The Question

This question was posted on behalf of an academic from France, who wishes to remain anonymous.

I would like to know of any cases where quotas for women have been abrogated - in accordance with article 4 of the UN Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, which stipulates that quotas must be deleted when the objective of equality is reached.

Summary of responses
Denmark is cited as a country where a temporary special measure was removed when it was no longer considered necessary.

Although the international legal framework views quotas as temporary measures, it is noted that many countries have passed legal measures of a more permanent design. In addition, within the African Union, the use of quotas is governed by the AU Protocol on the Rights of Women, which, unlike the UN Convention, does not recommend that measures be abrogated once achieved. The result is that there is often a clash between international instruments on the one hand, and regional and national instruments on the other.

One practitioner is of the view that while this is an interesting question, it is also a purely academic one, as true equality has yet to be achieved anywhere.

Examples of related ACE Articles and Resources
Encyclopaedia:
• Representation of Women  
• Legislated Quotas for Women’s Representation 
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Legislated Quotas for Women’s Representation

External Resources
• United Nations Convention on the Elimination on all Forms of Discrimination against Women 
• Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, African Union 
• Women in Parliament, Inter-Parliamentary Union
• Equality for Women, World Bank (2008) 

Names of contributors
1. Rosario Pavese
2. Manuel Wally
3. Susanne Giendl
4. Ata Okon Elder Ewa
5. Skye Christensen

In Argentina, we have a quota law since 1991, and it has not been abrogated. It is not even been discussed, even though the lists in the last election have been integrated by more than 37% of women (for Diputados) and 40% for senadores.

In the African Union context, affirmative action in favor of women is regionally governed by the AU Protocol on the Rights of Women, signed in Maputo in 2003.

http://www.achpr.org/instruments/women-protocol/#9

While prescribing positive measures, the protocol refrains from suggesting that such measures should expire once equity is achieved, as CEDAW does. This poses an interesting conflict between regional and international instruments. It should be noted that African nations are currently eclipsing the rest of the world in introducing women quotas, perhaps because of the existence of an applicable regional instrument, which lacks, for instance, in the EU and American contexts.

http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm

[email protected]

If I may quote from the 2008 World Band Report on Equality for Women (yes, that is four years ago, but we are still leading the same discussions because we are still in a similar situtation, better in some places, even worsened in others): 

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/EqualityforWomenfinal.pdf 

„In general, progress in expanding women’s opportunities has lagged behind progress in expanding women’s capabilities. Efforts are needed to “level the playing field” for women so they can use their increased capabilities in the economy and  society.“ 

Quotas are a classical remedy to level the playing field, even if you do already have a lot of qualified women, which is also why expanding women’s capacities (and all of the indeed very important measures mentioned in Abdoulaye’s commentary, for instance) is absolutely necessary, but certainly NOT ENOUGH to LEVEL the playing field for women – practically worldwide. 

So, unfortunately I am not aware of any country worldwide where quotas have been installed but actual and complete equality has been reached – I certainly know a number of countries where we do not have significant quota but a prevailing discussion for DECADES now that things will change with education and over time, anyway. Well, yes, things change, but it takes unnecessarily long and it is always just a little bit , but somehow women seem to be expected to be content with „steps in the right direction“, rather than – equality.

Anyway, if somebody could point out a country to me that has reached a factually entirely level playing field, with or without quota (and including for women of reproductive age with or without children), I would be grateful! Until then, I shall assume that the question is interesting, but, at this point, very academic.

[email protected]

The present government in Nigeria has tried to increase number of women in government, they still have not reached the 35% quota. so the question of removing quota does not yet arise. it may take more than a decade for this to happen. More education opportunities will fast track this

My my perspective, the issue of gender-neutrality in quota design is closely linked to the question of whether they are temporary or permanent. I'm including a few paragraphs that I recently wrote for a UN Women report on these two issues:

Temporary or Permanent Measures?

While the international legal framework refers to measures that ensure the representation of women as temporary measures - to be repealed at a point that they are no longer needed - many countries have opted instead to incorporate to incorporate legal measures of a more permanent design. These permanent measures often stipulate an acceptable range of representation (sometimes referred to as parity) of either sex such as 40%-60%. The benefit of this design is in the perception that parity is not a woman’s issue, but pertains instead to the broader issue of democratic representation and equality. In other countries, TSMs have been removed when they were no-longer considered relevant (such as Denmark). 

And on Gender-Neutral Quota Design:

Quotas and other TSMs may be constructed in a gender neutral manner. This may have the effect of making them more acceptable to some, by stressing gender balance in politics rather than a minimum number of women. 

A gender-neutral TSM focuses on gender balance rather than a minimum number of women. Nomination quotas may specify a maximum percentage of one sex, for instance, or that lists must alternate by gender. Reserved seat quotas may refer to the less-represented sex. Rotating reserved seats can specify that the seat may not be occupied by the same sex for more than two terms. Voter quotas may refer to a gender-balanced voting pair, or that a maximum number of one’s votes can be cast for candidates of one sex. Many private sector staffing quotas have been constructed this way – instead of targeting a specific proportion of women in the staff, they target a balance of anywhere between 40% and 60% of each sex. 

When considering a quota, a gender-neutral design may have both political benefits, as well as legal. It may be more even-handed for men and less discriminatory. Some gender-neutral quotas may result in less women’s representation than a non-neutral quota would, but only marginally so (such as might be the case for rotating reserved seats for instance).

For example, the Electoral code for the Belgian parliament contains a gender-neutral quota of 50%: “On electoral lists, the number of candidates of either gender cannot be greater than the other.” (Electoral Code, Article 117bis). The 2007 Spanish Parity law stipulates that there should not be over 60% or fewer than 40% of each sex in parliament. Political parties have the liberty of constituting their lists however they may wish, but the list will not be accepted if it does not conform to this requirement. The Ecuadorian law stipulates a similar provision with rank ordering: “The slates shall be established in an egalitarian fashion with a sequence of woman, man or man, woman until the total number of candidates has been completed." (Constitution of Ecuador - Transition system, article 4) The Macedonian law sets out a 30% quota, and refers to the ‘less-represented sex:’ "In the submitted list of candidates for Members of Parliament in every three places at least one will be reserved for the less represented sex" (Electoral Code, Article 64 [5]). The Serbian law similarly stipulates a 30% quota: “The lists of the political parties must contain at least 30 per cent of each sex. (Law on Elected Representatives, Article 40a)”

 Hope you find these helpful.