 Greetings everyone. It's my pleasure to welcome you all to this timely and important webinar on women inheriting land rights and realities, which is co-organized by Landisa and the working group for women and land ownership with support from the NRMC Center for Land Governance and Land Portal Foundation. It's indeed my honor to moderate this discussion today. Ownership and control over land is essential to ensuring gender equality and improve the quality of lives of not only women, but also of the families and communities. Despite a horde of international and national commitments, ownership of land continues to be an area with appalling disparities between men and women. An overlapping web of legal, structural, social, economic and cultural factors prevent women from realizing their right to inherit land. At the first place, the inheritance laws, policies and regulations overtly discriminate against women and are gravely insufficient to ensure them an equal right to inheritance, the plurality of laws and the huge ambiguities further under the progressive moves of the law. Even when the laws entitle equal rights to women, the social norms and institutions pose constraints to women from claiming their inheritance rights. These complexities and the opportunities therein lay the context of today's webinar. Allow me to introduce our esteemed panelists who come from a wide range of experience. We have with us Dr. Govind Kailkar, who is Senior Advisor for Women Land and Productive Assets at Landisa, India. We also have with us Dr. Hema Swaminathan, who is Associate Professor at Center for Public Policy Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore. We have with us Ms. Neeti Saxena, who is activist and researcher based in Uttar Pradesh. She has a lot of experience working on ground, especially in Northern India. And we also have with us Dr. Varsha Bhagat Ganguly, who is a researcher and former convener for working women on women and land ownership, precisely called WTWLO, which is a state level network of 43 NGOs and CBOs in Gujarat. We will today broadly discuss women's rights to inherit land in the context of human rights and global commitments such as the Sustainable Development Goals, legal and policy environment pertaining to inheritance by women in India, socio-cultural barriers to inheritance by women, and good practices and progress made to ensure women's right to inherit. We encourage participants to ask questions. Please use the questions feature to pose questions to the panelists. We will ensure that your questions are addressed in turn during the open discussion that follows. Let me open the conversation now with some thoughts from Hema Swaminathan. Hema, could you please share your thoughts on why it matters at all for women to own land and why is it important to talk about inheritance in the context? Shipra, it's really important in terms of social justice. That's the framing I would take. That women should have the same opportunity that everybody else to enjoy the fruits that ownership brings along with it. There is an instrumental argument that land is important for women, but when women own land, it's also good for the household and communities, and there are a whole range of positive outcomes that are associated with their land ownership. Certainly that is important, but that cannot be the only reason for women to have inheritance rights. In terms of inheritance being very critical, land is generally acquired in various ways through purchase, government distribution, marriage, and through inheritance. Land markets are generally underdeveloped in many developing countries and particularly in rural areas, so you don't find large-scale purchase of land happening. For women, in particular, it's hard to participate in markets just given their low levels of paid work that women are participating in India which limits their earning capacity. Within marriage, there is no concept of marital assets in most parts of the country, and this disadvantages women and completely discounts her contribution to asset building within marriage. There is land reform and land distribution from the state governments which plays an important part, but I would really stress that inheritance is really a critical pathway in which women are able to acquire land or stake their ownership claims over land. Thank you, Shukra. Thank you, Hema, for bringing in the aspect of social justice that makes it necessary to talk about women's inheritance in their own right. Govind, I now turn to you. Can you shed some light on the connection between the Sustainable Development Goals and the women's right to inherit land? Thank you, Shukra. At the outset, I would like to point out how the Sustainable Development Goals, which I will call SDGs, how they explicitly talk about women's right to land, and not only one goal. There are three goals that explicitly talk about women's right to land. Goal one on end poverty in all its forms, that means part of the poverty reduction or elimination. Target 1.4 talks clearly that ownership and control of land and other forms of property by women and men and their inheritance right in ensuring poverty ending by 2030. So that is the, if you want to end poverty, you have to ensure that there is ownership and control of land and other forms of property by both women and men. Second is goal two, which is end hunger and achieve food security and promote sustainable agriculture. Target 2.3 talks about achieving it through, quote, secure and equal access to land and other productive resources by women and indigenous peoples. Goal 5, which is on achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. Target 5A highlights undertaking reforms to give women equal rights to economic resources as well as access to ownership and control over land and other forms of property, financial services, inheritance and natural resources and accordance with national laws. Now there are three important things about these goals that we should note. All these three goals talk about inheritance rights and ownership and control of land. So not by ownership but management rights along with it, control rights. And this is for the first time that economist and or economic analysis is talking of asset distribution and not only of employment or income generation, which has been the part of the development dialogue so far. So and I have repeatedly pointed out this that asset distribution is much superior than the income generating activities or cash transfer program as asset distribution takes care of the market distortions. Not only it increases the agency of women, which other program to some extent also do, but the market distortions are taken care by the assets. Second is that there is some national commitment to these goals to a large extent. Government cannot bypass them as an external agenda of the industrialized powers of Western powers as was the case in the millennium development goals earlier which preceded this. Third important aspect is note about these goals is that such land ownership rights have the potential to address gendered social norms and realizing the agency of women and girls. In what way in terms of addressing their unfreedoms of mobility, decision making and all pervasive violence within home, workplace, public infrastructure such as transport and roads. So this is very important that goals really talk about ensuring that if we want poverty reduction, if we want reduction in equality, if we want to eliminate violence against women, which now all UN agencies and other development partners have to do it and government very much interested in doing that. Then achieving these goals will be very, very important. Thank you, Shifra. Thank you so much, Govind, for adding in this interesting perspective that comes with SDGs about the asset distribution and women's access and control to land and about the changes in gendered social norms and women's agency. Him, I come back to you. You know, we see these international commitments around women's rights. We also have a constitution that guarantees equality to everyone. And then there are national commitments to achieve these SDG goals. And then there are a horde of legislations related to inheritance. Where do you think actually are the barriers to women's inheritance among all these. Thank you, Shifra. I guess I'd like to build on what Govind was saying is that we do have these commitments. We've been an early signatory to international conventions and agreements like CEDAW. And now more recently, well, recently in the last 15, 20 years, we've also had some major legislative changes. One of which has been the Hindu Succession Amendment Act that now guarantees inheritance to daughters equally as well as sons, which we didn't have earlier for the country. But there are still many barriers and I think these can be classified into legal barriers and cultural barriers for women to be able to realize their inheritance rights fully. Often when we talk about legislative reform, we are usually thinking about the HSA amendment, which is the Hindu Succession Act amendment. That really applies to a majority of the population, but it still leaves out women who are not Hindus because the law is applicable to the Hindu population. We have personal laws which are dictated by religion and these don't give women equal inheritance to land under the ambit of the other personal laws. Even under the HSA, there are still certain loopholes. For example, some practices are governed at a state level and their agricultural land, how that is delt with at a state level and there are some inconsistencies there that need to be ironed out. Also, the law is not completely gender equal in the sense that if a woman dies and she has no class 1 heir, then her property first devolves to her in-laws rather than her parents. But the same is also not true for men in the sense it first devolves to his class 1 heirs or his parents or his wife, etc. So these are many inconsistencies and this is just a couple of examples. In terms of cultural barriers, I think some of the ground realities are that there is a bit or still quite a bit of a gap between what the law sees and what is the reality. I think there's a problem of awareness, there's a problem of patriarchy and there's a problem of social norms. There have been several studies done by micro level studies done by Landesa that point to an intersection of these various factors. A study that I conducted in Karnataka some years ago and Karnataka was one of the states that had a progressive version of inheritance laws for Hindu women even before the HSA amendment came. So it should have been a state where there is a lot more awareness of gender egalitarian practices. But we found when we spoke to both men and women that there wasn't awareness of inheritance rights. And then on the social front, I think women are hesitant to push for their inheritance rights and their native families. They are worried about losing family support, which is very important. And also it's not necessary that women who are part of that native family, for example a brother's wife might not want the sister-in-law to get land because then her husband's share is going down. And she thinks it's perfectly fine to deny it because she didn't get it from her native family. So there is this cycle of patriarchy that continues. So how we break this cycle and think about changing social norms regarding women and land or more broadly women and property I think would be very important to remove some of these cultural barriers. Thank you, Shifra. Thank you so much for bringing in these inconsistencies in several laws including HSA and other personal laws and women's hesitation in the patriarchal mindsets that play a role in formulation as well as implementation of these laws. And with this, I now turn to you, Varsha and Niti. First to you, Varsha, you have a huge experience working on the ground. We often hear people saying that women themselves write off their share to brothers that it will make hope that daughters start claiming for land. To what extent do you think Varsha is this true? What's been your experience around these? Shifra, the giving up land or release of titles by women is a very complex issue. And so therefore my answer is yes and no. So there are women who claim the right, but there are women or probably larger portion is releasing their entitlements once they have the title deeds in their hands. I would like to refer to a ground reality with a micro standard taken in three years ago. And what we did was that we conducted, we collected the data from the government offices. And that is based on village form number six, which is Hakpatra. That means any transaction which is taking place regarding land, it is being recorded. And so we came to know that and this is regarding like seven districts of Gujarat state and the sample is about 2700. And we realized that what we see, what we, the analysis revealed, first point is that among the non-tribals, the average of daughters giving up their titles is about 23%. That is almost one fourth women daughters, especially. It can be as high as 34% or 30%. These are the places which I talk about where 30 and 34% giving up entitlements are the places where the, you know, there is a land price are skyrocketing due to land acquisition on a large scale for industries. So that industrial development has affected family level decisions, especially women's land rights that we need to that. That was a very revealing finding that we had compared to non-tribal areas when we look at the tribal districts, the release of title reduces to ranging between 2 to 14%. And here are the areas where land prices are not really shot up. It's giving up land title per village is not more than five daughters and so on. You know, so there is a wide difference that we observed in tribal and non-tribal. But what we observed across the board is that all the single women are facing the maximum severe brunt of the situation, whether she's a widow or destitute, divorced or the deserted one. She has such no local standard and therefore she has to always select between the parental home and the in-laws place and then a different kind of struggle that she is facing and undertaking. So therefore what I would like to sort of summarize this point is that why is it complex because we need to understand the micro data into larger scenario, which is that we need to understand land prices and market, which Hema also referred to. The difference between tribal and non-tribal areas and extent of land acquisition, so both independently and as well as interlinked issues that reach areas and extent of land acquisition for industrial areas. That also we need to understand how the different manifestation of patriarchal values which are intertwined with the livelihood and survival concerns where land rights is primarily associated with men because the moment a woman decides to claim the rights, the first question she would face with herself, vis-a-vis herself within the family and within the communities that am I really destroying or disturbing my brothers or my in-laws, brother-in-laws, livelihood or survival options, you know. And so that is the scenario where women really struggle. On the other hand, if we see that there are women who do recognize need for their claiming the rights and they do claim the rights. In Gujarat, what we have, I mean, we have been working in the last 15 years and we have approached about 55,000 women, of them about 9,000 women have claimed and achieved their land rights. So if you really look at the overall scenario, 9,000 probably is not a very large number, but we do need to recognize that, yes, these women have claimed the rights. So with this, I think I have made a point. Thank you, Shipra. Thank you so much, Varsha, for sharing your experience and for sharing the outcomes of the study at the ground level that you did. Nithi, can you also share your perspective and experience of Northern states on some of these mindsets that we come across and how do really women respond to these mindsets? Thank you, Shipra. I'll just add to what Varsha was saying, I would draw from what Professor Govind and Hima said earlier. Of course, this is a popular perception that women don't want their share in land or inheritance or they just give up their rights for their brothers, which is true to a large extent actually. Our field experiences show that many women with their vulnerable situation and positioning within family, they decide to renunciate their claims. The met with women who knew about their share in ancestral property, but they refused to claim it. I mean, not just Hindu women who got their rights secured a decade back or so, but also Muslim women, old Muslim women who knew about their share, that Sharia and Sharia shared in properties secured, they knew about it, but still they said very clearly that they won't want to claim it because they don't want to break or have any kind of discord with their native family. For instance, we spoke to this woman who was a widow and had been staying in one small room with her five, six children. Her brothers were staying in the same locality in their own house, which was much bigger. We asked her to initiate some discussion with her brothers about her share in ancestral home because the same would ensure better living space for her and her children. We assured her for all our support to stand with her, but she just refused because of the fear of losing support or the connect with her native family, which she saw as a backup support system or rather only backup support system. She was ready to fight it out with her in-laws, but not with her brother. So this fear of losing support of native family, which Dr. Hema and Varsha both spoke about, the stems from the vulnerable positioning of women. We know how patriarchy operates. Women fear that claiming their share from native family might upset and even break the relationship with their brothers and sister-in-laws, who otherwise would be there to support them or give them shelter if they have had any problem with their marital families. To a certain extent, I would say women are quite active in disposing their own self. They are motivated by this feeling of indebtedness and gratitude towards native family, that they have spent so much of money on their education, on bringing them up, they have got them married. And of course, that they'll be there when something happens. They don't want to break this cord with their native family. Also, in the society, as social norms that we have, they apparently look at women who ask for their share. They're not seen as good daughters or good women. So as women, as a woman, they belong to marital families and they should be happy with what they get from their marital family. That's the usual understanding, the usual perception. Another reason why women don't claim their rights very actively is the violence that is perpetrated on them. In the field, we have met with women who have faced all kinds of violence ranging from physical to emotional, mental, both indirectly when they demanded their share in family property or even common property. And these perpetrators were their own siblings, close family members in few cases, other community members as well. And on top of this, the social, cultural sanctioning and acceptance of violence against women makes their struggle even more difficult as they are not left with much of support or backup. So these two are primary reasons that we see in the field when we go and talk to women. But then, of course, as I think Dr. Versha was saying that this value of property and also location of property, that also contributes, that also informs their decision making. For claiming parental property, women see that there's so much to lose and not much to gain. So in that situation, they prefer to give up their right. They see this as the most immediate thing to do to get their life going without looking into the bigger picture, into the affirmative that would come with the share of property in their hand, which ranges from shelter to security to financial security rights of their children, better lives, all that. Having said that, we also have a number of women who have successfully claimed their property rights. Not all women succumb to violence. We know that. Some fight back by changing their strategies, their negotiations, the kind of bargaining they do. And of course, they actively reach out to support groups and systems that they are exposed to. In such cases, her own agency and resilience are the key drivers. Of course, educational status, awareness level, age, interpersonal skills, all these act to this. Support mechanism at local level, whether it's institutional, community-based support groups, SSGs, peer support, support from family members also play a crucial role in motivating her in this decision. But I wish to highlight here that we really need to focus upon group of single women. Could be destitute, deserted, divorced. They are the most vulnerable group among all women. Because we know the social pressures and norms, they work in a much more intensified manner on them. So these are the key challenges that we face and also the affirmative experiences which you gather from the field. But things are changing and there are many, many women who are coming, stepping ahead and claiming their rights. Thank you, Shipra. Thank you so much, Nithi, for talking about this tense web of limitations and claiming rights by women. And also their immense power to assert at the same time. Govind, I come back to you. Can you shed some light on the sites for such significant gaps between the constitutional guarantee of equality to women? And their real life marginalization in inheriting land. Thank you, Shipra. I think the earlier background was very good. But it is important to know that the constitution of India since 1949 when it was framed. It guarantees the fundamental right to all citizens under law and prohibits discrimination on ground of sex. Article 14 and 15 of the constitution very well laid out. So they have the constitutional rights. In 1979, 80 government of India committed to CEDA that provide equal rights to both his spouses for owning, acquiring, managing, administering and disposing of property, which is the ownership means. So India to pass laws for protecting women's property rights, including right to agricultural land. But this was changed in the Hindu personal law. So this was a change that is addressing the social norms that realizing that these social norms go against women. The Hindu succession act of 1956, which was amended in 2005. Now this is a revolutionary law in nature. I'm not talking against the grain, but I'm saying because it really addresses the traditional social norms. According to Hindu law, women, Hindu personal law women did not have any right to land. So this was changed in order to make women co-personary on the same co-personary means right at the birth to to have ownership equal ownership rights in the ancestral property. So this was a very well, we were all delighted about this kind of law. But there has been limited implementation of this law. And the best it can be described as the fog of the entitlement that a fog was created a mystified situation. Yes, you have the right, we have changed the law, the social law, but at the same time they were not implemented. So what are the real kind of things? There are some implementation. That's why I don't say total lack of implementation. Because if you see the from 1979 to 2010, and these are the land as I studied that pointed out, I've been also involved with that. The state government of Andhra Pradesh, with the support from the World Bank, they launched this project of poverty reduction. And in this poverty reduction program, which is called Vellagu project, and now it is called Indira Kranti Pratapatham, over 5,000 women got land in their independent names. And this was irrespective of their civil status, whether they were married or single. These women were very much married or some were single. They were given the right to land, but they were from the landless households. Likewise, there were also programs in Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Bihar, Tamil Nadu, and Urisa. They also offered the similar examples of land transfers in women's name. They are also very much at Pradesh. This was done in 1990s, particularly late 90s. But these are pockets of ad hoc reforms. You have 5,000 women here, 10,000 women there, 7,000 women there, and then you see that you have solved the problem. But this is now, so this is the ad hoc kind of pockets being created. The subject of women's ownership and control of land, either joint or exclusive, have received very little attention from the government and also from the civil society. I mean, let us talk about the civil society also, whether we have taken as part of the civil society, we are from the women's organization, but as members of civil society, we have not also fully given it as much importance as we give to other issues. So this has been also one of the problems that marginalized women remain marginalized where they were, except creating these kind of showcases that, yes, we have done this. Each government came in power and they did that or some organizations got into and they managed to give this. So women have continued to be marginalized economically dependent and in the name of culture and social norms and the policy lend to the tiller. They were not considered tiller in spite of the fact that 74% of the rural women are engaged in agricultural production. But they are not farmers. We know about that because they don't own land. Land ownership only belongs to the land to the tiller and the man plows the land. And in many states, the plowing is a taboo for women. And I would say precisely because of this, because a core productive activity should not go into the hands of women, otherwise they will also claim the right. But policy flawed that Hema and Varsha and Niti, they talked about is also because of this, that you see the policy seems fairly neutral or just they are not just and they are not neutral. So there are two kinds of which keep women marginalized. One is the social norms and cultural norms, which we think communities are very much influenced. Families, communities. But besides this formal policy making institutions and implementation agency, they are development partners. They have been also responsible that have they have been influenced by these cultural, social norms that land and technology belong to women, to men. And that's why women have remained as the kind of real life. They have remained as the marginalized groups in terms of inheritance and property rights. Thank you, Varsha. Thank you, Shepra. Yes. Thank you so much, Kovin, for talking about all this vast body of knowledge and experience. Niti, will you quickly add some additional thoughts and ground experience to these gaps in laws and their ground implementation? Thank you, Shepra. Again, I mean, talking about gaps in laws, as I think Dr. Hema spoke, Macklint about it and also Dr. Govind. Of course, all the laws that we know about, they are gender discriminatory and they are, they are lackuners, substantive lackuners, but I'll talk more about the implementation part of it. You know, given my experience. So, land is an issue where we had de facto and de jure. Both kinds of gaps are there. I'll focus more on de facto. Lack of information and poor awareness level amongst women and men. Both. It comes out as a major lacuna. And this gap is not only about lack of information around women's share or her right to inheritance, but it's also about land related legal provision or administrative processes, which we know are quite complex and cumbersome. Poor maintenance of documentation, land records also pose a challenge to women who don't have easy access to documentation. Of course, culturally, women are not seen as land owners and holders. So this also leads to a state's apathetic attitude and complicity in denial of land rights and entitlement to women, particularly in Northern India, Hindi belt, which is, as we know, extremely patriarchal in nature. Also, the assumptions that women won't be interested in land matters. And if at all they come and claim their ills, then the presumption is that they are being coerced by someone else, you know, some other interested parties with vested interest. So such assumptions coupled with patriarchal approach among state functionaries in certain areas at local level, primarily, they lead to weak administrative will. And of course, political will is also lacking. So all this impinges upon women's land rights. We also know that women have very limited livelihood options and economic opportunities. So that also adds to their vulnerability and perpetual denial of rights. So because they are in this situation, economically vulnerable situation, they are not able to claim their rights because of the challenges, multiple challenges. Government of India, of course, has launched this National Land Records Management Program, which is being implemented across the country to integrate land records and other documents under single information system. But again, the results are quite varying in different parts of countries in states like UP and Bihar. They are still issues related to digitization of records, land surveys are being conducted, integration of land titles, mutation processes, these are also disputed. Again, in UP and Bihar, I'll say that land grabbing or illegal possession on common land by powerful and influential ones, we keep on talking about it, it's always in the limelight. It's seen as a power marker. And in such a socio-political context, claimant who are from the marginalized communities, their voices get muted. And also fighting for land, claiming one's rightful entitlement comes with a heavy economic cost. We know negotiations, court cases for settling land disputes go for years, and both the resources, money and time, they are not easily available with them, particularly those who are coming from marginalized communities. So these are major gaps in implementation of our policies and programs and usage of law on the ground. Thank you, Shipra. Thank you so much, Niti. Varsha, you have been working with a network of organizations to strengthen women's land rights. Can you share some of your experience of what has actually worked to bridge this gap between the legal commitments and ground realities and resulted in some gender equitable outcomes for land control, ownership and inheritance? Sure, Shipra. You know, we have been talking about what is not there or looking at this situation very critically. Here, I'm sharing a few practices and strategies that have worked in favor of women's land rights and processes and mechanisms now are sensitized to women's land rights, which gives kind of hope that we are able to enhance women's land rights compared to the previous years. What we have done is, in the light of that, we have been talking about sociocultural barriers and also implementation of policies and laws and so-called policies are so-called neutral and not neutral kind of things. Our practices broadly are three, which first is related to governance and administrative procedures. Basically, what we have observed is that the land machinery is very complex. Land being concurrent in concurrent lists, you know, some things are primarily with the state government and some things are with some specifications. So every state has a very different machinery, different hierarchies, a way of functioning procedures, etc. It's very, very difficult to understand the administrative machinery in a very van Gogh manner. At times, we have also found out that, you know, it is gender biased. For example, what we have sort of observed is that Patwari being village revenue secretary in Gujarat, he or she are liable, I mean, they are responsible for maintaining land records and many other administrative and political functions. So if a woman wishes to claim land rights, she would meet the Patwari and Patwari may dissuade her, saying that, oh, why are you getting into, like, a situation which is tension-summing in the family or the community. Your community doesn't have this kind of customary practices and so on, you know. So, I mean, when I said what we have observed is not more than one-fifth of women are supported for succession rights, probably intentionally or unintentionally, but they do keep women away from realizing her land rights. Second is, of course, the absence of gender-disaggregated data. And we have been repeatedly talking about this sex-disaggregated data at every level because the data are not maintained from the grassroots level and not at the National Land Record Modernization Program, which is at the national level. There are no specifications through which we are able to have the gender-disaggregated data. So basically, you know, what we depend on is the micro-studies that we conduct through people who are intervening. So basically, we do not have government official data, which clearly gives us the macro-level picture. The third is basic records are not maintained. For example, any woman when she has to claim her right, the basic land records are not in place, especially for a single woman who has to produce date certificate, family tree, and other administrative documents, etc. So then the process becomes very cumbersome. So these are by-large, very governance-related problems, administrative procedures and way of functioning of government officials. The second set of issues that what we have found out is that awareness and readiness among women for exercising and ensuring land rights is also one of the points that we really, really need to work well upon because basically we all know any awareness would not get translated so very easily. And so similarly, we also cannot say that a woman who is aware about land rights but she would definitely work towards ensuring her land rights or she has worked towards and ensured her land rights. That we need to understand and we have talked about various socio-cultural barriers from different panel members. So I'm not going much into detail. What is more important is that sometimes what we have observed is women are not oriented to demand any movable property, especially land. Sometimes she's not involved in decision-making process. Sometimes they are not given enough time or opportunity to understand and assess the implication of a decision of claiming land rights or giving up land titles and so on. Single women face, we have been repeatedly saying that single women face more dilemma and hostility and they are the worst affected among the lot. And as I was mentioning earlier that in case of land acquisition, when the title giving up is much higher, also works in favor of, more in favor of men because when the government start thinking about it for the compensation, it is usually the men, presupposedly a male who is thought about compensated and livelihood of the family is also seen as the male primary responsibility and so therefore the compensation also doesn't go to women as an equal share. The third gap that we have identified is about the political will. In many cases we have witnessed that leaded administration functioning is sometimes driven by the political will and they are largely in patriarchal in ethos. So that also I have just talked about. So I'm not elaborating on this point. Second point is that, you know, political measures are sometimes populist measures and they act as dual-edged sword. So for example, Gujarat government has launched a scheme, which is about women, if exclusively a woman or many women, more than one woman by property, then in that case the registration fee is waived off. And there is a reduction in stamp duty. So what happened is that we have seen both kind of results and implications that sometimes men use it as a kind of tax evading tactic and also that, you know, just to show that women hold this property but they are not involved in any decision making. Housewavers, some women have definitely used the land rights and the consequential empowerment. For example, there is a reduction in domestic violence. There is a higher level of participation in family decision making regarding property, social mobility, physical mobility. Women are more exposed to the tech structure and so on. So by large, I would conclude, I would summarize these three points. Is governance related, awareness and the political will as the most important gaps that we need to address. Thank you. Thank you so much, Varusha. And Nithi, can you also share some of the best practices that have worked in the country towards ensuring women's inheritance? Nithi, this is to you. Thank you, Shipra. Sorry, some of the networks and organizations that I'm familiar with and can talk about are primarily Makam, Ekarnari, Shakti Sangatun, Landisa and of course, Oxam India. Mahila Kisan Adhikar Manch Makam. It's a forum of approximately 150 individuals, organizations of women farmers, collectors, academician, activists working towards recognition and protection of rights of women farmers. Makam has been actively demanding for women rights to public and private land and also their rights on forests and entitlements for forest based livelihood. Makam has been doing a lot of public advocacy and research, documentation and capacity building on the issue and other concerning areas. There is the Ekarnari, Shakti Sangatun, which is a network of single women, which has been working on empowerment of single women. And it supports women's to reclaim their land and property rights as well as their rights on common lands. Landisa has been doing some good work towards strengthening women's land rights. It is operating in seven states in India and has been contributing for development of policies and programs that provide homestead and farmland to rural landless. Landisa has also been working towards law reforms and policies, you know, reforming policies to ensure legal recognition of farmland and that is being leased to rural poor. The organization uses, I mean, what I've seen that organization uses several strategies. They have been sensitizing state functionaries in West Bengal. They've been training revenue officials in Uttar Pradesh, Ulisa, West Bengal again. What I know in UP, Landisa has been working very closely in building capacity of elected representatives and raising awareness on the issue. One example comes from Telangana, interesting one, which is where they're extending legal aid, which is extremely critical for ensuring land tenure security for women. Landisa has been also advocating consistently with government and which is very critical in a state like Uttar Pradesh. And in UP, they have actually got some positive results also. In UP, the venue law till 2012, the unmarried daughters were given equal rights as a son, but unmarried daughters of pre-deceased sons, her rights were not secured. So after much lobbying, the state picked this up and recently, as in just last week, the change has been approved, which is very heartening. There have been gaps, of course, with regards to marital status of daughters, but at least some affirmative steps have been taken by the state government after the advocacy with them. Oxfam India has done a lot of work. Also, again, in Uttar Pradesh, they have done a lot of work on women land rights in past. There are groups from Maharashtra, Northeast, which have been doing good work in this direction. So, I mean, as of now, I can share this much. Thank you, Shabra. Thank you so much, Varusha and Neeti. We do really have before us some of the strategies that seem to have worked. Himana, I'm sorry. Himana, I turn to you and can you talk about some of the monitoring mechanisms that we have in India to track women's inheritance and land rights at the national level and where they need to be strengthened? Thanks, Shabra. So, I'm sort of wearing my academic and research hat. I think, really, we need to, the government needs to get our act together about collecting sex disaggregated data. And this needs to happen at all levels and at various forums, including registration, recording details of land, property after a death in the household, at the grand panchayat level. So, whenever there is land mutations, whenever these kinds of records are happening, we need to ensure that there is sex disaggregated data that is being collected and generated. Also, through our national household surveys, which our national sample survey organization collects with regularity, we have surveys that get detailed information on asset ownership at the household level. So, in NSS surveys, if we could get individual level land ownership information, as well as primary mode of acquisition, that would greatly help in being able to track whether these laws are being implemented and what the progress of these kinds of laws are. And if women's land ownership is actually improving, thanks to progressive legislations and implementation. Already, individual level land ownership is available within our latest national family health surveys, but within that data itself, there's quite a lot of inconsistencies. So, some of us who are working with that land information are not entirely convinced that that data is accurate and also the numbers seem inflated compared to other micro studies. Thank you, Shifra. Thank you so much, Hema. Govind, what do you think can be the additional ways to strengthen monitoring of women's inheritance in India? I have captured well, but I would like to add a couple of kind of points. One is that acknowledging and understanding the adverse role of gendered social norms through feminist research and advocacy. This would be very, very important by civil society groups which are gender sensitive by women's organizations and for a change in gender power relations. That would be very important in terms of, in all spheres, economic, political and social spheres, with attention to land and property rights of women as an unmediated right of women and girls. That would be the one important kind of measure of monitoring or method of monitoring. Second would be a continued policy impact monitoring, asking for gender and social audits of new policies and reporting at local, national, regional and international forums. Something is happening in this regard, such as discussions and ranking of gender gaps in UN forums, intergovernmental bodies, world economic forum, high-level political forum including general assembly. But I think we need more kind of continued efforts at this so that a continued pressure to change that system to policies are made and they are made flawless and they are implemented. And the last point I would say is about we need to strengthen our monitoring efforts particularly in three areas. One would be implementation of relevant laws such as the Hindu Succession Amendment Act and its extension to others, not the same way, but change in the personal laws, whether they are Muslims, Christians, Jains, Buddhists, all that. Second would be what has been done to remove flawed policies influenced by patriarchal norms, seeing land as the male right. I don't see that in the policy they recognize women's right to land because land to the tiller. Man is considered the tiller despite the fact that 74% of women, rural women are engaged in agriculture and they are not considered tillers or farmers. And a man as the head of the household. I mean these are the kind of patriarchal norms that keep hammering at us. And then the third would be research and advocacy on a change in gender social norms and patriarchal attitudes and behavior. We may be not so fond of World Bank, but World Bank has carried out about three volume study now, reports actually in the last three years, saying that unless the personal attitudes and mindsets of the patriarchal mindsets are changed, then only the economic policies would be possible. They would be successful, otherwise they may not be. So this is the, we need to recognize even the smallest steps and fragmented voices of women and men about women's agency and roles, their economic independence. They are moving away from unfreedom. So even when they are saying that land is a male subject, women are saying we need to really see in social, in what context they are saying that this would be very important. And we need to compile as somebody has pointed out a lot of good examples, micro examples, and make a macro picture out of that what change is taking place, which is good for everybody in terms of the movement, in terms of the research, in terms of extension of the rights of women and girls. Thank you. Thank you so much, Govind, for suggesting some of the things that can be done at the policy level. Hema, in the current context where we have before us the examples that have worked, and we also know of the host of challenges, what are some of your suggestions to bring about the changes at the policy level, and that the question of women's inheritance get enough attention from the government? I think I would like to just very briefly highlight a couple of points. One would be much better training and gender sensitization. This would be with local governance mechanisms, including your revenue officers, others who work with land records, registrations at the panchayat level, and better training to members of the judiciary. Often we think just because progressive legislation are made that the judiciary is also necessarily very progressive. That's not true. They're just as much as embedded in the patriarchy and the social system that we have with the same mindset and prejudices, working and sensitizing the religious leaders in terms of them contributing to this discourse on gender equality. Again, designing better data recording and collection mechanisms, ensuring all data collected is sex disaggregated. I think looking at best practices from across the world, use of community radios, creating a caterer of paralegals to work with community levels for large scale sensitization. Thank you, Shifra. Thank you so much, Hema, for these wonderful suggestions. We are approaching the end of the discussion, and we already have got a lot of questions from the participants. But before we wrap up this discussion, Sneethi, I would like to know some of your suggestions around the changes in the policy. Thank you. Thank you, Shifra. Very briefly. One is, of course, we have been talking about it during the discussion. One is gender audit of all the laws related to land assignments, sealing, tenancy, as well as inheritance and succession. I mean, that's a must. Then, of course, some very targeted intervention that I can think of right now. Like, states should give priority to women, particularly marginalized women from SESD Muslim community and single women in distribution of public land. Of course, some policy level measures should be taken to promote research work in this direction. That's a huge challenge that we grapple with while working on the field. There should be more programs and schemes to motivate people to transfer land in women's name and joint ownership. One point that I want to highlight here is that there is need for intensive efforts. These efforts are required at state level to address the anomaly in the state government's rules and provisions. As we were talking about, land comes under state list. For example, Zamidari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, ZALR, in various states generally, it's gender discriminatory in nature. And women in many states, they don't inherit agricultural land holdings. As we know, large part of agricultural rural population has property in form of agriculture land only. So, in such situation, women don't get anything at all with the evolution of land. So, it's definitely, I mean, there's critical need to advocate at state level with state governments to address such gaps. One last point, which is not related directly to policy, but it's very critical, I feel. It's inclusion of land rights and various discourses and interventions on women human rights. Establishing that connect between land rights and women right to livelihood, economic security, their right to live with dignity. So, that's one point. Thank you, Shipra. Thank you so much, Niti. And you rightly said that working at the state level is so very important to catalyze the changes at the policy level. And as we discussed this, I learned that yesterday only West Bengal government has decided to abolish the mutation fees for inherited land property. I hope these small but positive changes continue to pave a way for strengthening women's inheritance. And with this positive note, I will move ahead to take some of the questions from the audience. And I think like one of the questions that I will take from the audience is if somebody wants to know if caste plays a role in determining inheritance of women in India. And I would like go with you to respond to this. Does caste in India play a role in determining inheritance of women? Certainly to that extent. Thank you, Shipra, for the questions. That caste does play a role in terms of if analysis of patriarchy in India has repeatedly pointed out that there is a brimenical nature of patriarchy. That in as you go up higher in caste system, then more control on women you find that per the mobility and so on and so forth lack of mobility. These are the things that kind of are imposed on caste women. But in terms of the so-called lower caste or the other marginalized group, by sheer fact of poverty, they are working outside the home and that gives them the right to mobility. They are also not kind of purity and pollution syndromes are not there so that polluting women are also that kind of stigma is not there. So caste does play a role in transform shaping a culture where the women are considered only as the domestic dependent and economically dependent persons and not really outside this thing. Third thing that is which has come with the kind of external system that wherever these pockets that we talked earlier where the land has been distributed to the landless household, it has been largely among Dalits and backward caste. And there has been no objection from those men that the woman would run away if she has the right to land. While in the field work that I conducted in UP and Madhya Pradesh and other areas, it was repeatedly said that if the woman has the right to land, she will desert the husband and she will move away. So these are the kind of something that caste does play a role in terms of restricting women more in terms of the lack of rights to land. Thank you so much, Govind. And Varsha now I will pose another question to you. One of our participants want to ask that if to address gaps in women's inheritance, if there is a need to follow a top-down approach or is it better to realize the ground realities and then work towards policy changes? My answer would be, thank you Shikra for the question. My answer would be the both. The top-down and the bottom-up both approach need to be exercised for inheritance of land. For example, policy dialogue, advocacy and changes in the existing policy. If we do it, if we are able to influence the bureaucratic minds, if we sensitize the government officials, then the implementation part definitely works effectively. But at the same time, when I am saying that bottom-up approach is equally important, it is important that more and more women and men are aware, sensitized. And proactively work towards the claiming land rights, it always helps because what we have learned over these 15 years of experience is that if men are sensitized, then men also facilitated the entire process. If the government officials working at the local governance level or village level, if they are sensitized, then they definitely at least reduce dissuading women for claiming rights and that becomes very supportive. The local structure like Panchayati Raj institution, if the elected representatives, especially elected women representatives, they are sensitized and they work proactively. Then the land records, it starts from correction in land records to actual claiming of rights so that both level of participation, I mean both approaches for women's land rights are equally important and similarly we can also work with the political leaders at all the levels which can start at the Panchayati Raj institution, elected representative to the member of parliament and in between the member of legislative assembly and so on. So along with bottom up, top down and meso level efforts, if we take up this kind of holistic strategies and actions, they do really help us in developing gender sensitized tools, also using them in a very participatory manner by both government officials as well as the stakeholders. Yeah, I would end my say here. Thank you. Thank you so much, Varsha. And Hema, I'm posing the next question to you and somebody wants to ask, as we think of policies to strengthen women's inheritance rights, can we also be thinking of a right to marital assets and how can we strengthen that? Thank you, Shukra. I think this is a very interesting question and important perspective, one that often gets lost when we talk about inheritance because we're usually so focused on natal inheritance and what comes to women from their parent's house. But given in India that we don't have a concept of marital assets because we have a marital regime that is about separation of property, which essentially means that once within the marital union, whatever one accumulates as a property, it remains in the name of the person in whose name it is legally registered or this also applies to financial assets and banks, etc. And given our cultural norms, its property particularly largely tends to be registered in men's names. So when, if for some reason the marriage dissolves, then a woman doesn't get an automatic claim to it. Even if she has contributed to it either monetarily or her invisible contribution by taking care of the reproductive sphere of the household. And the more common scenario is that on the death of the husbands, even if the woman is inheriting, then she is treated on par with the husbands other class one is thus her own share is reduced. However, 50% of the share was automatically hers because it was treated as joint, then only the remaining 50% will be distributed to his other heirs. There was an attempt a few years ago by the government, I think three or four years ago by the government to bring in some reform, but it was a very half-baked attempt. It wasn't well thought out. And there was a huge pushback from many sections of societies and groups and political parties who said bringing about any change in trying to make marital assets equal between men and women is that it would wreck the institution of the Indian marriage. And that women would just take up all their husbands property and run away. So this really didn't work. So I think thinking about marital assets and its reform is a very high priority. Thank you, Shubra. Thank you so much, Hema. And Govind, I will post two questions to you and both of these are related. And they are like challenges to women's inheritance is a universal phenomenon or is it something unique to India? And then people also want to know if there are some of the best examples in the other countries towards changing mindset towards equitable inheritance for women. This is one and second one. You want to tell me this or? Yeah, so these are both Govind. The first one is the challenges to women's inheritance or universal phenomenon or is it something unique to India? And then there is this best practices from across the board. I have studied, thank you, Shubra. I have studied India and China at great length and then looked at some matrilineal and societies in India and also in other Asian countries. What I find with the first question is whether it is universal in nature? Yes, it is universal in nature in the present system, but historically it is not universal. And with the exception of matrilineal societies and that is also has to be seen in terms of as a society, I'm talking whether they are part of the country or they are not part of a country that is a different thing. So it is the kind of to some extent it is universal because of very large number of rights existing. But in Europe or in North America or in China, these kind of land rights have been changed. China, it was changed in the socialist system, although it is going through a lot of hiccups at China either modernizing or being a capitalist society. So this is repeatedly it is coming, but women do inherit property. A lot of African societies, women also inherit property. But what is really bad situation is with regard to is India because of the particularly Hindu society because of a patriarchal system and also hierarchically organized system. So there is a universality if we look at in India, there is a non-universality if we look at the other countries. In Latin American countries also there has been some change in the who is the head of the household, dual head of the household. So these are the with regard to as a distribution also that has been the question. Second is in terms of the kind of good practices. I find that the good practices only in material societies where the change is taking place where the even if the land goes in the name of one daughter and which is the youngest daughter, it is her duty to support everybody. And she cannot say really no to anyone, neither ill treat that the whole community is responsible for that responsible to make that person behave. So that is one good practice. Second good practice I find in terms of that land has been given to women in respect like in a well good project or earlier in World Bank and government upon predation. That was a very good practice where the land was given to women. When they were married single, this was not considered. I think that was very important when women are recognized in their independent categories and are not divided as married, non-married or unmarried. That would be important in my consideration. And these are the two good examples where I will see that there are also pockets in UP where women have been given these land rights without being considered. But earlier in 1997, 1992 to 97. I don't know, Shepriya, if I have answered your question. Oh, that's true. That's perfect, Govind. And thank you for sharing your perspectives and these examples. Varsha, I would pose the next question to you. And one of the participant wants to know that if a woman wants to claim her rights to inheritance, which has been denied by the family members, how easy or difficult is the process of legal recourse? Strictly speaking, the legal procedures and recourse is very lengthy, cumbersome and costly affair because overall, if we look at the judicial backlog, then we know that it moves very slowly. But yes, if we go by the procedures, somehow it sounds manageable, mainly because when a woman decides to claim her land, if all the documents are in place, many important documents are required right from like a family tree and these are the basic documents, family tree, the land in the land records, the name of the family members who should be there. So we let number form six and eight and so on. So if those are basically this like land records related documents are in place. It is very easy and a smooth process to get inheritance rights. The difficulty begins where the in-laws are not willing to share the land or give entitlement to the daughter-in-law or the daughter or the widowed daughter-in-law. There the different strategies have to be adopted, but basically it moves around the procedural part. So if we are able to do the procedural part in a smooth manner with all required basic documents, then I think we need not go for legal recourse as such. But there are of course very complications now that we are witnessing are on different counts. For example, now the Forest Rights Act gives the right to cultivate the land in the forest and management of it. Now it is a joint title given to the husband and the wife, to the both the spouses jointly. But usually in some cases we have seen that the title is given only to the men. Now whenever there is a problem vis-a-vis this kind of thing, it is a kind of mandate of the state and implementation agencies. Women have faced very difficult times to prove that despite I being a spouse of XYZ person who has been entitlement, there it is very difficult because it is a kind of law and abide by the rule. We are not able to do much about it. At the same time legal recourse takes a very different course because it is a kind of newly generated, though almost 10 years have passed of Forest Rights Act. But these are very typical questions which judiciary has also need to learn to address in a very gender sensitive manner. So I think I would like to be brief and I hope I have answered the question. Thank you so much, Varsha. And I will pose the next question also to you. What are some of the major ways in which inheritance rights of women of different religions vary from each other? Yeah, see they do vary because in India all the property rights are very closely related to personal laws. And so therefore the share of property is being followed by the personal law. It is driven by personal law unless the couple has registered the marriage in the Spatial Marriage Act. So largely yes, I mean theoretically if we go by inheritance then we all go, we need to go by personal laws. But what we have observed in implementing by behavior of the implementing agency, they largely want to consider every woman as a Hindu woman. And so sometimes the women believing in other phase other than the Hindu is definitely different treatment because they might not have expected or they might not have anticipated that despite the rule saying something, the law saying something the procedures are meant for everyone in a very uniform manner. The most most difficult part of this different religion that we have witnessed is that Dalit Christians. So earlier Dalits or us while Dalits who have decided to change their religion to Christianity they have a very different kind of recognition in different ways. And so therefore some such communities being very small in number, no trend setting procedural corrective mechanisms have been introduced. So yeah, so basically you know it depends on the sensitivity and the understanding of the implementing government official to consider which religion also having the know how of the that particular religion and personal law and also you know the attitude and determination that this particular women belong to this religion and then only it can happen. So yeah, these are even but which are much more than the motivation or the drive for ensuring and enhancing women's land rights. So they are very different kind of different sets of problems that women face. Thank you. Thank you so much Varsha and Nithi the next question is for you in the process of external investments that are taking place on community land. How can women ensure that their line rights and inheritance are put into consideration. Thank you Shepra. Actually you know in such cases as I was saying earlier the work the interventions which are going on at primarily at micro level. I mean their land rights the perspective has to be built in what we realize when you you know I mean they are groups doing some fantastic work. Let's say on violence against women but the connect with land rights the the criticality of you know of land rights in a woman's or in survey was life that connect is missing. So that understanding has to develop. So once we are working on the ground you have these investments being made the land for Commons are being encroached upon but women and you know I mean of course larger community but particularly women. When they they know about the criticality of owning property owning land the criticality of it in this in their lives. Once they understand that you know then they'll be able to fight it out. That's what you have seen. I mean in women's movement you know I mean people sitting in the panel as much more experienced than I am and they would add to this that you know it's it's community of course they need to be aware of this. But women it's the women once they understand how critical it is to own this piece of land they'll fight tooth and nail I mean that that's what we have seen so far. And of course it comes from policy level also. I mean we know the kind of politics which is going on in this you know this socio political context it's difficult and that's one of the major challenge that people working on land rights are facing. Lands of common lands are disappearing they are being encroached upon we used to have lands for artisans for weavers you know there was common land where they used to work it's all going now and worst affected by all these steps are women. So the I feel the interventions which which are being made at ground level they have to focus and they the you know they have to focus around land rights of people in general and particularly women. That's the way to go about it it cannot be an add on piece it has to be built in and all the community level intervention that we are talking about and we are doing on the field. That's what I feel I hope I've answered the question. Yeah thank you so much Niti and go in this one is for you what have been some of the landmark historical progressions in strengthening women's inheritance in India. Can you repeat it I was thinking of something else. Can you repeat it. Yes you are going so the question is what have been some of the landmark historical progression in strengthening women's inheritance in India. I think the best would be I would still hope that that would be inheritance right to the 2005 amendment act. I call this as a revolutionary act because it was historically I will be brief and then when soon after independence or at the time of the independence in 1950s. The president of India has threatened that he would bring the constitutional crisis if women were if any change was made in the personal law. Hindu personal law with regard to giving rights to women they were that time it was called Hindu code will then they they broke down that into series of kind of amendment and after 1956 55 the adoption act. The succession act they all were formulated but women were given limited rights in that the most important right came in 2005. Where the women became the co-personary that they have the same right co-personary means right at birth as the son has in the ancestral property. The only problem with this law is that there is no merit in the marital property she doesn't have this right. So that is that is the law this is the end force that is the landmark in India in China of course it is different. Thank you so much Govind we are left with just maybe two minutes more and before we end we have got a lot of questions from the participants. I just want to say that we try we have tried to address a lot of the questions but maybe if there are a few which have been remaining. We will try our best to respond to you through a personalized email so you can look forward to an email from us if your question has in something not been answered here. Before we finally wrap up Govind there is just one more question which I would like to clarify here because there are some two three questions regarding this. So people want to know that we have been talking about three levels of legal system one is the national level law the other is the state and regional law and third is the religious law. So people want to know that when we talk of land rights which law is actually prevailing. Although law it is a part of the land law is a state subject most of it is a state subject but the law that has been probably succession is a concurrent subject and at the same time the central government has that for a team. It's concurrent we probably both the state state is a province in India for outside India people are saying we use the word state. So the center and state these are the two in terms of the land largely is kind of determined by the state level government and succession is determined by the central government this is the one. So that's why there is a confusion on this so law that is prevailing really is at the in some states the law is prevailing like in West Bengal a lot of changes are happening and there is also the Hindu law was also different there. I don't want to confuse you because of the limited time there is a metakshara and the abhag two systems of law the abhag was much more liberal than the metakshara Hindu law and there is a nature of the government has been different. So their system is different overall the Hindu succession amendment act is a national level act and the state has to ratify that act or ratify means acknowledge that act and it becomes operational. Or somebody takes it to the Supreme Court then also it is operational because this is the act Central Act has to go in terms of it decides the succession and inheritance and then it becomes the kind of central law. So even in a state where the law where the government has not ratified the law so in those succession amendment act a individual can individual woman or man can take the her case to the Supreme Court of India and Supreme Court would decide most likely in favor of if everything is valid in favor of that person giving her the right to land. Thank you so much. I think this last minute clarification would help the audience have a better understanding. And with this I think we have come to the end of the webinar. Thank you so much everyone. Thank you Dr. Govind Hema Niti Varsha and thanks to the wonderful participants that we had. Thanks a lot and you can look forward to the emails from us for some personalized responses. Thank you everyone. Thank you Shukra. Thank you. Thank you everybody. Shukra. Thank you. Bye Shukra. Bye. Bye Shukra.