German philosopher Edith Stein famously said: “The world doesn't need what women have, it needs what women are."
What Stein’s statement essentially signifies is the value of women's inherent qualities, perspectives, and contributions to society beyond their traditional roles or possessions.
If one asks, “What’s our transitional government head, Prof Muhammad Yunus’ biggest constituency?” the answer should be -- WOMEN!
Since his “charity began at home” (read Jobra village -- the ideation lab of Grameen Bank) in 1976, what Yunus has consistently tried to ensure is unbanked rural poor women’s access to credit.
During Grameen’s formative days, Yunus banked on the unbanked women, and they -- through group formation at the community level -- put their faith in his microfinance experiment.
Women have long been overrepresented among the poor and disenfranchized. Thanks to years of effort by the microcredit guru, Grameen can now say that 98% of its borrowers are women.
Upon receiving his Nobel Prize, Dr Muhammad Yunus commented: “In Bangladesh, women don’t even make up 1% of bank borrowers, so we thought we should address the issue through our program.”
Millions of Bangladeshi rural women feel economically empowered today, and many state and non-state interventions have contributed to this, positively impacting their lives over the years. Prof Yunus and Grameen’s microfinance movement have certainly done their fair share.
The question is: When it comes to political empowerment, do women see much light at the end of the tunnel? Are women any better served with Prof Yunus presiding over a moribund democracy in transition?
Let’s scrutinize.
His administration of more than a year has seen the establishment of 11 reform commissions -- at least three of which have given him a very loud and clear message, advocating steps to ensure women’s greater say and representation in politics and parliament.
When the issue came up for discussion at the national consensus commission, we saw a display of “ignominious unity” among the key stakeholders, who vehemently opposed any notion or mention of greater representation for women in parliament through directly contested polls.
Most of the key political parties, including future contenders for power, shrugged off suggestions for greater women’s participation and direct elections for women lawmakers. They preferred retaining the current provision of 50 reserved seats over holding direct elections.
These heavily male-dominated parties appeared content with the current system of 50 unelected reserved seats for women. What they agreed to was merely a commitment to give at least 5% of nominations to women -- which practically translates into only 15 seats out of the 300 in parliament.
What is even more painstaking is that there was little enthusiasm among consensus commission members to walk the talk and make parties agree to terms that would enhance women’s chances for greater participation in politics and parliament in the near future.
In the first place, women were very poorly represented in all 11 reform commissions that Prof Yunus and his administration constituted. And then, these commissions did not consult women much either.
We have also witnessed, with utmost angst, that when the reform commission on women’s affairs submitted its report, its members were subjected to insults and threats by a section of religious bigots.
These bigots even labeled the commission members as “whores” simply for making some recommendations that did not align with their brand of religion-based politics.
The women's affairs reform commission had suggested, among other things, women’s rights to property and inheritance. This was nothing new -- it was in the same vein and spirit as provisions already enshrined in our national women’s policy, enacted over a decade ago but shelved since due to the nuisance value of the bigots.
The members who worked diligently and passionately for women’s causes in society did not receive much-needed support from the government. The government appeared to prefer “strategic silence” -- probably to appease its so-called “Islamist constituencies”-- leaving the women involved with the reform commission on their own.
Thanks to rights activists, NGO workers, and right-minded citizens of the country, who came forward to hold solidarity rallies in the capital, offering them moral support during that turbulent time.
We have also seen in recent months how women in public spaces have been harassed by bigots engaging in moral policing, admonishing women for their free choices of attire, and yet getting off scot-free.
It did not sit well with the promise of upholding women’s rights and dignity when the State remained a silent spectator as bigots accorded a hero's reception to such harassers in broad daylight.
It is a moment of truth for Prof Yunus. If he wishes to do justice to his past reputation for catering well to his biggest constituency -- WOMEN -- he needs to demonstrate publicly that his administration means business when it comes to women’s political empowerment.
He must seize the window of opportunity -- courtesy of the sacrifices made by many young women alongside men during last year’s Monsoon Revolution -- to make meaningful changes for women, who constitute 51% (read: More than half) of Bangladesh’s population.
Almost a 100 years ago, when Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was presiding over post-Ottoman modern Turkey, he did not hesitate to advance the causes of women in society.
Atatürk’s most significant reform addressed the legal status of women. In 1926 a new civil code was enacted that abolished polygamy, made divorce a civil action, and established equal inheritance rights for men and women.
In 1934, women obtained the right to vote -- much earlier than in many European countries. The following year, 18 women were elected to Ankara’s parliament.
We must have been inspired by Atatürk; otherwise, why would we still chant lines from our national poet Nazrul’s Kemal Pasha, or name Dhaka’s main road artery (leading to upscale Gulshan) after the great Turkish reformer?
Yunus would do well to go hands-on in nudging reforms for the empowerment of women -- there is no harm in taking a cue or two from Kemal’s reform textbook.
Reaz Ahmad is Editor, Dhaka Tribune.