Conundrum of Social Justice

The high echelons of cultural and economic life has been hegemonised by the interests and values of the social elites. The participation of the Dalit-Bahujan groups in several key sectors of power is just negligible. On several occasions, the judiciary, the policy-makers and the intellectual class legitimised the need of Reservation Policy as the crucial directive to make various spheres of social and economic life more inclusive and participatory. Especially, it acknowledges that the government must frame effective policies for the welfare of the socially marginalised and downtrodden groups. Lower castes and the poorer groups need the state’s protective measures to overcome the depressive societal and class burdens, to enter into the domain of middle class aspirations and to live a life with dignity and self-respect.

The policies of social justice are mandated to build an inclusive society and that can be achieved only if the public institutions also represent social diversity, accommodate plural castes and respect cultural distinctions in its functioning. However, even against such ethical ideals, there is a visible opposition, especially in the domain of civil society that wishes to challenge the welfare measures of the state to retain the domination of the ruling elites.

Read | Quota vs merit: A dichotomy demolished

In the making of modern India, the political elites have shown a broader consensus towards the policy of social justice. During the debates in the Constituent Assembly, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar articulated the foundational principles and constitutional directives to form the policies for the equitable representation of the socially marginalised groups in different institutions of the state. The social justice policy, often known as reservation policy, was heralded in the Constituent Assembly not as the framework to eradicate poverty or economic inequalities (as other socialist measures were proposed), but as the necessary arrangement to make different state institutions more accommodative towards the marginalised groups.

The first generation of post-Independence political elites were convinced that the Scheduled Castes and Tribes have faced historical injustices and are the worst-off sections in our society. It was proposed that justice could be delivered to these groups through various welfare and protective measures by the state. Further, the Article 340 of the Constitution also proposes that the government is obliged to take necessary measures for their welfare of the Socially and Economically Backward Castes (OBCs). However, there was a lack of political consensus at the national level, especially to make them part of the existing reservation policy.

It was with the release of the Kaka Kalelkar and Mandal Commission Reports that the government realised about the deplorable conditions of the OBCs in social and economic spheres. Soon a nationwide campaign picked up in the favor of the OBCs and during V P Singh’s regime in 1990, reservation for the OBCs was announced in central services and public sector jobs, making them an integral part of the national social justice policy.

However, this decision met with angry anti-reservation protests by the civil society groups, mainly by the upper caste university students in Delhi. The social elites questioned the legitimacy of the reservation policy and challenged the government’s decision in the Supreme Court. Without much surprise, the judiciary defended the OBC reservation in the historic Indira Sawhney case while laying down certain criteria for its implementation.

There was a consensus among the policy makers that the institutions of excellence, minority institutions and research institutions of national and strategic importance would be exempted from the reservation policy. The Supreme Court further suggested that the ‘creamy layer’ amongst the OBC groups (now subjects with annual family income more than Rupees Eight Lakh) shall not be given profits of the reservation policy. In addition, the anti-reservation proponents also argued that social justice policies compromise the merit, drains the superior talent towards developed countries and strengthens caste-based politics. There is not much rationale in such rhetoric, but it showcases the prejudices and hatred towards the marginalised social groups.

Therefore, when the current central government announced 27-per cent quota for OBCs and 10 per cent reservation for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category in the All-India Quota (AIQ) scheme for undergraduate and postgraduate medical and dental courses from this year, some felt that the government is infringing upon the law meant for the ‘merit’ based professional institutions.

It was argued in the court that higher education in medical sciences (post-graduate level) falls under the super speciality sector and therefore it shall not be open for reservation policy, as it will disturb the ‘merit’. The petitioners against the government’s decision played the similar old rhetoric without substantive arguments. Therefore in the final scrutiny by the honourable Supreme Court, the government’s decision is upheld, critically refuting the claim that reservation undermines the value of merit.

The conventional prejudices towards the social justice policies are often unaware of its ethical values. In the debates and deliberation on Reservation Policy often the actual facts about the deplorable social and precarious economic conditions of the Dalit-Bahujan are often ignored and rhetorical claims about ‘merit’ and ‘national integrity’ are raised. Such criticisms are often offered mainly to retain the exclusive domination and privileges of the social elites over the power structures. However, with the arrival of powerful Dalit-Bahujan political assertion at the national level, it is almost difficult for the ruling classes to oppose the ideals of social justice.

Though the current right-wing regime at the Center is not known for its commitment towards implementing the reservation policy, it is often due to political pressures and electoral compulsions (like the upcoming Assembly Elections in five states) that favorable decisions for the Dalit-Bahujan communities are offered. In the current case of the NEET examination, similar pressure on the government was visible. Such compulsions, are necessary for the effective functioning of democracy.

However, it would be always better if the state institutions act in favor of social justice policies not under political compulsions but to uphold its constitutional obligations. If the ruling elites showcase their commitment towards implementing the reservation policies firmly, it will only make society more democratic and the economic sphere more inclusive.

(The writer teaches at Centre for Political Studies in Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi)

Watch latest videos by DH here: