Home arrow Archives arrow Events and Issues arrow Events & Issues-2014 arrow Indian Quota System : PERVERSION OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION?, By Dr S Saraswathi, 12 May, 2014
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Indian Quota System : PERVERSION OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION?, By Dr S Saraswathi, 12 May, 2014 Print E-mail

Events & Issues

New Delhi, 12 May 2014

Indian Quota System

 PERVERSION OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION?

By Dr S Saraswathi

(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

 

The big verdict will be out shortly. Will the new incumbent in Delhi usher in a fresh vision or be bogged down by same old policies? Of particular interest will be the country’s reservation policy. Many people in India are not aware of the fact that its equivalents are in vogue in many countries in the East and the West. They are known by different names.

 

The Supreme Court in the US, by a majority of 6-2, practically ended the practice of “affirmative action” in college admissions in Michigan. By this verdict, it has upheld the constitutionality of the referendum result that disallowed affirmative action in college admissions. The judgement upheld that the States can disregard race as a factor in university admissions.

 

The referendum conducted in 2006 in Michigan, by a narrow margin, voted in favour of  prohibiting the universities and schools in the State from “discriminating against or granting preferential treatment” for any individual or group on the “basis of race, sex,  colour, ethnicity, or national origin”. By upholding the validity of the referendum, the Supreme Court has reversed the earlier decision of a lower court. The verdict is a blow to the policy of “affirmative action”, but a pat to the freedom of the States to decide the issue overriding the verdict of the courts. 

 

The term “affirmative action” was first used in the US in the National Labour Relations Act (Wagner Act) in 1935. It referred to equal employment opportunity measures that had to be adopted by federal contractors and sub-contractors. The object was to prevent discriminations against employees and employment seekers on grounds of “colour, religion, sex, or national origin”.

 

The need for affirmative action in the US, as in the case of Reservation Policy in India, lay centred in the long history of exploitation, discriminations, repressions, deprivations and marginalization of native communities by the Whites, leaving the victims incapable of developing their natural human potential. Apart from age and sex, population classification in America was made on the basis of race, religion, and national origin.   

 

Affirmative action, considered a means of correcting historical injustices when it was formulated, became the principal subject of a serious controversy in educational institutions in the US in the latter part of the 20th century. It included steps, procedures, policies, and programmes designed to overcome the current effects of past discriminations on members of minority groups. A distinct link between social injustice and minority status was perceived in the US.

 

Despite broad consensus among political parties on the policy of Affirmative Action, there are also strong anti-affirmative action lobbies working in the US. They question the efficacy of the policy to benefit the really deserving racial groups. Lack of a time-frame to achieve the objective of equality of opportunity is unacceptable to them.

 

The verdict in the Michigan case, however, is not unanimously welcomed in the US.   Marginalized groups hold on to special protection laws and support system that is still deemed necessary for meaningful and genuine participation in various walks of life. 

 

A similar verdict in India would have provoked nationwide protests not just by the affected groups, but by their political patrons. A basic element of the Reservation Policy of India is its political substance and value. Political parties have developed a vested interest in playing the politics of backwardness to befriend social groups, territorial groups, areas and so on.  

 

No wonder, the parties have been showing extraordinary and sudden enthusiasm in the pre-election period to expand the list of Backward Classes. Religion-based reservation for which no provision exists in the Constitution is mooted as a possibility. Jats and Muslims, for example, are among those picked up for reservation benefits.

 

Election manifestos of almost all parties address the disadvantaged groups specifically.  The Congress has promised to create a national consensus on affirmative action for SCs and STs in the private sector after facing stiff opposition for its sudden proposition to issue an ordinance to immediately affect this. It has also promised reservation for the backward minorities.

 

The BJP manifesto does not mention about the Reservation Policy, but offers “priority” to SCs and STs and OBCs. It mentions a programme named as “Van Bandhu Kalyan Yojna” to empower forest tribals. The BJP shows a slight shift from caste-based quota to empowerment and opportunity. This party, which promised job quotas on economic criteria for all economically weaker sections other than SCs, STs, and OBCs now wants to identify 100 most backward districts to lift them to the level of other districts. 

 

The CPM has promised a Central legislation to extend reservation for Dalit Christians and Muslim communities, and provide reservation in the private sector for SCs and STs.

The AIADMK manifesto provides for extension of reservation to SC converts. The JD(U) promises reservation in the private sector also.

 

The DMK, true to its ancestral ideology, has included in its manifesto removal of the ceiling of 50% fixed by the Supreme Court and also of the “creamy layer” concept. It has affirmed its stand in favour of separate reservation for “the most backward classes” and opposition to introducing economic criteria for identifying the backward. Incidentally, it must be mentioned that identification of the “most backward classes” and separate quota for them is an achievement of the PMK (Pattali Makkal Katchi) in Tamil Nadu.

 

The Nationalist Congress Party manifesto supports reservation for Muslims and Marathas in education and jobs. Interestingly, the Aam Admi Party boldly sings a different tune. It says “Those who have already availed reservations should go back in the queue.  Reservation should be religion-neutral. Majorities who are minorities in other States should be treated as such.” There is an element of novelty in its approach, but no basic change in the strategy to deal with social and educational backwardness.

 

Recall the Communal Award of Ramsay Macdonald (1932) which introduced separate electorates for the Depressed Classes. Though it was rejected as a ruse of the British to “divide and rule”, it can be re-read for the statement that, “His Majesty’s Government do not consider that these special Depressed Class constituencies will be required for more than a limited time.” A time-frame of 20 years was considered as the maximum period.  Mahatma Gandhi said, “I am convinced that if they are ever to rise, it will not be by reservation of seats, but will be by the strenuous work of Hindu reformers in their midst…”

 

Affirmative action and its Indian version “Reservation Policy” should be seen not as compensation for historic injustice, but as a device necessary to ensure that past injustices do not become a permanent feature of our future also, though in a modified form.  

 

We have worked the Reservation Policy for several decades, but nowhere near the goal of achieving equal opportunity status. Still, we cling on to this policy and want to expand its application to the majority of the population.

 

Malaysia is perhaps the only country which covers the majority of the population – the Malays – under the affirmative action policy. In India, the Supreme Court has fixed that reservation should not exceed 50% of posts and seats, but political parties are keen on adding groups. 

 

It is time to think of better alternatives to the Reservation Policy with sincerity to provide development opportunity for all. To get stuck with an old policy is to admit bankruptcy of ideas, insincerity in the purpose, and vested interest in politicizing the quota system.  Indeed, perversion of affirmative action. ---INFA

 

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT