Priyanka Gandhi targets PM Modi over women’s quota bill, calls delimitation plan political

Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra on April 16 criticised the Modi government over the women’s reservation bill, alleging that the proposed linkage with delimitation is politically motivated and could undermine democratic principles.

Speaking during the special session of Parliament, Priyanka Gandhi said the bills “smell of politics” and questioned the government’s intent behind combining women’s reservation with the delimitation exercise. Narendra Modi had earlier addressed the House backing the bill as a major step towards women’s empowerment.

The Congress leader reiterated that her party supports women’s reservation but argued that linking its implementation to delimitation could delay the process and affect fair representation. She described the delimitation proposal as an “attack on democracy,” raising concerns about how electoral boundaries may be redrawn.

The debate took place as the government introduced key legislative proposals, including the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill, 2026 and the Delimitation Bill, 2026, during the ongoing Parliament session.

The bills aim to enable 33 per cent reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies, alongside a reconfiguration of constituencies based on future census data.

Priyanka Gandhi also accused the Prime Minister of presenting “incomplete information” on the women’s quota bill, while asserting that women’s representation should not be used for political gain.

She pointed out that the demand for women’s reservation has existed for decades and should be implemented without additional conditions.

The remarks come amid sharp exchanges between the ruling government and Opposition parties over the proposed reforms. While the Centre has maintained that delimitation is necessary to ensure fair representation, Opposition leaders have argued that the move could alter the electoral balance and delay the rollout of women’s reservation.

The discussion is part of a broader political confrontation during the special Parliament session, with both sides presenting contrasting views on the timing, structure, and implications of the proposed changes.