority state.

All promoters of this bizarre idea of producing more children to have greater power and a voice louder than the rest seem to be driven by the same urge that led Chinese leader Mao Zedong to encourage high fertility rates – he is said to have declared that “With many people, strength is great.” He too did not show any concern with pregnancy and childbirth-related issues that among women would have generated questions and demanded answers the state was not prepared to give.

In the case of India, leaders from both the ruling party and the opposition are also largely non-inclusive in demanding 16 children per family. Fears the southern satraps seem to be gripped with have more to do with proportional representation in the Lok Sabha, and the fears are not unreal.

If the delimitation of seats in the Lok Sabha (an exercise frozen for 25 years in 2001) happens as expected in 2026, the north with its higher population will see an increase in its authority over the southern states.

No state of course will have zero seats, but the five southern states may lose 23 seats if the change in demography in the last 25 years is taken into account. And even if the total number of seats stays as is, the southern states would lose 25 seats and the top five in the north will get 33 additional seats.

Fewer seats and a smaller population may mean the better-governed and more prosperous South will get a lower share of central funds despite contributing more to the central kitty than many ‘BIMARU’ states.

Some ideas are not really new but need reaffirmation at confused times like this. One of these is a simple idea that women citizens are intrinsically as human as men and not just a sum total of certain biological givens that can be adjusted randomly by men without consulting women.

Also read | In Numbers: The Concerns Behind South Indian Politicians’ Remarks on Having More Children

Rooting for more and more children should be seen as a fundamental infringement on young mothers’ reproductive rights and physical autonomy. As more and more families turn nuclear with both parents working, they find that political decisions, randomness in limiting and then delimiting family size, and environmental changes all shape and affect both men and women equally.

So at the moment, all men and women seem in agreement with the simple notion that the Family Planning programme ushered in four decades ago: chhota parivar, sukh ka aadhaar. (A small family is a happy family).

The absurd and politically driven lurch from Europe to China to India of pushing families to a past when fathers sired families with a large brood and women bore their progeny as a matter of course, seems senseless to better-educated young couples today who are marrying and having children much later than their parents did.

The high cost of having more children, the pregnancy-related need for medical supervision, the harsh maternity leave policies most private companies have and the unequal burden of child-rearing that women of all classes and castes still experience, makes their exclusion from political debates on fertility absurd.

A 2022 survey by the Chinese recruitment firm Zhilian Zhaopin of professional women revealed that the reason the three-child policy failed to take root in an authoritarian state like China was that on the ground, only 0.8% of surveyed women wanted three children. Many women were happy marrying later and felt that their employment would be negatively affected by having more children – perhaps in view of clear pregnancy-based discrimination at the workplace.

Given China’s spectacular failure to turn the clock back on fertility norms, leaders demanding more and more children per family should move tactically and think about becoming inclusive. Instead of pushing for more children, they should push for a bigger say for women from the South in the Lok Sabha and build a case for the criterion of delimitation being demographic change and not demographic performance.

In general, women down South look better placed on educational and social indices. Good administration has seen to it that the fruits of progress reach them regularly as also medical facilities.

Lending support to women would automatically give them greater leverage with the Union government that has been beating its own drum about being pro-mothers, sisters and daughters. This would also present a healthy parallel to the increasingly authoritarian, male chauvinist and Hindi-Hindu stance the Union government has been selling.

North or South, as Indians living in the world’s largest democracy, we must all now seriously debate why it is that instead of asking the economy and polity to adjust to the change in the size of families, males dominating the political, religious and economic spheres expect women to adjust their fertility so that the needs for more Hindus, more Lok Sabha seats, skilled labour or cannon fodder are met.

It would be relevant to point out here that even our initial state-driven movements for smaller families and saving planet Earth have arisen not from a primary concern for mothers or Mother Earth, but from pressures generated by the wastefulness of the Vikas model and the repeated misallocation of financial resources by governments controlling all central funds, which they use for their own long-term political well being.

A revolutionary delimitation exercise where no state gets fewer seats than its current allocation and larger states get proportional representation may abolish the reason for the southern states’ rage.

They can also prosper some more by becoming more inclusive and appreciative of females and not treating them as misfits and outsiders in politics and in the markets. They could then go further and induct skilled northern labour to offset the gaps created by an ageing population and attain an enviable national popularity.

Mrinal Pande is a writer and veteran journalist.

Saakhi is a Sunday column from Mrinal Pande, in which she writes of what she sees and also participates in. That has been her burden to bear ever since she embarked on a life as a journalist, writer, editor, author and as chairperson of Prasar Bharti. Her journey of being a witness-participant continues.

In Numbers: The Concerns Behind South Indian Politicians’ Remarks on Having More Children

Declining fertility rates in southern states pose multiple risks: shrinking workforces, slower economic growth and reduced representation in parliament.

As fertility rates in southern India continue to fall below the national average, chief ministers like Andhra Pradesh’s Chandrababu Naidu and Tamil Nadu’s M.K. Stalin are sounding the alarm about an impending demographic crisis. 

Naidu has proposed incentives for larger families, going so far as to suggest a law that would restrict local body election candidacy to those with more than two children. Stalin, concerned about the South’s potential loss of parliamentary seats due to its slower population growth, quipped sardonically, “Why not aim for 16 children?”

Despite their differing political affiliations, both leaders share growing concerns about the long-term economic and political ramifications of these population trends.

Declining fertility rates in southern states pose multiple risks: shrinking workforces, slower economic growth and reduced political representation in parliament. As northern states grow, the South may lose parliamentary seats in the 2026 delimitation exercise. Moreover, an ageing population in states like Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh could strain public finances, with fewer working-age individuals supporting a growing elderly population.

Given that Union tax allocations are heavily influenced by population size, this demographic shift might lead to a redistribution of resources. Ironically, southern states – already net contributors to the central pool – could end up receiving even less in return.

Demographic divergence within India

India’s population is growing rapidly. On April 19, 2023, the United Nations announced that India (142.86 crore) overtook neighbouring China (142.57 crore) to become the world’s most populous nation. However, according to the World Population Review, this milestone was actually reached a few months earlier.

Chart 1

This growth, however, has been significantly skewed across the country. Population census data reveals that north Indian states have experienced a much higher growth rate compared to their southern counterparts.

As can be seen in Chart 1, in between the 1971 and 2011 censuses, the combined population of Rajasthan, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat in the North grew by over 150%. In contrast, the southern states of Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Karnataka saw growth below 100% during the same period.

This southern growth rate fell well below the national average of 121%.

Total fertility rate (TFR) is one metric that helps explain broader population growth dynamics. TFR refers to the average number of children a woman is expected to have over her lifetime. A TFR of 2.1 is considered the replacement level, meaning that a population will remain stable without growing or shrinking if the TFR stays here.

The Report of the Technical Group on Population Projections 2011-2036, prepared under the aegis of the National Commission on Population and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, provides insights into the fertility trends across Indian states, particularly highlighting the stark differences between South Indian and North Indian states.

Chart 2

As can be seen in Chart 2, the overall fertility rates in South India have consistently dropped below the replacement level of 2.1 and are projected to remain low through 2035. All southern states show fertility rates below 1.6 by 2031-35.

North Indian states, on the other hand, have significantly higher TFRs than their southern counterparts, though fertility rates are declining over time. States like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh will maintain above-replacement-level fertility for the next decade or more, contributing to continued population growth.

Median age is another metric that provides insight into the demographic ageing trends between South Indian and North Indian states. The median age is the age at which half the population is younger and the other half is older. A higher median age indicates an ageing population, while a lower median age suggests a younger, growing population.

Chart 3

As can be seen from Chart 3, all southern states are projected to have median ages above 37 years by 2036, with some (like Tamil Nadu and Kerala) crossing 40 years. This shows that southern India is ageing rapidly, largely due to lower fertility rates and longer life expectancy.

In contrast, northern Indian states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh are projected to have younger populations even by 2036, with median ages between 28 and 32 years.

Economic fallout

What does all this mean?

As Naidu pointed out, there will be severe and immediate economic implications.

Southern states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh have TFRs well below the replacement level of 2.1, with projections showing TFRs stabilising around 1.5 by 2036. As a result, these states will experience shrinking populations and rapid ageing.

This demographic shift means fewer young people entering the workforce, leading to labour shortages, declining productivity and a higher dependency ratio as the elderly population grows.

The increased burden on social services like healthcare and pensions could strain state finances, while the shrinking consumer base may slow economic growth.

In contrast, northern states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh have higher TFRs (ranging from 1.85 to 2.38), indicating continued population growth and younger populations. The projected median ages in these states will provide a potential demographic dividend with a large working-age population.

However, this also presents a challenge: northern states must create sufficient jobs and invest in education and skill development to prevent high unemployment and social unrest.

Chart 4

In fact, high dependency ratios in southern states signal an impending economic strain due to a shrinking workforce and rising social care needs. On the other hand, northern states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar will need to focus on youth employment as their working-age population grows.

Political fallout

Going beyond the economic concern raised by Naidu, who is part of the NDA, Stalin, who is part of the opposition INDIA bloc, has taken a step further by raising serious political concerns.

The immediate political implication of this demographic challenge is electoral.

Simply put, due to divergent and uneven population growth, South Indian states stand to lose parliamentary seats in the next delimitation exercise. This issue was highlighted in Milan Vaishnav and Jamie Hinston’s 2019 report titled “India’s Emerging Crisis of Representation”.

Chart 5

According to Chart 5, India’s population is projected to grow by 31.1 crore between 2011 and 2036. Six North and West Indian states – Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Gujarat – will account for a remarkable 63.8% of this growth.

Typically, parliamentary and legislative seats are allocated based on population. States with larger populations receive more seats, ensuring that each representative serves a constituency of roughly equal size.

Delimitation aims to create constituencies with equal or nearly equal populations. This is crucial for fair representation, as population disparities between constituencies would result in unequal voting power among citizens.

Following India’s independence, delimitation exercises were conducted regularly after each decennial census to adjust constituency boundaries according to population changes. The constitution mandates that Lok Sabha seats be allocated to each state based on their population, with these allocations revised after every census.

During the Emergency in 1976, the Indian government froze the number of Lok Sabha seats per state until 2001, based on the 1971 census figures. This freeze was implemented to protect states that had successfully reduced their population growth rates through family planning from losing seats to states with higher population growth.

In 2001, the freeze on seat allocation was extended to 2026. This ensured that no state would gain or lose parliamentary seats based on population growth until after the 2026 census, maintaining stable representation for states that had controlled population growth.

The seat freeze based on the 1971 population count has led to malapportionment in parliament. Some states, particularly in the North, have experienced significant population growth, yet their number of seats remain unchanged. Conversely, southern states, which have controlled their population growth, currently hold a larger share of seats relative to their population size.

After 2026, the seat allocation freeze will be lifted and parliamentary seats will be redistributed based on the most recent population data (likely from the 2011 census, unless the Union government conducts a census in 2025).

States with higher population growth, especially in the North (such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan), are expected to gain seats, while Southern states (like Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh) may lose seats due to their slower population growth.

The political implications of this redistribution, as raised by Stalin, are significant. The reallocation of seats post-2026 will likely shift political power from southern to northern states, as the latter gain more seats in the Lok Sabha.

The key question remains: how many seats will be affected? According to Vaishnav and Hinston, the five southern states combined stand to lose 26 parliamentary seats in the 2026 delimitation.

Chart 6

As Chart 6 reveals, in contrast, northern states, particularly Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, are projected to gain a combined 21 seats in the Lok Sabha, substantially increasing their influence. Additionally, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan are set to gain four and six seats respectively, further tilting the balance towards the North.

Currently, the five South Indian states have a combined total of 134 seats in the Lok Sabha, representing 24.6% of the total 543 seats. This gives these states a substantial voice in legislative matters, including constitutional amendments that require a two-thirds majority.

However, after the 2026 delimitation, their combined total could drop to approximately 108 seats or fewer.

This reduction means that if the southern states’ representation falls to around 108 MPs or less, their ability to influence constitutional amendments will be significantly diminished. Even if all southern MPs vote as a bloc, they would only have about 20% of the total seats, well short of the 33% needed to block a two-thirds majority.

Consequently, if an amendment is strongly supported by northern states – which will have gained political clout due to increased representation – the southern bloc could be overpowered in the Lok Sabha, effectively rendering them politically impotent on crucial constitutional matters.

This shift could lead to federal tensions, as southern states may feel increasingly marginalised and underrepresented in national decision-making processes. Their concerns regarding resource allocation, representation and policy priorities could be sidelined by the more populous northern states.

As Vaishnav and Hinston aptly put it, “If federalism is the glue that has kept the world’s largest democracy together, there are growing signs that this adhesive is becoming unstuck.”

Financial fallout

In India’s current economic structure, population size significantly influences the allocation of central funds, directly impacting states’ financial health. This financial dynamic can be better understood by examining the 15th Finance Commission’s recommendations, the role of cess and surcharges, and the distribution of central transfers among states.

The Finance Commission employs several criteria to allocate central tax revenues to states, with population size being a crucial factor. The 15th Finance Commission has assigned a 15% weightage to the 2011 population and an additional 12.5% to demographic performance, rewarding states that have lowered their fertility rates.

However, southern states with slower population growth receive lower allocations compared to northern states with higher population growth. Consequently, northern states with larger populations are set to receive a greater share of central tax revenues.

Cess and surcharges are Union government levies not shared with states. These levies constitute a growing portion of the government’s tax revenues, reducing the divisible pool of taxes transferable to states. Currently, 18% of all Union government taxes are in the form of cess and surcharges.

Southern states, being more developed and significant contributors to the nation’s tax base, argue that the increasing cess and surcharge collections have diminished their available funds.

Chart 7

Chart 7 reveals a stark contrast between South and North Indian states regarding their returns from the central divisible pool. The five southern states as well as Maharashtra receive significantly less than they contribute. Their returns range from a mere Rs 0.08 (Maharashtra) to Rs 0.62 (Kerala) for every Re 1 contributed.

This disparity underscores that these economically advanced states, while being net contributors to the central pool, receive disproportionately lower returns – a situation that could potentially breed discontent over resource allocation.

On the flip side, northern states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan are net recipients, gaining far more than they contribute. Bihar, for instance, receives a whopping Rs 7.26 for every Re 1 it contributes, while Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh receive Rs 2.49 and Rs 2.09 respectively.

These states, with their larger populations and greater developmental needs, benefit from the population-based resource allocation, securing much larger shares of central funds.

This glaring contrast highlights the growing fiscal imbalance between North and South India: southern states contribute more but receive far less in return, while northern states heavily rely on central support for their development.

Chart 8

Chart 8 reveals that southern states like Tamil Nadu (18.7%), Karnataka (17.7%) and Telangana (14.1%), and Maharashtra (17.8%) rely far less on central devolution compared to their own tax revenues. These states generate substantial tax revenue independently and receive a smaller proportion of their total tax income from the central pool, demonstrating their relative fiscal self-sufficiency.

Maharashtra, for instance, despite being the largest contributor to the central pool, receives only 17.8% of its total revenue from central funds – underscoring its role as a net contributor rather than a recipient.

In stark contrast, North Indian states such as Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh heavily depend on the Union government’s divisible pool for their revenues. Bihar, in particular, receives a staggering 67.4% of its total revenue from central devolution, highlighting its profound reliance on federal transfers. Similarly, Madhya Pradesh (48.1%) and Uttar Pradesh (42.3%) also depend on central funds to a much greater extent than their southern counterparts.

This disparity illuminates the North-South fiscal divide: southern states exhibit greater self-sufficiency in revenue generation, while northern states significantly rely on Union government funds for their fiscal stability and development needs.

Therefore, southern India faces a multifaceted crisis due to falling fertility rates and an ageing population. Economically, a shrinking workforce may lead to labour shortages and reduced productivity, while a growing elderly population will strain healthcare and pension systems. Politically, southern states risk losing parliamentary influence during the 2026 delimitation as northern states with higher population growth gain seats.

Financially, the South’s contribution to central tax revenues far exceeds its returns – an imbalance that could worsen as resource allocations increasingly favour more populous northern states. If left unchecked, these trends may result in political marginalisation and financial strain for southern states, threatening federal harmony in India.

Why Omar Abdullah’s Nomination from Baramulla Is a Strategic Gamble

Aside from the fact that he will take on Sajad Lone, the constituency also has a significant population of Paharis, who the BJP wants to woo.

New Delhi: The National Conference (NC) has taken a strategic gamble by announcing the candidature of former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister and party vice-president Omar Abdullah from Baramulla constituency which is set to go to polls on May 20.

The election will be a direct face-off between Omar and Peoples Conference (PC) president Sajad Lone who is hoping to secure his first victory in parliamentary election from his home constituency which mostly includes Baramulla, Bandipora and Kupwara districts of north Kashmir.

Without naming Lone, Omar said that his fight was not against the PC chief, “My (electoral) fight is not going to be against any individual but the powers who stand behind him and support him,” he said, ostensibly implying the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.

He added: “My party wants me to contest from North Kashmir because the BJP and the Union government are focussed on this constituency and I want to defeat them in north Kashmir itself.”

The announcement of Omar’s candidature, which was made by the NC President Farooq Abdullah, defied earlier speculations that the party vice-president was contesting from Srinagar constituency which is presently represented in the Lok Sabha by his father.

The party sources said that senior Abdullah has decided to take a break from active politics for some time but he will continue to lead the party.

Sajad Lone right) in a photograph from 2022. Photo: X/@sajadlone

Post-delimitation landscape

The number of assembly constituencies in Baramulla Lok Sabha constituency increased from 15 to 18 after J&K’s delimitation in 2022. The delimitation exercise, which was necessitated by J&K Reorganisation Act 2019, increased the number of assembly seats in Jammu and Kashmir from 83 to 90.

While Kashmir got only one new assembly seat after the delimitation, six new seats were carved out in Jammu, the stronghold of the BJP.

Trehgam, the new assembly segment carved out in Kashmir, falls in Baramulla constituency. Two assembly segments – Budgam and Beerwah – which were part of the adjoining Srinagar constituency, were also clubbed with the Baramulla constituency, taking the total number of assembly segments to 18.

Of these 18, the PDP won seven in the 2014 assembly election followed by the National Conference with four seats and Congress and PC with two seats each. Awami Party leader Engineer Rashid, who is languishing in Tihar jail, was also elected from Baramulla’s Langate assembly constituency.

However, in the aftermath of the reading down of Article 370, the PDP, which was the leading party in 2014 assembly election in north Kashmir, suffered a series of setbacks with several leaders such as the former ministers Dilawar Mir and Imran Reza Ansari quitting the party.

Mir, whose son Yawar Mir was elected from Rafiabad assembly constituency on the PDP mandate, joined the Apni party led by Altaf Bukhari, a former PDP leader and Srinagar-based business tycoon. Javed Hussain Baig, the PDP’s face in Baramulla, also recently joined the National Conference.

Another key PDP leader and Shia leader, Imran Raza Ansari, who was elected on the PDP mandate in 2014 assembly election from Pattan assembly segment, is now in the PC led by Lone along with Abbas Wani, the PDP’s lawmaker from Gulmarg constituency.

Electoral equations

In recent years, both the National Conference and Peoples Conference have widened their electoral base in the north Kashmir constituency which has a significant population of Shias who vote for their religious leader during the time of the election.

While Ansari, who is also the vice-president of PC, enjoys widespread support among the Shias, the addition of Budgam assembly segment, which is the bastion of Aga Ruhullah, another Shia leader and three time lawmaker, to Baramulla constituency, will weigh heavily on Lone’s performance.

Also read: Is the ECI and Union Govt Passing the Buck on Jammu and Kashmir Polls Post-Delimitation?

A senior NC leader and the party’s Lok Sabha candidate from Srinagar constituency, Ruhullah was critical of his party’s actions in the aftermath of the reading down of Article 370 which earned him widespread support across the political spectrum in Jammu and Kashmir.

Also, Omar was elected consecutively in 2009 and 2014 assembly elections from Beerwah, the second assembly segment of Srinagar Lok Sabha constituency which is now part of Baramulla constituency.

The Baramulla constituency also has a significant population of Paharis, a linguistic minority in Jammu and Kashmir who were recently granted tribal status by the Union government. The saffron party is wooing the Paharis who live in some pockets of Baramulla and Kupwara districts to change its political fortunes in Kashmir Valley.

Besides, the nomination of Awami Party’s jailed leader, Engineer Rashid, who was arrested by the National Investigations Agency on terror funding charges, from Baramulla Lok Sabha constituency, will add more spice to the electoral contest.

The Bukhari factor

The desertion of Dilawar Mir from the PDP and Usman Majid from the Congress, and their entry into Apni Party will make Bukhari one of the key players in Baramulla constituency. Rumours are already doing the rounds that Bukhari may put his weight behind Lone but the official announcement in this regard has not been made yet.

Both Bukhari and Lone are widely believed to enjoy the support of the saffron party. Senior BJP leader Tarun Chugh and Lone met Bukhari at the latter’s party headquarter in Srinagar last week but the outcome of the meeting was not known. Even though the BJP is politically absent in North Kashmir, the three parties are in the midst of forming an alliance for the upcoming Lok Sabha election.

While Omar has projected the election as his party’s battle against the BJP, the Peoples Conference has frequently accused him of being the saffron party’s first ally in Jammu and Kashmir, citing his ministership during the NDA government headed by Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He has also been accused of purportedly holding talks with the BJP after 2014 assembly elections for forming a coalition government with the BJP, a charge denied by the National Conference.

By taking the battle to Baramulla Lok Sabha constituency, Omar seems to be confident about his party’s prospects in the home turf of Lone who hails from Kupwara district. On the other hand, the Peoples Conference president is banking on the new electoral equations to pull the rug under Omar’s feet and secure his first Lok Sabha victory,

Delimitation Should Not Solely Be Determined by Numerical Superiority: Former SC Judge Chelameswar

There needs to be a debate if some states should get a “premium for their non-performance”, the retired judge said, speaking about delimitation and Central funds.

Retired Supreme Court judge Justice Jasti Chelameswar asked whether there should be a pattern where somebody gets a premium for their nonperformance, with the South Indian states paying for the nonperforming states.

He was speaking during a panel discussion on “Delimitation: Southern Discomfort And Solutions” at Dakshin Dialogues 2023, the annual flagship thought conclave of South First, in Bengaluru on Saturday, October 7.

“The matter of delimitation and ‘One Nation, One Vote’ should be debated seriously. Funds from the government of India are being used for the different states… Some of us in some other parts of the country are not being cared for so well. Something is required to be done. But should it be such a pattern that somebody gets a premium for their non-performance? How to solve it? That’s a matter which should be discussed along the line of delimitation,” said Justice Chelameswar.

On amending the constitution

He added that the constitution of India was a legal document that deserved the utmost respect: It was crucial not to view it as something infallible, but rather subject to scrutiny and adaptation.

This aspect has been a topic of discussion for the past 75 years, from the very beginning when questions arose about whether the constitution could be amended by parliament, he noted.

“It was in 1973 that the Supreme Court ruled that the constitution could be amended by parliament, with the limitation that the basic structure of the constitution could not be altered. Defining what constitutes this ‘basic structure’ is a complex task, akin to traditional Indian philosophy – it’s challenging to explain,” he said.

However, it was also worth noting that there were aspects of the constitution that might benefit from periodic reevaluation.

“What may have been suitable a century ago may require reexamination through rigorous and intelligent debate,” he explained. “The process should not be solely determined by shouting and numerical superiority; it demands thoughtful consideration.”

On interpreting the constitution

The framers of the constitution were individuals of great wisdom, with vast experience and deep commitment to the nation, noted the retired Supreme Court judge, adding that many of them endured prolonged periods of incarceration during the British colonial era.

Their sacrifices and dedication to the country’s development and democratic principles culminated in the creation of this constitution, he said.

“While there are aspects that might warrant reconsideration. I’d like to emphasise that the constitution’s ongoing interpretation and application are essential for its relevance and effectiveness,” he said.

“As for the principle of ‘one person, one vote’, it’s indeed a fundamental tenet of democracy. However, it raises questions about how political power, derived from numerical representation, intersects with other crucial aspects like financial distribution. I’m not an economist, but I can provide an example to illustrate this,” he added.

He also said there are two high courts in India where the use of Hindi as a language of communication is legally permissible – Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. Other states have subsequently joined.

“This development occurred in the 1950s when the assemblies passed a resolution, and the government was tasked with notifying Hindi as a language for high courts,” he noted.

“It’s important to note that this decision wasn’t influenced by any particular political party. However, despite the resolution, the use of Hindi in high courts has not become widespread. This raises questions about the practical application of such decisions,” he said.

Request for Hindi in court

He said that he once attended a gathering where the demand was raised to make Hindi an official language for legal documents and court proceedings. Many speakers supported this demand.

“When it was my turn, I mentioned that I come from a region where Hindi is not widely spoken, and I had watched numerous Hindi movies. I asked if anyone in the audience had seen even one South Indian movie, irrespective of the language. Surprisingly, not a single person had. My point was that diversity in languages is important, and learning more languages is enriching,” he said.

He added that, however, these decisions could be politically influenced. For instance, Hindi-speaking individuals formed a majority in parliament, and this influenced decisions regarding language use.

Similarly, election processes should adhere to the constitutional principle that the ratio of representation among states should be roughly equitable.

This story was originally published on South First.

Women’s Reservation: Modi Government in Tearing Hurry to Propose but Not to Wed

If the Modi government truly wanted to implement reservation for women, would it not have passed the Bill at the inception of its takeover of state power, giving itself room to accomplish the historic deed?

There are men and other men.

There are women and other women.

Thankfully not all men or women are ever of one mind.

Indeed, women, having sharper brains and fewer crude stakes, are harder to persuade than most men.

Think that despite the relentless propagation of a cult, the recent seven assembly bypolls saw the King’s party lose four of the seven, including one in the all-saffron Uttar Pradesh (Ghosi).

And remember that women voters now outnumber their male counterparts.

So, was it yet another desperate gambit to bring on the Women’s Reservation Bill in a “special Session” (not waiting for the scheduled Winter Session) of parliament, as if to have the measure implemented in the coming assembly elections?

Of course not.

This was meant to be another decorative candle to be dangled with yet another golden promise for the future.

And some future too.

Note that the Bill stipulates that the reservation will be implemented only after a national census is held, followed by a nationwide delimitation exercise.

That delimitation exercise may of course prove to be the most contentious political battleground than anything we have seen before.

In what way may parliamentary constituencies be rearranged (gerrymandered, if you know what I mean) in order to produce the maximum fruit for the ruling party we do not know.

If the discredited delimitation exercise conducted in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is anything to go by, that nationwide exercise may take forever, and then some.

Consider that the southern states, having performed far better in matters of development and population control, will stand to lose to those other states whose numbers have swelled with no comparable growth to boast of.

So much for fair play.

Will then the expansion of constituencies in northern states and their shrinkage in the south receive happy agreement?

Think again.

The Women’s Bill thus has clearly been a proposal with no date for a happy nuptial.

Consider that had the Modi government indeed wanted grandly to implement reservation for women in parliament and the assemblies, it would have brought on the Bill at the inception of its takeover of state power, giving itself room to accomplish the historic deed.

Any good reason why this was not done?

Because most men folk who aspire to parliament may make progressive noises but are at heart distressed by the prospect of losing their perches.

On the matter of content, the Indian National Congress, and indeed most parties who constitute the INDIA grouping of opposition parties, have now thrown a political spanner into the ruling juggernaut.

How about the inclusion of women who belong to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs)?

This is a dreadful catch-22.

Given that the ruling party, especially Shri Modi, has been courting this class of Indians, how may they explain the exclusion of their women members from the provisions of the Bill, since the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are included?

Is this anomaly set to unleash another Mandal movement?

If yes, this may indeed prove too hot for the saffronites to manipulate.

And, if they do concede the demand, how may they refuse OBC menfolk the same benefit?

Will the cult then succeed in persuading India’s women that its intentions have been clean, or will most citizens see through the subterfuge?

Remember, the fifteen lakh for each citizen did not come, nor did the two crore jobs every year.

Nor did the income of our farmers double as was promised.

If these, as the now honourable home minister once said, were just chunavi jumlas (poll gimmicks), why may India’s very smart women believe that the provisions of the Bill will become a reality should the BJP come back to power in 2024?

The fat is in the fire.

But there is no telling what cuisine may or may not come forth to the feminine spread.

Badri Raina taught at Delhi University.

Why Women’s Reservation May Not Be Implemented Even in 2029 Lok Sabha Elections

The Union government tying the legislation to the census and delimitation exercises means that Articles 81 and 82 of the Indian constitution will come into play – and perhaps delay the implementation until 2039.

New Delhi: On Wednesday, as the Lok Sabha debated the Women’s Reservation Bill, or the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam before it was passed later in the evening, Congress spokesperson Gurdeep Singh Sappal drew attention to the possibility that the reservation may not be implemented until the 2039 parliamentary elections. He quoted from BJP MP Nishikant Dubey’s speech in the lower house, in which he tied the Bill’s implementation to Articles 81(3) and 82 of the constitution. 

What do these Articles mean? Both these Articles assume significance as the current Women’s Reservation Bill is tied to the possibility of a census in the near future, followed by a delimitation commission that will redraw the Lok Sabha seats. It may also increase the number of seats if the Union government decides to amend Article 81.

Article 81 says that the number of seats will be restricted to 530 members chosen by direct election to the Lok Sabha, in addition to the 20 members chosen either through election or nomination from the Union Territories. Article 81 (3) says that these seats will be decided on the basis of the 1971 decadal census.

Against the backdrop of the current Women’s Reservation Bill, Article 82 becomes more important. Article 82 refers to the provision that reallocation of seats (delimitation) could be done only after every decennial census to ensure fair representation of all regions.

After India’s independence, the delimitation commission was constituted to reallocate Lok Sabha seats according to the first few rounds of census. However, the 42nd amendment, passed in 1976 during the Emergency, froze the delimitation of seats until the 2001 census. In 2001, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government passed the 84th amendment that froze the number of constituencies till 2026, even as the census data was being collected. 

Thus, Article 82 virtually bars any delimitation of constituencies before the 2026 census. The redrawing of Lok Sabha seats can happen only after the census. 

The freeze was introduced again to ensure that some regions which have fared better in controlling their population did not get left behind in terms of parliamentary representation. For example, the southern states have performed well in restricting their birth rates but some north Indian states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar have not. In terms of the distribution of Lok Sabha seats, which is done on the basis of population figures, the northern states could have a disproportionate advantage.  

The delimitation commission passed after the 2001 census redrew the Lok Sabha seats again ahead of the 2009 general elections but did not increase the number of Lok Sabha seats because of the freeze in place. 

The BJP MP Dubey said that Articles 81 and 82 prevented the Union government from implementing the women’s Reservation Bill in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls, meaning that a census, followed by another demilimitation exercise, had to happen before the women’s quota could be introduced. 

The big question, however, is what is the likelihood of the quota being implemented by the 2029 elections? Most experts believe that it is highly unlikely that the quota could be introduced by 2029. 

Union home minister Amit Shah said during the Lok Sabha debate that the Union government could begin the census process immediately after the 2024 elections, and that will allow it to implement it by 2029. However, experts believe that this is easier said than done. 

The final report of the 2011 Census was published only in 2013, after a two-year waiting period. The 2021 census was postponed – initially because of the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, but the Union government has not given any definite timeline yet.

If we take Shah’s word that the Union government will initiate the census in mid-2024, the final report is expected only by 2026. The delimitation commission will then begin its work to reapportion the Lok Sabha seats, and that should take at least another four to five years. This means that the introduction of women’s quota is unlikely even in the 2029 Lok Sabha elections. 

This is the best-case scenario if the Union government sticks to its promise of initiating the census immediately after getting elected. Opposition leaders and political analysts, however, are more pessimistic. 

Yogendra Yadav wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “Article 82 (amended in 2001) virtually bars delimitation prior to the first census figures post 2026. That can only be 2031. Most observers don’t remember that (the) Delimitation Commission takes 3 to 4 years (last one took 5 years) to give its final report. Besides, the coming delimitation can be very contentious, given the population ratio changes. So we are looking at a report around 2037 or so, that can only be implemented in 2039.”

TMC MP Mahua Moitra said, “What this government has brought here is not a Women’s Reservation Bill, it is a Women’s Reservation Rescheduling Bill. Its agenda is delay, its agenda is not reservation. The constant dithering on when there will be the next Census and when there will be delimitation will mean that the reservation is indefinitely delayed. This is not a historic Bill as it is being touted. It is a sham. The question of women’s reservation requires action, not the legislatively mandated procrastination.” 

“It means, in true BJP doublespeak style, we do not know if, and actually when, we will have 33 per cent women sitting in the Lok Sabha. The date of the next Census is entirely indeterminate. Therefore, the date of the delimitation is doubly indeterminate. So, women’s reservation is dependent upon two totally indeterminate dates. Can there be a greater jumla [empty promise]? Forget 2024, this may not even be possible in 2029,” Moitra said.

A few MPs from the southern states, like DMK’s Kanimozhi, have also expressed fear that southern states may end up losing their number of seats after 2026 (when the freeze ends) because of their lower birth rates, while northern states, despite performing poorly on that front, may add to their Lok Sabha tally.

Such a situation may complicate the electoral matrix and lead to a political storm, delaying the women’s quota even further. Moreover, the next delimitation exercise, in all likelihood, will be a complicated exercise as it will have to reapportion constituencies. The last such exercise took five years to complete, and it is likely that the next exercise, a more complex one, may take longer. In such a situation, one is truly looking at the 2039 Lok Sabha elections for the women’s quota – as envisaged by the current Bill – to be implemented. 

There was, however, another route for the Union government to implement the reservation immediately. It could have chosen to delink the women’s quota from the census and delimitation. A simpler Bill could have allowed all parties to ensure 33% reservation for women within the current architecture of the Lok Sabha. But since that has not happened, many opposition leaders are describing the Modi government’s Bill as yet another “election jumla”.

Southern States Should Collectively Oppose Delimitation, Says Telangana Minister KTR

He asked why Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Karnataka should get fewer Lok Sabha seats in the new delimitation for heeding the Centre’s suggestion on implementing population controlling measures.

New Delhi: Southern states should not be punished for controlling their population growth and concentrating on development, Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) working president K.T. Rama Rao said on Tuesday, May 30, commenting on the planned delimitation of Lok Sabha seats after 2026.

According to The Hindu, the IT minister of Telangana said that “it is time for all the political parties in the South, cutting across party affiliations, to raise their voice against the injustice” of the delimitation process. He said the “progressive policies” of the Southern States were “harming them while those unable to control their population to ensure proper distribution of resources were benefitting from the delimitation”.

If the delimitation process is conducted only on the basis of population, several states in North India are expected to have more representatives in the Lok Sabha while those in the South may lose a few.

“How can the South States Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Karnataka get fewer Lok Sabha seats in the new delimitation for heeding the Centre’s suggestion on implementing population controlling measures,” he asked in a statement.

The BRS leader said that the Southern states, which account for just 18% of the country’s population, contribute 35% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). These “progressive states contributing to the nation’s economy and development should not be ignored and put at a disadvantage”, he said.

The minister said those states, particularly in the North, which have ignored the Union government’s population control measures “were benefitting from the delimitation while those striving to strengthen the national economy were being undermined in the Lok Sabha delimitation process”.

Census, Delimitation and the Increased Seating Capacity of New Parliament

The outcome of the delimitation exercise can change the landscape of representation in parliament.

India is rapidly digitising. There are good things and bad, speed-bumps on the way and caveats to be mindful of. The weekly column Terminal focuses on all that is connected and is not – on digital issues, policy, ideas and themes dominating the conversation in India and the world.

The new parliament that was inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday, May 28, has every opposition leader questioning the idea of a New India with imaginations of Akhand Bharat. To every perceived voter of the BJP, Modi is replacing the symbols of colonial history with Indian symbols of power. The parliament building signifies that power and it is a structure with an increased seating capacity of 888 Lok Sabha seats and 384 Rajya Sabha seats. This highlights the role of the census in the delimitation exercise, which will happen sometime after 2026.

The Union home minister and BJP leader Amit Shah said in 2019 that the BJP will remain in power for 50 years. Shah, the much-touted master strategist and ‘Chanakya’ of BJP’s electioneering ideas, understands the role of the census and delimitation in ensuring that the party remains in power. The delimitation and re-organisation of Kashmir after the dilution of Article 370 show us what the BJP is capable of doing to take control of power. The delimitation process of 2008 was also very controversial in the Northeast among the tribal communities, which lost representation. The new delimitation commission set up for the Northeastern states by the executive in 2020 has also been temporarily halted.

The census 2021 – whenever and if it ever happens – will be one of the most important exercises in the history of India. The data from the census will determine how electoral constituencies will be redrawn. The outcome of this exercise can change the landscape of representation in parliament. To political observers, this is not a new phenomenon as delimitations in Gujarat, when Modi and Shah were in power, gave the BJP a similar advantage while undermining opposition political parties.

Raw data from the census was always confidential and in the custody of the census commissioner under the Ministry of Home Affairs. The Census Act of 1948 protects the citizenry by ensuring the raw census information is not shared with anyone. The census as we know is being replaced by population databases like the National Population Register and 360-degree profiling databases, where census data remaining confidential is immaterial when the other databases have similar information. Any national political party with access to this information and the ability to influence the delimitation process can change the contours of our electoral constituencies.

Therefore, it is important that data contained in census 2021 should have information security, while also minimising the data that is collected in the process. The National Population Register and the upcoming Amendments to the Registration of Birth and Deaths Act, 1969 instead promote building 360-degree profile databases. These issues of information security and census are not unique to India. Even the United States Census Bureau is exploring mathematical options of Differential Privacy to protect the confidentiality of its population and the effects of the census on its democracy.

The US is also a prime example of issues related to the manipulation of electoral constituencies through a process called “gerrymandering“, which has mostly helped the Republican party. If and when the delimitation process does start, the ability of political parties to profile voters and their voting patterns may determine the spatial boundaries of new electoral constituencies. This ability to spatially identify the population and its profiles is now being acquired by the Indian state in different sectors from agriculture, land titling, urban taxation and other economic avenues to replicate its usage in electoral politics. The Indian government is literally using drones to map every household in India and this information too is going to be used by political parties as part of electoral manipulation and electioneering.

By the need for information security, I am not limiting it to confidentiality and privacy of the population in census 2021, but also the integrity of information in the census. The census is not only about determining population but also electoral voters through the exercise of citizenship that has been juxtaposed with the census. Faulty data in the census can always be used to take away the rights of minority populations – as was the plan in Kashmir and northeastern states. At the same time, any information that is acquired by the state and is not shared with its population creates information asymmetries between the citizenry and the state.

Delimitation is a future exercise that will be a very political process and will cause different population groups to adversely react to how the exercise proceeds. But the census is a problem that is at our doorstep and the lack of accountability in its administrative procedures will determine the fate of various population groups. While a significant section of civil society opposed the weaponisation of census and citizenship exercises through the NRC, our lack of ability to determine information practices of the census 2021 could be a very costly affair for democracy.

The current opposition to Census 2021 is also making the Ministry of Home Affairs do an online exercise, where citizens update their information on their own. The multiple parallel exercises of creation of birth and death registries, social registries for welfare, Aadhaar Voter ID linking and NATGRID for surveillance will allow the government to do a census without going door to door. If it is just data collection, the government has figured out how to force us to part with it through coercion.

Supreme Court Seeks Centre, EC’s Response on Plea Challenging J&K Delimitation

The matter will be heard next on August 30.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday (May 13) asked the Union government, administration of the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir and Election Commission to file their replies on a plea challenging the recent delimitation exercise undertaken in the area.

“…all respondents being represented before us in order to examine it is necessary to have the stand of the respondent filed on affidavit. The affidavits be filed within 6 weeks,” LiveLaw quoted the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh as saying.

The bench also noted that since this case was not about the revocation of Article 370 and Article 35A, the parts of the petition criticising that move was to be ignored. “On our specific query Ld. Counsel for petitioner submits that he is not assailing the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A of Constitution of India. Thus, the allegations in that behalf are relevant and to be ignored,” the judges said.

The matter will be heard next on August 30.

The petition has alleged that the delimitation exercise was supposed to be carried out on the basis of the 2011 population Census, but there was no such population census in the UT that year.

The plea also challenges the increase in number of seats from 107 to 114 (including 24 seats in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) in the UT of Jammu and Kashmir to be ultra vires Articles 81, 82, 170, 330 and 332 of the Constitution and Section 63 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, according to LiveLaw.

The petition, filed by residents of Jammu and Kashmir K, also sought a declaration that the constitution of the Delimitation Commission under the Delimitation Act 2022 is without power, jurisdiction and authority, Hindustan Times reported.

On May 5, a three-member delimitation panel headed by Supreme Court Justice (retd) Ranjana Prakash Desai notified 90 assembly constituencies in J&K. According to the notification, seven additional constituencies have been added to the J&K assembly.

As The Wire has reported, while the assembly constituencies in Jammu, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s stronghold, have increased from 37 to 43 with the addition of six new seats, the number of seats in Kashmir has gone up only one notch, from 46 to 47. This is despite the fact that Jammu’s population is only 53 lakh, around 15 lakh less than the Kashmir Valley’s population of approximately 68 lakh, according to the 2011 Census.

In the revised electoral map drawn by the delimitation panel, the average population of an assembly constituency in the Muslim-majority Kashmir will be 1.4 lakh, while it will be only 1.2 lakh in Jammu, which is the bastion of the saffron party.