The Fall of VP Singh and After
[From Liberation, January 1991.]
The euphoria is over. By its very nature a euphoria is always short-lived, and, if VP Singh could survive for nearly eleven months it is no mean achievement for a politician who has had no roots in Indian politics, more so in "opposition" politics. Ironically, the man who had excelled in the art of resignation, eventually earned the distinction of being the first prime minister who was voted out on the floor of Parliament.
VP Singh is gone. Shall he make a comeback soon or be reduced to an ideologue of peripheral politics? It is too early to predict anything on this score; let us confine ourselves to the age-old wisdom of "wait and see".
VP Singh repeatedly claims to have sacrificed his government for the sake of the high principle of secularism. His line of argument is that he could have saved his government by conceding the BJP’s demand. He is projecting himself as a martyr for the great cause of secularism and, describing the vote of confidence as a battle between communalism and secularism, he even appealed to the MPs to vote according to their conscience.
The pattern of voting, however, revealed that the battle-line or rather lines were drawn at different planes, and the party whip was defied by nearly half of his own party MPs. If VP Singh is to be believed, the overwhelming majority of the MPs sided with communalism. Then how can one explain the split in the Janata Dal, especially when Mulayam Singh and Chimanbhai Patel, who are facing the BJP’s wrath as well, have opted for the Chandrashekhar camp? Chandrashekhar, the new prime minister, too is talking in a similar tone on the secularism-communalism issue. Actually, had VP Singh conceded the BJP’s demand, his government would have fallen with still more disgrace. Because, in that case the Left would have been compelled to withdraw its support and the Chandrashekhar-Devi Lal camp would still have rebelled, and that too with a greater moral authority. There was no course open to him to save his government at that juncture. In fact, he tried his best to come to a deal with the BJP till the last moment, the promulgation of the controversial ordinance being a proof of this. VP Singh is telling only the politician’s truth, the truth that suits him best. However the real reasons behind his fall are different — very different — and are rooted deep in the social divisions, in the traditional rivalries between different political parties and between various factions within his own party. The balance of social forces, and as their reflection, that of political forces within the Parliament, weighed against him and brought about his downfall.
The whole phenomenon cannot be explained simply as the bourgeois politicians’ lust for power, by invoking questions of norms and morality, and by overplaying the role of money power. All this amounts to a layman’s understanding of politics and a liberal-moralist approach which fails to understand that political parties are not any artificial creations of some professional politicians, but are the inevitable and natural products of modern-day societies, through which (political parties) various classes and strata of the society articulate their interests and compete with each other for share in power. Individual politician’s lust, scramble for loaves and fishes, money power etc., can operate only within the parameters of realignment of social forces. Let us begin with an analysis of the VP phenomenon in Indian politics.
VP Singh should be given the credit for making a serious attempt to build a bourgeois alternative to the Congress at an all-India level. Being pushed to the opposition politics, he mercilessly renounced his Congress past, and projected himself as the inheritor of the anti-Congressism of Lohia and Jayprakash and thereby as the natural leader of the opposition. Starting as a recruit of Sanjay Gandhi during the Emergency, his rise to UP chief ministership where his ruthless encounter campaign liquidated hundreds of youth belonging primarily to backward castes (incidentally, Mulayam Singh’s rivalry with VP Singh dates back to that period), then to an ardent advocate of economic liberalisation as Rajiv’s finance minister, and finally, his overnight transformation into the central opposition figure was in itself a wonder of Indian politics. He termed the Left as his natural ally and developed a good rapport with various non-party political formations and grassroots movements which had sprung up as antitheses to the Congress authoritarianism. He brought them all to the mainstream of political process. Most importantly, he successfully developed a National Front with important parties of regional opposition (to the Congress). He envisaged a political combination that would replace Congress not only in numerical terms in Parliament, but would also signal a new kind or political formation more suited to the present-day Indian conditions. His position within the Janata Dal was all along vulnerable as he was the commander of an alien army. The Janata Dal was an eclectic combination of several traditionally well-entrenched factions whose first loyalties were to their own chieftains rather than to the supreme commander. However, he hoped to keep the factional divisions in his own party within check by pitting one faction against another and, more importantly, by using his clout with the National Front allies against any challenge from within his own party. The BJP had no place in his original scheme of things and he carefully maintained a distance from it during the election campaign.
His AJGR combination worked well from Gujarat to Bihar. A good majority from the kulak lobby of backward castes as well as the old and new rural gentry of his own caste of Rajputs backed the Janata Dal. The Muslims, getting alienated from the Congress after the Bhagalpur riots and the controversial Shilanyas decision, voted for the Janata Dal. In Orissa, where the Janata Dal variety has all along been the natural opposition to the Congress, it gained the most from the anti-Congress wave. The Left recovered its positions in Bengal which it had lost to the Congress in 1984, and with some losses here and gains there, managed a fair representation in the parliament.
However, VP suffered his biggest setback in South India. The wave in South India was in direct opposition to the one in the North and was more sweeping too.
The electoral pattern in South India, which no one expected and which continues to puzzle political analysts, coupled with a satisfactory performance in Maharashtra, made Congress the single largest party Parliament.
The other unexpected development was the meteoric rise of the BJP. The BJP has always been a strong force in North and West India on its own and in states like Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh, it has traditionally been the main opposition to Congress. Every anti-Congress wave has meant its rise in those states. However, in 1989 elections, backed by its expanded network and by fully exploiting the Ram card, it surpassed the wildest expectations of its own leadership. Results have shown that it has expanded into several non-traditional areas as well and spread its wings among the peasantry and among backwards, dalits and Adivasis as well. The Left, the only consistent anti-BJP force, could do practically nothing to check the advance of the BJP in the Hindi belt and its slogan of ‘isolate BJP’ fell flat on its face. The BJP’s performance was more or less its own independent showing and the Ram card had yielded rich dividends.
Thus two adverse factors, first, the emergence of Congress(I) as the single largest party and thus its retaining the trump-card to exploit any situation to its favour, and second, the spectacular rise of the BJP, which fuelled its desire to play the trump-card, handicapped VP Singh from the very beginning. Moreover, deprived of the crucial support from his regional allies of the National Front within Parliament, his capacity to play down the factional squabbles within the Janata Dal was reduced to a minimum.
Here one must note the crucial difference between the objective placements and subjective ambitions of the BJP and the Left. Whereas the traditional strongholds of the Left such as Bengal and Kerala are areas where Janata Dal is virtually non-existent, the Left has no strong presence in the Janata Dal strongholds. The Left has virtually resigned itself to playing second fiddle to the Janata Dal in national politics and, whatever expansion it dreams of in the Hindi belt as well as in states like Andhra, Orissa, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu etc., it does so only through following behind the tail of the Janata Dal and its National Front allies. The Left, therefore, can live in long-term harmony with the Janata Dal.
The situation is entirely different for the BJP. Its areas of operation overlap with those of the Janata Dal and its existence and expansion can only be at the cost of the Janata Dal. The rivalry between the two is an in-built objective phenomenon. Moreover, the BJP, driven by the aggressive Hindu Rashtra philosophy and backed by a well spread-out network of ideologues and propagandists and by the well-organised RSS cadre force, aspires to occupy the centre-stage in Indian politics. The rise of religious fundamentalism in Iran and Pakistan, collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, serious setbacks in the Soviet Union coupled with the church assuming a crucial role — all these have provided it a conducive ideological environment. Back home, its success in exploiting religion for political ends has emboldened its spirits.
The 9th Lok Sabha, a hung one, was quite reflective of the major contradictions of Indian society, and of the emerging trends. If the South versus North contradiction was reflected in the pro- and anti-Congress waves, the rise of Hindu fundamentalism was represented by the rise of the BJP. The traditional Left’s resigning itself to the subsidiary role vis-a-vis Janata Dal had become quite apparent. The Akali Dal (Mann) swept the polls in Punjab, the BJP and even the IPF got their representations on their own independent planks.
VP Singh was faced with a Hobson’s choice. There was no way he could form government without BJP support. Overnight the formulations were changed ostensibly on ‘people’s pressure’.
Realisation dawned on him that there is nothing called value-based politics, rather values are based on the contingency of practical politics and that politics is nothing but the art of managing contradictions. In a fine acrobatic feat, the Left which had hardly anything to differentiate between the Congress and BJP, ‘between cholera and plague’ as described by EMS, changed its slogan from one of isolating the BJP to collaborating with it. Attempts were made to differentiate between BJP, the political party, and VHP, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena, the communal outfits. Rajeswar Rao even talked of positive socio-economic content in the BJP’s programme. The slogan of national unity and integrity came handy in justifying this collaboration and indeed Advani remarked that BJP’s views on national unity, on Pakistan, Punjab etc. are more akin to that of the Left than that of the Janata Dal. In private, left leaders went on claiming the success of their strategy in forcing the BJP to be responsible to the government and thus putting a brake on its communal frenzy, while at the same time keeping it out of the government. History has shown that actually this was a political fraud perpetrated on the people. A definite illusion was spread regarding the BJP and people were kept off-guard.
It was sheer naivete to expect BJP to give up the very Ram card that had paid it rich dividends and to believe that it would faithfully serve the Janata Dal government in the fashion of the Left. The BJP had made its intentions very clear from the very first day when it refused to accord unconditional support to the Janata Dal government and Advani declared his intention of acting both as the brake and the accelerator of the government. Things have moved only in the predictable direction. If the Left fails to find an explanation there is none to be blamed but itself for the political naivete it exhibited, for its political pragmatism, for its crime of diluting the struggle against religious fundamentalism. I still feel that the best tactics for the Left would have been to allow the Janata Dal and BJP to form the government at the Centre, and to reserve the role of playing as "the accelerator and the brake" for itself. This would have refurbished the independent image of the Left.
VP Singh began the second round of his political career with politics-based values and with skills in managing contradictions. His very ascendancy to prime ministership was a result of the shrewd gameplan of pitting Devi Lal against Chandrashekhar. Every support exacts its own price and at a juncture, despite all his attempts, it became impossible to contain the irrepressible Devi Lal, Chautala and company. One crisis after another rocked the Janata Dal and, ultimately, he had to part company with Devi Lal.
He rushed to implement all the unimportant declarations of his manifesto with which the people at large were least concerned. On the major issue of Bofors, his government failed to come out with any further evidence. On the contrary, the period of his rule has only swung the pointer away from Rajiv Gandhi in the Bofors case.
On Punjab he failed to take any initiative and soon lost rapport with Akali Dal (Mann) taking Punjab back to square one. Militant activities rose to a very high pitch in Kashmir as a reaction to the crucial presence of BJP, with its avowed demand of scrapping Article 370, in central power. VP Singh sought to tackle the problem the BJP way through Jagmohan, and thus, all semblance of political process was destroyed in Kashmir.
The economic situation worsened further and prices rose to astronomical proportions. The economic problems of Rajiv Gandhi’s period have only been compounded further and in the background of the Gulf crisis, Indian economy stands at the brink of collapse with the dangerous prospect of India joining the list of debt defaulters.
VP Singh’s style of all-party consensus soon became a farce. Forced to operate within a grim economic situation, encircled by the Congress waiting in the wings on the one hand, and on the other hand,the BJP bent on playing a decisive role, and threatened by the emerging Chandrashekhar-Devi Lal gang-up from within the party, his survival instinct led him to a sudden declaration of implementing the Mandal Commission report. It was a clear attempt at carving out a political territory for himself, enhancing his position within the Janata Dal and putting all his adversaries on the defensive. As the events proved, he had grossly miscalculated and, eventually, the implementation of Mandal recommendations signalled his downfall. His social base among his own castemen, Rajputs, dwindled. Powerful Jats of Haryana, UP and Rajasthan and several other major castes which had hitherto formed social base of the Janata Dal in the Hindi belt shifted their allegiance and the Chandrashekhar-Devi Lal company shot back into prominence.
Students and youth, particularly in and around Delhi, felt badly betrayed by a man on whom they had reposed great faith as an ideologue and had been expecting some sort of enhanced job opportunities as a result of his promise of making the right to employment a fundamental right. Instead, they found in him a scheming politician who was robbing them of whatever little job opportunities that were there. Their utter sense of frustration was reflected in the form of ‘self-immolation’ by scores of middle-class and lower middle class young boys and girls — a form so unusual with youth. The implementation of the Mandal report did consolidate his position among certain major backward castes but in no way was it a new addition. On the other hand, he lost a considerable segment of social support and, then, this angry outburst of students and youth in the form of self-immolation posed a serious moral question before his continuation in the office too.
The powerful media went against him and the Congress, the BJP as well as the Chandrashekhar-Devi Lal group shrewdly exploited his predicament.
VP Singh’s line of argument was that certain backward castes had already attained sufficient economic and political clout — due to the green revolution etc. — and were eligible to get a proportional share in the higher echelons of bureaucracy. Historically, as they had been socially and educationally backward, they could not compete on the basis of merit for a long time and the only way to ensure their representation wss through job reservations.
He further argued that it was not only a question of social justice but more that of social harmony: "Within the family whereas the elder brother should continue to enjoy greater power and authority, he should also grant some right to the younger brother, involving him too in the decision-making process."
Limited by the vision of a bourgeois politician, his essential concern was to incorporate within the ruling system those sections of backward castes who had already attained sufficient economic and political clout, i.e., the representative interests of the kulak lobby. Championing these narrow class interests in the name of common masses and even, revolution, has always been the art of bourgeois politics! Of course, this process of integration is an objective natural process and VP Singh or no VP Singh, it shall go on — sometimes through tension, and at other times with some adjustments here and there. Supporting this measure from a very different premise of advancement of class formation within castes, class polarisation and class struggle is an altogether different thing, but taking VP Singh on face value, terming the implementation of the Mandal Commission as some sort of revolution and rallying behind him, is tantamount to political foolishness and renouncing the class position of communists.
VP Singh’s expectation of political polarisation on backward-forward basis at an all-India level cutting across party lines reflects the wrong and narrow understanding of Lohiaite politicians. He was behaving in a foolhardy manner when he expected a split within the Congress and BJP on these lines, while calling for a conscience vote. Forward-backward caste contradiction is definitely one of the major social contradictions in Indian society, and in some states, particularly in Bihar, it does decide the mainstream of politics, but this is not an all-pervading contradiction. Viewed in isolation, the Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu symbolises the rise of backward castes against the forward castes, but then, the Tamil national identity, the South Indian identity, plays a still bigger role there. Dravid movement too has got divided into two major streams of DMK and AIADMK, and, in recent years the rise of other backwards like Vanniyars has been an important phenomenon.
Then again, backward castes do not operate as uniform single entities and are themselves engaged in internal rivalries even within Bihar. These often result in various alliances between certain forward and backward castes against such other combinations. In states like Bengal there is no distinct category of powerful backward castes and no forward-backward rivalry.
In UP, certain analysts believed Mulayam Singh to be the representative of the backward among backward castes, and he was supposed to be organising the poor and middle peasants against the kulak Jat lobby. By all accounts, be it on the issue of Mandal Commission or Ram Janmabhoomi, he was seen as the staunchest ally of VP Singh. However, traditional political rivalry reigned supreme here and VP’s attempts were objectively intended to carve out his own base in Uttar Pradesh at the cost of Mulayam Singh. The Mulayam Singh-Ajit Singh controversy too is a known affair and, essentially, the split in Janata Dal in UP is along the same lines. There is some substance in Mulayam Singh’s allegations that VP Singh through various manoeuvres did try to topple him. The Mulayam Singh-Chandrashekhar-Kanshi Ram alliance was taking shape in UP as against the VP-Ajit combine for some time and no serious political observer would have ignored the presence of the three on the dias of the 12th October central anti-communal rally. The rally was, at the same time, the indication of the sharpening factional struggle within the Janata Dal. Strangely, Messers Jyoti Basu and Indrajit Gupta, who too adorned the dias and sang laurels in praise of Mulayam, failed to notice the real politics behind this anti-communal fanfare. Modern political parties are not, and cannot be, simply the parties of backward or forward castes. Various caste and class combinations operate within them and their sum total reflects their bias towards a particular caste-class, more pronouncedly at particular junctures, and in essence only. Thereafter, they again move back to normalcy. For instance, the Hindu and forward caste bias is definitely the essence of Congress but it exhibits itself in a very complicated process.
The Mandal Commission did threaten the BJP in North India to some extent as it went against the latter’s drive towards Hindu unity. Its calculated move of Rathyatra and associating it with extreme positions was definitely a counter move. Advani had said that his arrest would prove disastrous. He proved prophetic. The VP government at the Centre fell, the Janata Dal split into many factions and the VP faction could ultimately retain power only in Bihar. The BJP has emerged as the main opposition in Parliament. Socially and politically the sum total of contradictions had already started operating against Mr.VP Singh. The withdrawal of BJP’s support was its outcome and provided the necessary catalyst for his fall. It was not simply the question of withdrawal of support by the 90-odd members of the BJP-Shiv Sena combine; it was, at the same time, the break up of Janata Dal and a new-found equation with the Congress.
The Chandrashekhar-Congress(I) combination essentially means the return of Congress rule through the back door. It is definitely an unstable alliance because Devi Lal and a section of the Janata Dal(S) cannot cooperate with Congress for long even if Chandrashekhar is absorbed within the Congress. We must therefore go to the masses both in anticipation of elections and for developing mass struggles.
VP Singh’s Janata Dal and the Left are back to the position of natural opposition, where we had already been waiting for them. To be sure, now there is greater scope for joint activities, collaboration and alliance between us and them, and, we must fully explore these possibilities. However, we must say some words of caution here. The menace of communalism and its representative party, the BJP, is no doubt threatening the very fabric of the Indian society. The left parties have made it the sole plank of their propaganda thrust. We must not forget that in practical politics this is a clever ploy to sell their line of trailing behind this or that bourgeois-landlord combination. The parallel efforts to unite and mobilise the masses on their basic issues, in democratic struggles and militant mass movements — the traditional and time-tested forms of the Left’s most effective challenge to fundamentalism and communalism — have been given a go by and they are not even considered as forms of struggle against communalism. Therefore, whereas the opportunist Left rests its hope on bourgeois politicians in anti-communal struggles, and keeps itself busy with facades like human-chains, seminars etc., fundamentalism continues to spread its tentacles into the minds of people at grassroots.
This ideological environment, the grim and hopeless economic crisis, the erosion of national identity built during anti-British struggles — all prop-up religious ideology as a force: Religion brings solace, Hindu identity appears as the only means of preserving national-identity and the BJP goes marching ahead towards its die-hard anti-communist and fascist goal. Revival of the Left’s legacy, its ideological and political offensive, its course of militant mass movements on basic and democratic issues is the only way to take on communalism. It is the backward social conditions, the lack of democratic consciousness, and economic desperation that provide fertile ground for the rise of fascism. The same conditions are also conducive to the advance of revolution provided the communists shed off all social-democratic and parliamentary illusions, if they dare to march independently and with the masses.
VP Singh and Laloo Yadav may go with us only to an extent. They and the BJP, now thrown into opposition again, may, step by step develop a rapport again under the banner of anti-Congressism. It began from Lohia who formulated this theory first in the 1960s and developed coordination with the then Jan Sangh. The same was repeated in 1977 within the Janata Party, and again in 1989 in a different form. While in opposition, they get closer, once in power they fall out. This is how the things stand. The CPI and CPI(M) are again spreading illusions about a decisive anti-Congress, anti-BJP secular combination having taken shape which can now only develop in a unilinear direction. If we allow ourselves to be misled by the appearances and place all our cards at the disposal of Messers VP Singh and Laloo Yadav, the Left would again be destined to suffer a rude shock. While keeping our doors open for any tactical, temporary and transitory alliances with secular and liberal forces of the bourgeoisie, let us march independently. The revolutionary situation has advanced in a favourable direction. The ruling classes are facing deep political instability. Instead of confining our activities within the bounds of parliamentarism and formalism, the time has come to boldly arouse the masses and daringly go in for militant mass struggles.
Let us hold high the banner of independence and of mass struggles.
Vishwanath Pratap Singh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article is about a person who has recently died. Some information, such as that pertaining to the circumstances of the person's death and surrounding events, may change rapidly as more facts become known. In the event that this article is disruptively edited following the death of the subject, please request administrator intervention. |
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2008) |
Vishwanath Pratap Singh विश्वनाथ प्रताप सिंह | |
 | |
| In office 2 December 1989 – 10 November 1990 | |
| Preceded by | Rajiv Gandhi |
| Succeeded by | Chandra Shekhar |
| Born | 25 June 1931 (1931-06-25) Allahabad, United Provinces, India |
| Died | 27 November 2008 |
| Political party | Janata Dal |
Vishwanath Pratap Singh (Hindi: विश्वनाथ प्रताप सिंह) (25 June 1931 - 27 November 2008) was the 10th Prime Minister of the Republic of India.
[edit] Early life
V. P. Singh entered local politics in Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh during the Nehru era. He soon made a name for himself in the state Congress Party for his unfailing rectitude, a reputation that he would carry with him throughout his career.
He was appointed by Indira Gandhi as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh in 1980, when the Congress came back to power after the Janata Party interregnum. As Chief Minister, he cracked down hard on the dacoity, or banditry, problem, that was particularly severe in the rural districts of the south-west. He received much favourable national publicity when he offered to resign following a self-professed failure to stamp out the problem, and again when he personally oversaw the surrender of some of the most feared dacoits of the area in 1983.
[edit] Cabinet Minister for Finance and Defence
Called to the Centre following Rajiv Gandhi's massive mandate in the 1984 General elections, he was appointed to the pivotal post of Finance Minister, where he oversaw the gradual relaxation of the license Raj as Rajiv had in mind. During his term as Finance Minister, he oversaw the reduction of gold smuggling by reducing gold taxes and the excellent tactic of giving the police a portion of the smuggled gold that they found. He also gave extraordinary powers to the Enforcement Directorate of the Finance Ministry, the wing of the ministry charged with tracking down tax evaders, then headed by Bhure Lal. Following a number of high-profile raids on suspected evaders - including Dhirubhai Ambani [1] and Amitabh Bachchan - Rajiv was forced to sack him as Finance Minister, possibly because many of the raids were conducted on industrialists who had supported the Congress financially in the past. However, Singh's popularity was at such a pitch that only a sideways move seemed to have been possible, to the Defence Ministry.
Once ensconced in North Block, Singh began to investigate the notoriously murky world of defence procurement. After a while, word began to spread that Singh possessed information about the Bofors defence deal that could damage the Prime Minister's reputation. Before he could act on it, he was dismissed from the Cabinet and, in response, resigned his memberships in the Congress Party and the Lok Sabha.
[edit] In Opposition
[edit] Janata Dal
Together with associates Arun Nehru and Arif Mohammad Khan, Singh floated an opposition party named the Jan Morcha. He was re-elected to Lok Sabha in a tightly contested by-election from Allahabad, defeating Anil Shastri. On 11 October 1988, the birthday of the original Janata coalition's spiritual leader Jayaprakash Narayan, the Janata Dal was formed by merger of Jan Morcha, Janata Party, Lok Dal and Congress (S), in order to bring together all the centrist parties opposed to the Rajiv Gandhi government, and V. P. Singh was elected the President of the Janata Dal. A federation of the Janata Dal with various regional parties including the DMK, TDP, and AGP, came into being, called the National Front (India), with V. P. Singh as convener and N. T. Rama Rao as President.
[edit] General Elections of 1989
The National Front fought the elections in 1989 after coming to an electoral understanding with the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party and the Communist Left Front that served to unify the anti-Congress vote. The National Front, with its allies, earned a simple majority in the Lok Sabha and decided to form a government. The Communists and the BJP declined to serve in the government, preferring to support it from outside.
[edit] Election as Prime Minister
In a dramatic meeting in the Central Hall of Parliament on 1 December, V. P. Singh proposed the name of Devi Lal as Prime Minister, in spite of the fact that he himself had been clearly projected by the anti-Congress forces as the 'clean' alternative to Rajiv and their Prime Ministerial candidate. Devi Lal, a Jat leader from Haryana stood up and refused the nomination, and said that he would prefer to be an 'elder uncle' to the Government, and that Singh should be PM [2]. This last part came as a clear surprise to Chandra Shekhar, the former head of the erstwhile Janata Party, and Singh's greatest rival within the Janata Dal. Shekhar, who had clearly expected that an agreement had been forged with Lal as the consensus candidate, stormed out of the meeting and refused to serve in the Cabinet.
[edit] Prime Minister
Singh held office for slightly less than a year, from 2 December 1989 to 10 November 1990.
[edit] Punjab and Kashmir
He faced his first crisis within few days of taking office: terrorists kidnapped the daughter of his Home Minister, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed (Former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir). His government agreed to the demand for releasing militants in exchange; partly to end the storm of criticism that followed, he shortly thereafter appointed Jagmohan, a controversial former bureaucrat, as Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, on the insistence of the BJP who were concerned that an insufficiently hard line was being taken with the separatist elements in the state. Jagmohan subsequently inflamed opinion in the Valley when he ordered troops to fire on the funeral procession of the unofficial head of Kashmiri Islam, the Mirwaiz, and shortly thereafter the Kashmir insurgency began in earnest. In contrast, in Punjab, Singh replaced the hardline Siddhartha Shankar Ray as Governor with another former bureaucrat, Nirmal Kumar Mukarji, who moved forward on a timetable for fresh elections. Singh himself made a much-publicised visit to the Golden Temple to ask forgiveness for Operation Bluestar and the combination of events caused the long rebellion in Punjab to die down markedly in a few months. V. P. Singh also withdrew the IPKF from Sri Lanka.
[edit] Reservation for Backward Classes
Singh himself wished to move forward nationally on social justice-related issues, which would in addition consolidate the caste coalition that supported the Janata Dal in North India, and accordingly decided to implement the recommendations of the Mandal Commission which suggested that a fixed quota of all jobs in the public sector be reserved for members of the historically disadvantaged so-called Other Backward Classes. (Generally abbreviated OBCs, these were Hindu castes, and certain non-Hindu caste-like communities, which, though not untouchable, had been socially and educationally backward). This decision led to widespread protests among the youth in urban areas in North India.
[edit] Tussle with Dhirubhai Ambani
In 1990, the government-owned financial institutions like the Life Insurance Corporation of India and the General Insurance Corporation stonewalled attempts by the Reliance group to acquire managerial control over Larsen & Toubro. Sensing defeat, the Ambanis resigned from the board of the company. Dhirubhai, who had become L&T's chairman in April 1989, had to quit his post to make way for D. N. Ghosh, former chairman of the State Bank of India.
[edit] Babri Masjid
Meanwhile the BJP was moving its own agenda forward: in particular, the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation, which served as a rallying cry for several radical Hindu organisations, took on new life. The party president, Lal Krishna Advani, toured the northern states on a rath - a bus converted to look like a mythical chariot - with the intention of drumming up support. Before he could complete the tour by reaching the disputed site in Ayodhya, he was arrested on Singh's orders on the charges of disturbing the peace and fomenting communal tension. This led to the BJP's suspension of support to the National Front government. V. P. Singh faced the vote of confidence saying that he occupied the high moral ground, as he stood for secularism, had saved the Babri Masjid at the cost of power and had upheld the fundamental principles which were challenged during the crises; `What kind of India do you want?', he asked of his opponents of various shades in Parliament before losing the vote 142-346[3]; only the portion of the National Front remaining loyal to him (see below) and the Left front supported him in the vote.
[edit] Chandra Shekhar
Chandra Shekhar immediately seized the moment and left the Janata Dal with several of his own supporters to form the Samajwadi Janata Party or the Socialist People's Party. Although he had a mere 64 MPs, Rajiv Gandhi, the leader of the Opposition, agreed to support him on the floor of the House; so he won a confidence motion and was sworn in as Prime Minister. He lasted only a few months before Gandhi withdrew support and fresh elections were called. He tried his level best to get support till last minute but failed.
[edit] Aftermath
Singh decided against contesting the new elections and retired from active politics. He spent the next few years touring the country speaking about matters related to issues of social justice and his artistic pursuits, chiefly painting. In the H. D. Deve Gowda and I. K. Gujral governments of the late 1990s, Singh acted as a sort of elder statesman and adviser for the successors to the National Front coalition. In 1992, Singh was the first to propose the name of the future President K. R. Narayanan as a (eventually successful) candidate for Vice President. Later the same year in December, he led his followers to Ayodhya to oppose the Kar seva proposed by L. K. Advani, and was arrested before he could reach the site; the Masjid was demolished by the kar sevaks a few days later. He was diagnosed with cancer in 1998 and ceased his public appearances.
[edit] Jan Morcha relaunch
When his cancer went into remission in 2003, he once again became a visible figure, especially in the many groupings that had inherited the space once occupied by his Janata Dal. Ironically, his caste-based social justice policies had caused the rise of parties like the Bahujan Samaj Party that were formed around caste identities; his own notion of populist socialism was thus squeezed out of the electoral marketplace. To remedy this, he relaunched the Jan Morcha in 2005 with Raj Babbar as President, and began the slow process of aggregation of smaller parties in the North with a view to contesting the Uttar Pradesh elections.
[edit] Agitation at Dadri
Singh was placed under arrest in Ghaziabad as he and his supporters were proceeding towards a hauling where prohibitory orders under Section 144 had been imposed to join the farmers agitating against the acquisition of land at Dadri by the Anil Ambani-owned Reliance Industries and demanding adequate compensation.[4]. Later, Singh and CPI General Secretary A. B. Bardhan [5] were again arrested on the U. P. border when they were proceeding to Dadri. However, Singh and Babbar were later able to evade the police, reaching Dadri on 18 August 2006, and ploughing the land in solidarity with the farmers.[6]
[edit] Death
V. P. Singh died after a long struggle with blood cancer and renal failure in Apollo Hospital in Delhi on 27 November 2008.[7]
[edit] References
- ^ In May 1985, Singh suddenly removed the import of Purified Terephthalic Acid (PTA) from the Open General License category. As a raw material this was very important to manufacture polyester filament yarn. This made it very difficult for Reliance Industries under Dhirubhai Ambani to carry on operations. Reliance was able to secure, from various financial institutions, letters of credit that would allow it to import almost one full year’s requirement of PTA on the eve of the issuance of the government notification changing the category under which PTA could be imported.
- ^ Man in the News; V. P. Singh: Low-key Indian in high-anxiety job - New York Times report
- ^ India's cabinet falls as Premier loses confidence vote, by 142-346, and quits - New York Times report
- ^ V. P. Singh arrested on way to Reliance plant
- ^ V. P. Singh, Bardhan held on U. P. border
- ^ V. P. Singh, Raj Babbar spring a surprise at Dadri
- ^ Former PM VP Singh dies at Delhi's Apollo Hospital
| Political offices | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded by President's Rule | Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh 9 Jun 1980 – 19 Jul 1982 | Succeeded by Sripati Mishra |
V P Singh was protector of social justice: CM,leaders grieve
Chennai, Nov 27 : Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi and leaders of various political parties in the state today expressed shock and grief over the death of former Prime Minister V P Singh and offered their condolences.
Mr Karunanidhi, in a message here, said the death of Singh, who was a symbol of culture, tradition and principles, was an irreparable loss to the country.
Describing him as the protector of social justice, artist and his best friend, the Chief Minister said he was deeply grieved by his death.
His contributions to Tamil Nadu when he was Prime Minister were historic, he said adding that the state was indebted to him for constituting a tribunal to resolve the Cauvery dispute, implementing the Mandal Commission recommendations on Reservation for Backward Classes and naming the airports after Anna and Kamaraj.
He would remain alive for ever in the history, Mr Karunanidhi said and offered his condolences to the latter's family members.
Expressing shock and grief, TNCC President K V Thangabalu said he buried all his political differences and was friendly with leaders of all political parties. His death was a great loss to the country, he said.
--- UNI
V.P. Singh a champion of social justice
Anita Joshua
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He was highly sensitive to social realities: Somnath
A leader who stood for principled politics: CPI(M)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW DELHI: Leaders from across the political spectrum were one in hailing the former Prime Minister, V.P. Singh, as a champion of social justice and secularism who was willing to sacrifice the highest office for his convictions.
In his condolence message, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the country had lost a great patriot and nation-builder whose empathy for the weaker sections would always be etched in national consciousness.
“As Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and later as Finance Minister and Prime Minister, he consistently strove to translate his convictions into public policy. Even after being afflicted with a debilitating disease, he continued to be at the forefront of the struggle for social justice.”
Ansari’s condolence
Vice-President Hamid Ansari said V.P. Singh had carved a niche for himself as an honest and dedicated parliamentarian.
Recalling his long association with Mr. Singh, Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee said: “He had always been highly sensitive to the social realities of the country and he refused to compromise when the secular fabric of the country was sought to be threatened and readily sacrificed the prime ministership for the sake of the unity and integrity of the country.”
While the Congress described him as a leading political light of several decades, the BJP remembered Mr. Singh for his high level of personal integrity and commitment for the cause of social justice.
“He was a leader who set certain norms for himself and lived by them,” said BJP leader Arun Jaitley.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) hailed Mr. Singh as one of the few contemporary political leaders who stood for principled politics. “The country has lost a leader of rare distinction and commitment,” the CPI(M) said in a statement.
Condoling his death, the CPI said he was one of the rarest politicians who did not forget the mandate of the electorate while in office. “It is a matter of shame that the Congress and the BJP had combined together to remove him from office.”
Secular nationalist
Mourning the passing away of a comrade-in-arms against the Rajiv Gandhi dispensation, Railway Minister Lalu Prasad described Mr. Singh as a truly secular nationalist who was committed to people’s welfare and national development.
“Throughout his life, he constantly strove for the betterment of the poorest among poor, especially those who belonged to the deprived sections of society and minorities.”
According to Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar, India has lost a distinguished and an eminent social and political leader who had actively participated in the Bhoodan Movement and worked hard for the uplift of the socially disadvantaged sections of society.
“Committed activist”
Janata Dal (United) president Sharad Yadav — who was a Minister in Mr. Singh’s cabinet — remembered him as a committed activist for social change and a crusader against corruption. “In his death, the country has lost an honest politician, a statesman and a true champion of social justice and secularism.”
Another fellow traveller and Union Minister S. Jaipal Reddy said Mr. Singh gave a new dimension and new direction to the Indian polity by supporting empowerment of marginalised sections through the electoral process and affirmative action.
http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/28/stories/2008112857881600.htm
ALL SHADOW AND LITTLE SUBSTANCE ? SOCIAL JUSTICE AND THE RULE OF LAW IN INDIAhttp://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/3/9/8/p173986_index.html
Lately, India has received a great deal of attention in the Western media as an ‘emerging knowledge superpower’, and as ‘a potential economic giant.’ Aside from being routinely described as the ‘world’s largest democracy’, India is now being touted as the poster child for the success of globalization. While some euphoria seems understandable, what is often ignored is that India’s economic prosperity has not translated into a better quality of life for most of its citizens. That its human development indicies are low is quite well-known. A lesser known fact is that India’s justice system has become largely dysfunctional and moribund. Plagued by rampant corruption, nepotism, procedural inefficiencies, archaic laws, interminable delays, and outright subversion by the rich and the powerful, the justice system has not been able to uphold, in several cases, even symbolic notions of social justice and the rule of law. The deinstitutionalization of the justice system is apparent from the fact that the conviction rate for criminal cases is just around six percent.
More disturbing is the fact that initiatives of the state and the verdicts of the judiciary, particularly in the recent times, have overwhelmingly redounded to the benefit of the elites of the propertied castes and classes. Thus, on the one hand, a predatory form of globalization is exacerbating socio-economic inequalities; and, on the other, the actions of both the state and the judiciary appear to be in favor of the ruling elites and their agenda of globalization. Globalization has, thus, aggravated social tensions and profoundly compromised the human rights of millions of marginalized Indians. Not surprisingly, therefore, the legitimacy of the state and the justice system has severely eroded.
In this paper, based on a detailed, critical analysis of the socio-legal initiatives of the state and the judgments of the courts, I wish to argue the following:
a. The policies, statutes, and institutions of the state, though ostensibly meant to uphold social justice and the rule of law, have failed to accomplish their objectives.
b. The judiciary, though quite progressive in an earlier phase (1980s to mid 1990s), lately, appears to have diluted its commitment to the voiceless and marginalized sections of society. Its recent verdicts on issues such as the resettlement of the evacuees of the Narmada dam project, workers’ right to strike, and the ‘right’ of private educational institutions to charge exorbitant capitation fees – to cite some prominent examples - all seem to suggest that the judiciary appears to be eager to further the agenda of globalization, often times regardless of its consequences for the poor.
c. All told, the perfunctory policies and interventions of the state and the tepid response of the judiciary in providing relief to the ‘victims’ of globalization, have resulted in the abrogation of inalienable human rights and civil liberties and jeopardized the human dignity of millions of hapless citizens.
Social Justice
DFN Main Focus: Human Rights and Advocacy
Defend the defenseless, one injustice at a time!
Latest Dalit Human Rights News from India
History of Dalit Oppression in India
Become an Advocate for Dalit Rights
Frequently Asked Questions – Social Justice
Serving as an international advocate for Dalit rights is the heartbeat of the Dalit Freedom Network. The Dalit Freedom Network represents Dalits internationally in Washington, DC, London, at the United Nations, and at major conferences on human rights and religious liberty. DFN seeks to raise awareness and find relief funding for Dalits across India.
The Indian constitution guarantees equality, justice, and human dignity for all people and bans discrimination based on one’s caste. However, slavery and oppression based on the philosophy of the Hindu caste system is very much alive in India, especially in rural areas.
Ultimately, DFN seeks to bring an end to caste-based discrimination and the resulting oppression the Dalit community experiences. If you would like to participate in this process, or help provide funds for those that do, please indicate your interest by email to: info@dalitnetwork.org
Stories
Atrocities and Crimes Against Dalits
Social Justice News Articles
Legislation
Indian Politics
Supreme Court Case in India
British MP introduces debate on Caste Discrimination, May 2007
Links
Organizations
Laws and Policy Database
Downloadable PDF’s
- Resolution in the US House of Congress, May 2007: H.CON.RES.396 Expressing the Sense of the Congress that the United States Should Address the Ongoing Problem of Untouchability in India.pdf
- Special Tidings From Ghataprabha: The Story of a Devadasi.pdf
- Recommendations to the Government of India of the Justice Jagannath Mishra Commission: Scheduled Castes Report.pdf
According to the traditional Hindu view, human beings were divided into four categories on the basis of their intrinsic qualities. The highest caste, the Brahmins, were the thinkers, philosophers, and priests whose role was to provide both spiritual guidance and intellectual sustenance to the society. Originally, they lived on the charity of the people, given in return for the performance of various rites. Next came the Kshatriyas, or Warriors, who were primarily concerned with the defense and governance of the state. The kings and rulers belonged to this caste. The third caste consisted of the Vaisyas, or Traders, who were involved in agricultural and commercial operations. In the fourth category were the Sudras, or Laborers. This caste, at the lowest rung of the hierarchical ladder, were responsible for various services, including menial jobs like scavenging and cleaning. They were considered "untouchable" and the three higher castes were not permitted to mingle with them. Marriage across caste lines was forbidden, and even now this taboo persists. Those who fall in love and marry in spite of the taboo risk excommunication from their castes. |
This social system of gradation was given religious sanction by a verse in the ancient sacred writings of Hinduism and the earliest document of Indian history called the Rig Veda. Believed to have been composed between 1500 and 1000 B.C., it records that Brahmins came from the face of the creator, Kshatriyas from his arms, Vaisyas from his thighs, and Sudras from the soles of his feet. Members of the lowest caste were subjected to many restrictions in society. |  Lower-caste women work all day picking weeds for a wage as low as 50 cents a day. |
At present, Indian society is characterized by an obsession with the kinds of development that would lead to a free-market economy. The growing economic success of some in India has created a chasm separating the rich from the poor, who make up about 56 percent of the population. Economists describe "two Indias"--one rich and one poor. India's caste system can no longer fully contain the socioeconomic change that the country is undergoing. Different religions, occupations, and levels of education are no longer correlated with caste. A high-caste person cannot be born a chief executive, for example, but must work to become one. A person of low caste may now get a good education and become an executive, a college professor, or even a government leader. |
Indians who belong to the lower castes that were once considered "untouchable" now choose to call themselves by the name Dalit, meaning "oppressed," and signaling that they are actively resisting injustice. Dalits make up 18 to 20 percent of India's population. Only about 3 percent of India's population is Christian, but 50 percent of the Christian population is Dalit, according to Ms. Soosai Raj Faustina, a teacher and member of the Dalit Solidarity Peoples (DSP) National Working Committee. Foreign Christian missionaries have also had a history of helping Dalits with education and with economic development. |
Rural India still presents a dismal picture of life for its low-caste people, though. A friend of mine, Dharamnath of Jagdalpur, a member of the Methodist Church and an excellent vocalist, says that the typical low-caste village family may have only one sari (a draped dress using several yards of cloth) for all its women. So, while one woman comes out the hut draped in the sari, four other women must wait inside for their turn to wear the same dress. They can only come out one by one. Faustina explains that, even though she teaches in a mixed school run by the Roman Catholic Church in Ongur, Dalits are still separated in the village. "Normally, Dalits are put on the east side of the village," she reports, "because the wind blows from west to east, and non-Dalits don't want to be contaminated by wind that has touched Dalits. All the institutions are in the non- Dalit area of the village. We are resisting these things," she adds. The Supreme Court of India in Delhi.
Migrant populations flock to the outskirts of cities to find work. |  A village girl holds her little brother. In fact, empowered by India's constitution, the Dalits have organized to push for change through legislation and social institutions. Public transportation, radio, and television have begun to have a modernizing impact, especially on children and youth, even in rural villages. But a lack of political will on the part of the state prevents some recommendations from being implemented. Also, villagers who travel to large cities in search of job opportunities are likely to encounter crime syndicates and mafia organizations there. Even in small towns, gangs have proliferated. Last year, the worst-ever massacre of Dalit and landless men, women, and children occurred in Bihar. Sixty people were killed by the Ranvir Sena, a self-styled armed militia of the upper-caste landed gentry, formed to crush the movements of Dalits and agricultural laborers. |
Dr. James Massey, a minister of the Church of North India and a Dalit, is a member of the government-sponsored National Commission for Minorities (NCM) in India. This commission is responsible for investigating incidents of religious violence in India. Massey says that religious violence in India is fueled by hatred and fear, not outside influences. The NCM investigated the highly publicized murder of Australian missionary Graham Stuart Staines and his two young sons, Philip (age 9) and Timothy (age 6), who were burned alive in their jeep on January 22, 1999, while they were sleeping. Staines was in Orissa working among patients with leprosy. The NCM team concluded that the incident was part of a definite plan on the part of militant Hindus to create insecurity among Christians. This gruesome act, however, evoked unprecedented condemnation from all sectors of Indian society, including the ruling Hindu Bhartiya Janata Party. The majority of Hindus do not subscribe to these violent methods of reinforcing the nationalistic ideal of creating a Hindu state. Christian leaders in India have appealed for safety and security not only for Christians but also for indigenous people, regardless of their religion. One banner carried by a child at a mass rally read: "Burn Hatred, Not Children." In a secular society, tolerance and coexistence are two sides of the same coin. Under Article 25 of India's constitution, a citizen has the freedom to profess, practice, and propagate any religion. |
Economic growth without social justice: EU-India trade negotiations and their implications for social development and gender justice
http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=10217This paper attempts to place the EU-India FTA negotiations in their historical and topical context, and questions the coherence between the development aid agenda on the one hand, and the trade and investment agenda on the other.
Economic growth without social justice: EU-India trade negotiations and their implications for social development and gender justice.
Author: Christa Wichterich, with input by Yamini Mishra, CBGA, New Delhi, and Pam Rajput, University of Chandigarh.
On 28 June 2007 negotiations on a bilateral trade and investment agreement between India and the EU were launched in Brussels. The negotiations have to be seen have to be seen in the context of fast-changing global economic relations and the growing significance of the emerging markets in Asia. Both sides consider an export-led and free-trade-oriented strategy a powerful driver of economic growth, development, and employment. India is in the process of adopting in a “grand leap forward” the liberalisation model, enhancing its export industries in manufacturing and information technologies, and its access to foreign markets. It has already become an important production base and outsourcing destination for EU operators. The EU wants to maintain its competitiveness in the world economy by gaining access to the large Indian market, expanding investment, the export of goods and services, and ensuring favourable trade rules and regulations.
While the bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) is supposed to prepare the ground for a “strategic partnership” in trade and investment, India is still a major recipient of EU development aid. The Country Strategy Paper for India 2007-2013 provides 470 million euro for both economic and development co-operation. While in the past decade Indian economic growth rates rank second in the world behind China, UNDP ranked India’s human development at 126, and gender-related development at 96 in its global comparison. One quarter of the population of India lives below the poverty line.
This paper attempts to place the EU-India FTA negotiations in their historical and topical context, and questions the coherence between the development aid agenda on the one hand, and the trade and investment agenda on the other. Does it still hold true what the European Commission stated in 1996 aiming at enhancing the EU-India partnership: “The European Union firmly believes that social development must be a parallel objective to economic development”? Exploring the main interests behind the FTA on both sides, the paper asks whether considerations regarding social inclusion, poverty eradication, and gender equality are informing trade policy-making. It looks at trade liberalisation and the FTA procedures through the prism of social justice and human development. Since bilateral trade negotiations are held in great secrecy, the paper wishes to provide civil society actors in the EU and India with background information and to build their capacity to engage critically in policy-making on trade and development and in transregional networking.
To access the publication online, please go to: http://62.149.193.10/wide/download/EU%20INDIA%20BROCH.pdf?id=533
Changing Economic Scenario and Social Justice in India/Mahabal Ram. New Delhi, Dominant, 2003, xxxii, 296 p., $28. ISBN 81-7888-050-4.
Contents: Preface. Introduction. 1. New economic policy : meaning and concept. 2. Compulsions for adopting new economic reforms. 3. Visionless political decisions. 4. Disinvestment policy and selling of crown jewels. 5. Danger of liberalisation. 6. Challenge to democracy. 7. Multinationals as civilizers. 8. Invasion of capitalism. 9. Lack of preparations. 10. Mockery of tryst with destiny : poor and Dalits alienated. 11. Folly of new economic reforms. 12. National agenda for collective economic emancipation of poor and Dalits. References.
"Soon after independence the nascent Indian nation adopted semi-socialistic (state controlled) mix-economic system for the reconstruction of its economy with justice as its main objective. It worked well for 43 years (1947-90) and a lot of wealth and employment opportunities were created which of course could not percolate to the bottom rung of the Indian society due to political and bureaucratic corruption. The ruling elites both Congress as well as BJP, votary of Swadesi replaced the existing Nehruvian economic system with the capitalistic new economic system so called liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation and opened its economy and its market to the foreign players, the Multinational Corporations (MNCs) under the pressure of World Bank, IMF and WTO, the tentacles of the Developed Countries (G-7) without laying down proper guidelines and conditions. The new economic system lack social justice.
Constitutionalising social justice in India: the role of the Supreme Court
The Withering Social Justice in India: A Case for Diversity
The policy of reservation and other opportunities of development guaranteed in the Indian Constitution for the SCs and STs (Dalits) are increasingly becoming redundant in view of the ever-increasing process of liberalization, privatization and globalization. Moreover, the very castes and communities that opposed such measures have now started demanding for it. In this changing circumstances Dalits and other marginalized groups need to aim at diversifying national assets and opportunities of development among all castes and communities rather than aiming at the mere continuation of the existing Reservation policy. The paper in the process portrays how the state has failed in protecting the Dalits' dignity, human rights and in meeting their basic needs. The paper suggests that in the changing context, Dalits should prevail upon the State to adopt Diversity policies which are popular in US and other developed countries as means to ensure social justice to all communities in a dignified manner.
Keywords: Social Justice, Dalits, Globalisation, Wealth/Asset Diversity, Reservation/Affirmative Policies
Dr Ramaiah AvatthiReader, Unit for Social Policy and Social Welfare Administration, Tata Institute of Social Sciences |
Posts
Bidyut Chakrabarty
24 Apr 2008
Reservation is an empowering device in India. In a landmark judgment in April, 2008, the case of Ashoka Kumar Thakur versus Union of India validated the Ninety-Third Amendment Act with the Indian Supreme Court endorsing the demand for reservation for the demographically preponderant Other Backward Castes (OBC) in higher education. Reiterating its views on the Indira Sawhney versus Union of India (1992) the Court denied reservation to those who had already attained economic well-being or educational advancement as ‘it would be unreasonable, discriminatory or arbitrary, resulting in reverse discrimination’.
With the approval by the highest court of justice, the Ninety-Third Amendment to the Constitution (2005) is the culmination of a process that began with the acceptance of the Mandal recommendations by the VP Singh-led National Front Government in 1990, in light of massive opposition by caste groups, including OBCs.
The Mandal scheme was justified because it recommended reservation for a group that constituted more than half of India’s population that remained excluded from government jobs. The Ninety-Third Amendment Act is thus a continuation in the sense that it extends reservation for the same group, this time in the realm of higher education.
From the point of social justice, these schemes seem legitimate because the state potentially has the power to adopt discriminatory measures to favour one group of people against another in a multicultural society. In order to neutralise inequality, the state must provide resources to the underprivileged ‘on non market principles – free education, assured income, nutritious food and health’. Can reservation serve as an appropriate scheme to accord recognition to the disadvantaged due to historical reasons? Perhaps yes. A politically ‘liberal’ society however does not endorse social discrimination because citizenship, conceptually speaking, is universal. Hence ascribed identities are completely disregarded in defining citizenry. One may perhaps theoretically defend this position.
But, given the peculiar evolution of societies in various socio-economic and political contexts, this position may not appear tenable simply because identical rights for all are inadequate in protecting cultural-minorities. What is therefore required are ‘special’ rights for minorities who are identified as ‘disadvantaged’ groups. The argument that justifies discriminatory laws draws on the idea that since citizens are ‘differentiated’ and thus ‘unequal’, different communities should have different rights as citizens.
There is a historical dimension that has underpinned India’s caste-based discourse. Different communities undergo a variety of social churning processes through time. Hence some are deemed to be ‘privileged’, while others are seen as ‘marginalised’. A society that rejects ‘differentiated citizenship’ and appreciates universal citizenship seeks to insist that the latter give up their identity and submerge with the majority. Purportedly, this is how a society flourishes. From the multicultural point of view, this position smacks of ‘cultural imperialism’ because the prism through which a society is uniformly viewed insists on treating un-equals equally. Here, the norms and values of the privileged majority acquire salience given their well-entrenched nature and therefore any opposition to them provokes consternation among those who tend to belittle the importance of historical processes that have divided mankind.
There are thus strong arguments in favour of reservation in a multicultural country like India. But the difficulty arises when groups or communities that deserve reservation are identified on the basis of ascribed identity, namely caste. Apart from the 1931 census of India, caste was never a criterion in classifying the Indian population. So if caste is a defining category, the 1931 index is hardly persuasive because as the census was guided by imperial priorities and may not have reflected India’s actual demographic profile. Furthermore, since the criterion of ‘backwardness’ is historically-conditioned, it is doubtful whether it remains valid even in the twenty first century.
Similarly, reservation in higher education appears to be an empty slogan in the light of the fact that seats for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes remain vacant owing to a lack of applicants. Even after more than half a century of reservation for these communities, the number of beneficiaries remains abysmally low.
As evident in the latest educational statistics, released by the Union Ministry of Human Resources Development, while 73% of Scheduled Caste (SC) students quit school before taking the class X final examination, the figures for the Scheduled Tribe (ST) students (79%) are worse. Interestingly, the drop-out rates are not so high among the children who are in class I-IV. Only 37% of the SC students discontinue, while 59% of the ST students fall under this category. If contrasted with prevalent high Gross Enrolment Ratio, which is 83% for the SCs and 86% for the STs, the drop-rates reveal the unfavourable socio-economic circumstances in which these same students are forced to take-up odd jobs just to survive. Since the majority of SC and ST population draw on agriculture for livelihood, these children are roped in to farm the land once they reach 10-12 years.
Given this reality, reservation in higher education makes no sense so long as drop-out rates in schools are alarmingly high. In order to translate the scheme into practice, the pursuance of a ‘literacy mission’, especially among the downtrodden by creating conditions, where the benefits of going to school outweigh the forced-alternative of working in the field. Otherwise, the benefits of reservation continue to be ‘uneven’ among those who can avail them and thus, the social justice agenda will always remain a distant goal.
Despite having stirred the sensibilities of both the socially advantaged and disadvantaged sections of society, the 1990 Mandal reservation scheme has brought about radical changes in Indian polity and society. The grammar of entitlement has now become an integral part of the language of politics in contemporary India.
There can be a debate on how to execute the decision, but all political parties are unanimous in accepting the logic and reality of the Ninety-Third Amendment Act (2005) confirming reservation in all institutions of higher learning. Nonetheless, the Mandal debate marks an important shift in the public justification for reservations.
After Mandal, caste as a basis of collective struggle for gaining equality in positions and social status became a respectable term among the marginalised. It is now being seen as an empowering device to enhance one’s meager entitlements in society. While the first phase of reservation under the Mandal Commission represented the politics of caste assertion or the politics of identity, the second phase is one defined by castes that assert their right to power.
The 2008 decision of the Supreme Court constitution bench in the case of Ashoka Kumar Thakur versus Union of India is undoubtedly a watershed judgment seeking to redefine the normative subjectivity of formal democracy. This involves the critical reformation of the institutions of public and private life and requires new frameworks for the accountability of government to the people. The recent judicial verdict is not merely a meaningful political statement, it has moved a step closer to the constitutional goals of a more equal and just society.