In a rare legislative setback for the Narendra Modi government, the 131st Constitutional Amendment Bill, which was intended to increase the strength of Parliament and enable the implementation of the women’s reservation Bill, was defeated in Parliament. The concerns and fears of opposition parties also reflect the tension between majority rule and minority representation.

Ambedkar believed that representation of all sections of the population, including minorities and other vulnerable groups, serves as the barometer of democracy within a political community. Along with the representation of opinions, he insisted that personal representation of individuals from the community is also important, as he believed that specific concerns could be voiced only by the community members. We may share the concerns and extend our support to minorities, SC/STs, women, and transgender individuals, but we may not be able to replicate their lived experiences to address grievances related to them. Thus, personal representation constitutes the substance of democracy.

To have a fair and equal representation for all citizens throughout India, Articles 81 and 170 of the Constitution give the ratio of population for Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assembly seats. Article 327 empowers Parliament to create an independent Delimitation Commission to redraw the constituencies to uphold the democratic principle of “One Vote, One Person, One Value”. But the delimitation exercise has been used as a political tool by the ruling parties all over the world to weaken the opposition by gerrymandering the constituencies in their favour.

Packing and cracking

Gerrymandering is the practice of manipulating the boundaries of the constituencies to create an advantage for a political party. This dilutes the votes likely to be secured by opposition parties. Gerrymandering also reduces representation of certain sections of the population and weakens democratic politics. “Packing” and “cracking” are the two important ways in which gerrymandering is carried out. “Packing” is bringing all the targeted population into a single constituency, so that their influence in the other constituencies is minimal. “Cracking” is dividing and scattering the targeted population among different constituencies so that the vote value becomes insignificant. This will create a safe constituency for the dominant party and weaken the opposition. Communal gerrymandering is the manipulation of constituencies to weaken the voting value of a particular community/minority/caste.

Throughout the world, it is very difficult to prove charges of gerrymandering, as the legal and technical standards are complex. Even in India, the decision of the Delimitation Commission is final and cannot be challenged in the court of law. A lack of institutional framework/understanding on what constitutes fair and effective representation is a major constraint in challenging communal gerrymandering all over the world.

In the US, to protect African American voters from being excluded through racial gerrymandering, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted. It prohibits any state practice that will lessen the opportunity for racial or linguistic minorities to participate in elections and elect their representatives. The Act imposes a legal obligation on delimitation authorities to create electoral districts with a majority of minority voters.

Communal gerrymandering in India

For the first time, the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002) noted that the representational disparities have widened due to the freeze on the redrawing of constituencies from 1976. The commission noted that the representation of Muslims was lower than their proportion of the population, and this could lead to alienation. It is recommended that political parties develop leadership potential among the minorities, and the state should strengthen pluralism in politics. Further, the commission recommended that to avoid any major disparities while delimiting the constituencies, the Delimitation Commission should reflect the plural composition of society.

The Sachar Committee (2006), constituted to study the social, economic, and educational status of the Muslim community of India, highlighted in its report the institutionalised discrimination of Muslims and weakening of their political participation. The report alleged that the Muslims were excluded from political participation and representation through a variety of mechanisms. It highlighted two major exclusionary mechanisms used against Muslims. The first was the non-inclusion of Muslims in the voters’ list, which snatched away their right to choose their representatives. The second was the declaration of “reserved” constituencies in areas where Muslims had higher concentration, which denied them political participation. The above two reports showed that the Muslims were systematically excluded from political participation over a period of time.

In 2023, the Delimitation Commission redrew the boundaries of parliamentary and state legislatures in Assam. Election studies expert Yogendra Yadav alleged that communal gerrymandering during the delimitation exercise in Assam has diluted the votes of Muslims. The Muslims, who were a majority in 35 out of 126 constituencies in Assam, were restricted to 20 constituencies after the delimitation exercise. Similarly, the 2022 delimitation exercise in Jammu and Kashmir weakened the representation of Muslims in Kashmir in comparison to the Jammu region: the Jammu region, which has majority Hindu population, saw its seats go up by six, while the Muslim majority Kashmir region had only one additional seat.

Such systemic exclusion of Muslims from political representation has denied the community any significant socio-economic development, as pointed out by the Sachar Committee. The representation of Muslim MPs in Parliament has shown a decline in recent times. In 1952, Muslim MPs’ representation in Parliament was 5.11 per cent, which increased to 9 per cent in 1980. After that, there was a decline in their representation, and in 2024, they accounted for only 4.42 per cent of Parliament despite an increase in their population to 14 per cent.

There are only 24 Muslim MPs representing around 180 million Muslims in the present Parliament. There is a clear reduction even in the nomination of Muslim candidates by all political parties. It got reduced from 320 in 2014 to 94 in 2024. Out of 24 elected Muslim representatives, 21 are from the Congress-led INDIA Alliance, and one is from Asaduddin Owisi’s All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM); two are independent candidates. Similarly, the State legislatures have seen a decline in Muslim representation in recent times. The present delimitation exercise seems like another exercise to reduce and deny Muslim representation in Parliament, which is the long-term agenda of Right Wing politics.

What parties should do

The opposition parties, rather than getting trapped in communal politics, should play a constructive and interventionist role in challenging the communal gerrymandering in India to strengthen the political representation of minorities. The present three-member Delimitation Commission is represented by a retired judge appointed by the Union Government, the CEC, and the State Election Commissioner.

As suggested by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, the Delimitation Commission should be represented by more members, including minorities, SC/STs, and opposition party leaders, to carry out the delimitation exercise in an objective manner without communal gerrymandering. Opposition parties should increase the nomination of minorities and SC/STs in general constituencies. The civil society should be more active in confronting the communal polarisation and work towards strengthening the political participation of diverse communities to realise Ambedkar’s idea of democracy.

Venkatanarayanan S. teaches at the Department of International Studies, Political Science, and History at Christ University, Bengaluru. The opinions expressed are personal.

Also Read | For BJP, population alone is the sacrosant principle: Suhas Palshikar

Also Read | Timing and intent of women’s reservation Bill suspect: John Brittas