Mandal Commission
The report of the Mandal Commission had not only a huge impact on the social front in India but also created a political turmoil. It generated a furious controversy and mass protests across the nation. A peculiar feature is that the controversy is not being fought between the right and the left; on both sides of the divide are ranged both right and the left. Those who were vigorously demanding its implementation believed that it will lead to a reduction of social and educational backwardness and give a chance to live to the backward classes who constitute 52% of the population of India. Those who were opposing it, with equal vigour, believed that the implementation of the Mandal recommendations will intensify casteism.
Morarji Desai’s Jantata Party government in 1978 as per the Constitution of India under article 340 for the purpose of Articles like 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India with the objective was to "identify the socially or educationally backward” and to consider the question of seat reservations and quotas for people to redress caste discrimination gave a green signal to formation of the commission. This Article 340 states that: It is obligatory for the government to promote the welfare of the Other Backward Classes (OBC). This provided the constitutional legitimacy for setting up Mandal Commission. After a very thorough scientific investigation has with the help of experts from various disciplines worked out 11 indicators to determine social backwardness. These indicators are social, educational and economic in nature. When the Backward Classes Commission was appointed by the then prime minister Morarji Desai, it barely caught the media's attention.
In 1979, under the chairmanship of B P Mandal – popularly known as the Mandal Commission – was established by the ruling Janata Party under the prime minister ship of Morarji Desai with the objective of identifying the OBCs. In 1980, it published its findings, placing a total of 3,428 communities in the OBC category, comprising 54.4% of the country’s population. The Mandal Commission recommended that there should be employment quotas in public sector organisations (including nationalised banks and private sector undertakings which received financial assistance from the government in one form or the other) and reserved places in higher educational institutions of 27% for the OBC in addition to 22.5% job quotas and seats in higher educational institutions that were already in place for SCs and STs. The figure of 27% was arrived at as the Supreme Court limited total reservations to fewer than 50%d but due to a change in the government in 1979, the Mandal Commission’s report was shelved. The report was finally handed over to the then prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1980 but she didn’t give much attention to it. After her assassination, her son and successor Rajiv Gandhi reportedly told his aides: "It's a can of worms; I won't touch it." The report got an afterlife when then prime minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh announced in 1989 that he would implement 27 per cent reservations for the backward castes in government jobs. For Singh, it was a political opportunity to consolidate the backward castes as the new vote bank for a limping Janata Dal. Talk of implementing welfare measures to this section (OBC) has ignited resentment especially among the high castes.
The announcement led to a series of spirited agitations and nasty newspaper headlines and a series of widely publicised self-immolations by high-caste students. A Delhi University student Rajiv Goswami, who had attempted self-immolation, became the poster boy of protests.
While the critiques of the Mandal commission in 1990-92 mainly discussed the principles of equality and justice in the Supreme Court, attention was not at all paid to the demerits and defects in the 11 criteria selected by the Mandal Commission. None of these measures were even casually examined by the government, and then Prime Minister V.P. Singh adopted the effortless and populist route of issuing a one-para order discussing the boon of 27 per cent reservation on OBCs. The report of the commission was submitted in December 1980 but was never implemented.
Between the failure to effectively control the political cost of the protests escalating enough to close parts of the nation, and an eleven-year-old human rights improvement project, were causes that ultimately led to accepting the resignation of the Janata Dal party's Prime Minister of India, V. P. Singh. The opponents succeeded in obtaining the stay of the operation of the order by filing a writ in the Supreme Court. In the elections that followed, Mr. P.V.Narasimha Rao came to power. He realized that his Congress Government could not ignore the popular upheaval in favour of Social Justice. The Supreme Court gave its verdict in favour of the implementation of 1990 order of the Union Government, providing reservation in jobs. So from 1992, a part of the recommendations of the Commission is being implemented. There is reason to believe that the students' protests in 1990 would not have been so ferocious if it were not for the covert support extended to them by certain political parties, such as the Congress and the BJP. Generally people believed that congress was behind these protests to shake down the ruling coalition government of V.P.Singh. Immediately after coming to power by congress in 1991, 12% reservation was given to upper caste and denied reservation to OBC.
Critical Point of view
First, the methods and criteria adopted by the Mandal Commission to define a backward class were widely regarded as flawed, raising scepti¬cism about whether the communities determined to be OBC by the commission were truly socially disadvantaged or deserving of the massive welfare programmes incorporated under the reser¬vation policy. Second, several observers felt that the reasons why successive govern¬ments tried to implement the Mandal Commission recommen-dation had more to do with political factors than economic and social, as several of the communities included in the Mandal Commission’s OBC list formed important vote banks for political parties both in power and in the opposition. Though ironically it is the same thing which led to their downfall.
What Social Justice do the Mandal Commission is talking about is only the past. If go for reservation based on Mandal Commission's recommendation, i think we are heading for yet another creation of inequality. May be the Commission's findings are true in a sense. But the solution cannot be the best. All the recommendations made in the commission' report basically provides a space for the so called backward people' economic upliftment at the cost of depriving the so called forward communities. Given a school & free education, if a community doesn't want to read then it is solely their problem. Govt can create awareness & provide a level playing field only but not reservation. Reservations what so ever is present today is again used by the developed part of the backward community & it never reaches to whom it is meant for. Scrap the reservations based on social status & if necessary reservations shall be given on economic status alone.
Critics of the Mandal Commission argue that it is unfair to accord people special privileges on the basis of caste, even in order to redress traditional caste discrimination. They argue that those that deserve the seat through merit will be at a disadvantage. They reflect on the repercussions of unqualified candidates assuming critical positions in society (doctors, engineers, etc.). As the debate on OBC reservations spreads, a few interesting facts which raise appropriate question are already apparent. To begin with, is there any clear idea what proportion of our population is OBC? According to the Mandal Commission (1980) it is 52 percent. According to 2001 Indian Census, out of India's population the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes comprise of is 16.2% and 8.2% respectively. There is no data on OBCs in the census. However, according to National Sample Survey's 1999–2000 round around 36 per cent of the country's population is defined as belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC). Other arguments include that strengthening the separate legal status of OBCs and SC/STs will perpetuate caste differentiation and encourage competition among communities at the expense of national unity. They believe that only small new elite of educated Dalits, Adivasis, and OBCs (Creamy layers) benefit from reservations, and that such measures don't do enough to lift the mass of people out of poverty. The controversy generated by the recommendations of the Mandal Commission reflected many issues which needed a deeper analysis. There is no doubt that the main recommendations and the demand for their implementation were to be supported from the viewpoint of democratization of Indian society. The main objection of the critics of the recommendations was the use of the case/community criteria to analyze backwardness.
Conclusion
Quota system is definitely not going to uplift the really backward people. The really backward castes (SCs & STs) have never benefited. There is no doubt that SCs & STs (Really Backward) people need support. But the quota system is 99% misused and the benefits are not flowing to the targeted population.
The founding figures of the Constitution made it clear that any enabling legislation that gives a leg-up to socially and economically 'backward classes' cannot proceed on the basis of caste alone. Though it is horrifying to notice and lay eyes at the way leading politicians of the day have sneaked in "caste" as a major determinant of OBC status. Therefore, no one has the term 'Backward Castes' which nobody dare interrogate as it is so widely employed and has become part of our political vocabulary.
And lastly its impact on society at large has been worse. The line dividing the reserved from the non-reserved categories, instead of blurring, has deepened, generating mutual hostility. Our politicians refuse to learn from history. Do such gimmicks really pay electoral dividends? In the end, L.R. Naik, the only Dalit member in the commission, refused to sign the report saying only a new elite of educated Dalits, Adivasis, and OBCs would benefit from reservations. Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Prasad Yadav rode Mandal politics to electoral glory. Ironically Mandal did not live to see backward caste affirmation and competitive caste politics as he died two years after submitting his report. Today, Mandal politics seems to have lost its traction. And Rajiv Goswami? He died quietly in 2004, having suffered 90 per cent burns.
No comments:
Post a Comment