The Supreme Court has asked the Union Government to put on hold its ambitious and controversial program to increase affirmative action quotas in educational institutions. These quotas increases are mainly aimed at the Other Backward Castes section of Indian society, a section that slipped into the ambit of affirmative action after the Mandal Commission's report being implemented in 1990 by the then incumbent V.P. Singh Government. These communes were then deemed eligible for affirmative action benefits by virtue of them being socially and economically backward, as also because doing so would have been in conformity with the Directive Principles of State Policy. The percentage of seats which would be reserved for members of these communes has been fixed at 27 percent of the total, in keeping with their numeric strength as per the 1931 census.
And that is where the entire policy fell foul of the court. That a policy should be formulated keeping as its basis a census conducted more than 70 years prior has baffled the court, and not without reason. Does the Government wish to insinuate that the quantum of the population belonging to these communes has remained frozen at the same level for over a century? While it is very much possible that the communes might now comprise a reduced percentage of the total populace, and this prospect would be most attractive to those opposing these reservations, it is equally likely that they might now constitute a higher percentage.
This brings us to the main point of this blog. I have always maintained that affirmative action on the basis of commune or creed is largely self-defeating as it rarely if ever addresses the real issues, and risks being monopolized by the more affluent sections of the communes/creeds in question. The standard mode of implementation followed by the Indian state also doesn't allow for much reform on a continuous basis, something that is imperative for an affirmative action program to be deemed to be truly responsive to the needs of the communes whose troubles it wishes to alleviate.
The haste by which the Government was attempting to push this piece of legislation and its inability to answer queries on why the 1931 census and not the more recent 2001, or for that matter, even the 1991 census (in case the 2001 census' computations should still be ongoing) was employed to determine the exact percentage of seats to be reserved under the program proposed somehow suggests that the State was trying to subvert the process of natural justice in its pursuit to be seen as socially aware.
I don't wish to support such a view. The State was being its usual self: plain old incompetent. I mean, it's a cardinal rule that you base your calculations on the most recent data, data which would, logically, be the most accurate approximation to the current situation. Then how could the State mess up so badly?
This blog has always stated its support for affirmative action based on economic considerations. While economics alone cannot be deemed to be enough, by that record, even a communal identity should also not be enough. The case for economics as 'one' of the parameters, and perhaps this being already a part of the system by way of the 'creamy layer' proviso, is strengthened by the fact that while it is accepted that the designated communes do suffer from a systemic bias against them, once a member becomes sufficiently emancipated by way of his financial and social status, the member shouldn't then be able to claim the benefits of affirmative action. Should such a member's offspring, by some quirk of fate, again fall short of the emancipation definition, then the same would become eligible, but not if the same continues on the same level as the parent.
The problem doesn't lie so much with the intention behind the approach, as in the manner in which the issue is sought to be resolved. This is not an issue which can be resolved overnight; reservations or affirmative action cannot be seen as the panacea for the issue. At best, it is one manner of reaching the goal, but it needs to be supplemented with more concrete measures to remove or reduce the institutionalized biases which make coercive measures such as the one proposed by the Government necessary and required. Till such time, reservations are at best a piecemeal alternative, incapable of satiating the hunger of the designated classes for emancipation.
4 comments:
i dont view the reservation issue as any..means of emancipation for the commoner.. but as a means of livelihhod.. infact i think i shud be offered a reserveed seat everywhere i go.. to strat off.. i need reservatoin in BEST BUs NO. 505 .. the first seat from the back door...... then i need reservation in the 9.37 train firstclass dabba the first seat near the window.... then they can slowly start reserving cookies when i go to subway and they shud keep the bars oopen late at night cause i like my drink late.. aftr\er 1... in the leisure of the silent night... temme if u have any expert opinion abt tht...
-the devil
Shreedhar, with repect to your views, I "reserve" my comments!!!
While humor and satire is a good way of reducing the heat about the issue, it shouldn't become the norm.
Jokes apart, just because one has been negatively affected by the reservation policies doesn't mean that one be blinded by the potential benefits of the policy. Just as every other initiative, even this one has its pros and cons. How we choose to implement it and let it be implemented will decide whether the pros are more prominent or the cons.
Reddy it is very nice of u to bring such an issue into notice in your blog.This entire reservation policy is not because the government is very concerned about the interests or the well being of the so called backward class but because it has to satisfy its ever increasing need for filling their votebanks and this is very evident with the behavior which the so called backward well wishers like Mayawati and Mulayam singh are displayin, by keeping mum over the whole issue.It is no longer a fight for equality but these politician's ego which is forcing them to implement it.By forcing the institutions to implement the reservation policies they themselves are creating a barrier between the backward and the forward classes which no longer anyone even bothers to find out unlike the ancient India wherein it was prevalent for a long time. So as mature individuals people should themselves realize this and try and come forward to oppose this bill.
Post a Comment