'Abolish Caste'
Article 7 — and quotas —have not worked, says Suraj Bhan. The solution: kill the law.
ANURADHA RAMAN
Is this another Sangh parivar attempt to play their unstated upper-caste card? In a controversial move, the chairman of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, Suraj Bhan, has decided to recommend to the President that Article 17 of the Constitution dealing with untouchability be amended, and reservations abolished. He has proposed this be done in five years after studying the amendment's impact. For Bhan, untouchability is still widely prevalent despite Article 17, and reservations have been made a mockery of.
Hear him out and it would seem that untouchability, one of the ills of Hindu society, can be done away by merely changing a few words in the Constitution.
Declares Bhan: "All it needs is an addition of one word. Instead of the Article stating 'Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden', it should read: 'Caste system and untouchability stand abolished'." His proposal
will be part of a special report on the status of the scheduled castes, details of atrocities committed against Dalits, bogus registration of scheduled castes and recommendations to remove the anomalies, to be presented to President Abdul Kalam three months from now.
The commission's proposals being recommendatory in nature, Bhan says the government has to respond within a month of the report being made public. "The government has to give reasons for accepting or rejecting our proposals," he says. In fact, the government has to submit an action taken report within a month to the commission, set up under Article 338 to oversee the implementation of various safeguards provided to scheduled castes under the Constitution.
For the last couple of months, Bhan, an NDA government appointee, has been talking to religious heads to seek their endorsement on his grand move to amend Article 17.
Says Bhan, "The religious heads of virtually all Hindu organisations (read the RSS and VHP) are with me. I have the endorsement of VHP's Praveen Togadia and Ashok Singhal." Bhan argues that untouchability is part of the caste system and will remain as long as the system does. "Once the system goes, the practice too will end," he says.
As for scrapping reservation for scheduled castes, Bhan argues that instances of bogus claims (higher caste members claiming to be Dalits) have been on the rise and reserved seats are not being filled on the plea that there aren't enough suitable candidates. "How can one become a scheduled caste if not by birth?" he asks.
While Bhan says he is willing to debate his stand, his views have upset the pro-reservation intellectuals and activists. Asks D. Shyam Babu, fellow at the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation: "What purpose is served by amending Article 17? After all, laws have been passed to strengthen Article 17 and if untouchability prevails, one needs to question the non-implementation of the laws passed in support of Article 17." Bhan counters that the Prevention of Atrocities Act and the Civil Rights Protection Act haven't even made a dent in the system. "The conviction rate is hardly 2 per cent in such cases, that is if they're taken note of at all," he says.
About reservations, Bhan says bogus candidates are claiming scheduled caste status to avail of special privileges and the incidents seem to be only increasing with each passing year. "In the Badayun district of UP alone, 300 false cases came to our notice. Moreover, when we sent a questionnaire to states seeking information on the steps being taken to improve the lot of SC students, their answers invariably were 'almost nothing'," says Bhan. Rather than ensure that laws are complied with and reservation not misused, the chairman would rather just abolish the caste system via an amendment.
Among the other changes he has proposed are the deletion of objectionable references to Dalits in the scriptures, Manusmriti and Ramcharit Manas. "Expunge derogatory references in them," recommends Bhan.
He also proposes dropping surnames in any application for jobs. "The surname is the first indicator of an individual's caste. We should do away with surnames. Instead, educational qualifications like BA or MA can be prefixed."
Reactions to Bhan's proposals have swung from open scepticism to downright rejection. "Why doesn't he have the courage to denounce the scriptures instead of proposing to amend the Constitution? Will his party allow him to do that," counters D. Raja of the CPI. He cautions that Bhan's proposal should be debated politically and that the UPA is committed to reservation in the CMP.
"Our party is committed to a casteless society but the ground reality is different. That's why Parliament has felt the need to extend reservation after every 10 years, though it was meant only for the first 10 years after the Constitution was accepted," says Raja. He accuses Bhan and the BJP for
proposing a formula without taking into account the prevalent situation. "Untouchability is prohibited but practised in different ways. What Bhan should be looking at is how to strengthen Article 17 rather than proposing to amend it," says Raja.
Union rural development minister Raghuvansh Prasad says it's not the right time to remove reservations. "The Constitution makers did put a 10-year time limit, but the ground realities forced them to extend it. The scheduled castes have not been coopted yet into society and reservations should stay till that happens," says Prasad.
Raja is not alone in questioning Bhan's motives.
Social activist Kancha Iliah says such an amendment will be scuttled even as it is proposed. Having presented his case to the US House Committee on Human Rights, Iliah said, "we have asked for affirmative action from the US specially in companies run by them and other MNCs, and informed the committee that the Indian government supports reservation in the private sector". Iliah senses a brahminical conspiracy behind the move to scrap reservations when he says that the RSS has always been opposed to reservation. "Did Suraj Bhan ask for the caste system to be banished from the religious pithas when he went about seeking their support?" asks Iliah.
But Bhan is prepared for an onslaught of criticism. Meanwhile, Dalit activist Chandra Bhan Prasad says the commission should get realistic and not widen the already existing rift in the system. "When we're debating over whether to allow reservation in the private sector, the commission should be exploring those avenues," he says. But the chairman of the SC Commission believes he is on the right track. Two birds with one stone. Abolish caste. With it, reservation.
ANURADHA RAMAN
Is this another Sangh parivar attempt to play their unstated upper-caste card? In a controversial move, the chairman of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, Suraj Bhan, has decided to recommend to the President that Article 17 of the Constitution dealing with untouchability be amended, and reservations abolished. He has proposed this be done in five years after studying the amendment's impact. For Bhan, untouchability is still widely prevalent despite Article 17, and reservations have been made a mockery of.
Hear him out and it would seem that untouchability, one of the ills of Hindu society, can be done away by merely changing a few words in the Constitution.
Declares Bhan: "All it needs is an addition of one word. Instead of the Article stating 'Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden', it should read: 'Caste system and untouchability stand abolished'." His proposal
will be part of a special report on the status of the scheduled castes, details of atrocities committed against Dalits, bogus registration of scheduled castes and recommendations to remove the anomalies, to be presented to President Abdul Kalam three months from now.
The commission's proposals being recommendatory in nature, Bhan says the government has to respond within a month of the report being made public. "The government has to give reasons for accepting or rejecting our proposals," he says. In fact, the government has to submit an action taken report within a month to the commission, set up under Article 338 to oversee the implementation of various safeguards provided to scheduled castes under the Constitution.
For the last couple of months, Bhan, an NDA government appointee, has been talking to religious heads to seek their endorsement on his grand move to amend Article 17.
Says Bhan, "The religious heads of virtually all Hindu organisations (read the RSS and VHP) are with me. I have the endorsement of VHP's Praveen Togadia and Ashok Singhal." Bhan argues that untouchability is part of the caste system and will remain as long as the system does. "Once the system goes, the practice too will end," he says.
As for scrapping reservation for scheduled castes, Bhan argues that instances of bogus claims (higher caste members claiming to be Dalits) have been on the rise and reserved seats are not being filled on the plea that there aren't enough suitable candidates. "How can one become a scheduled caste if not by birth?" he asks.
While Bhan says he is willing to debate his stand, his views have upset the pro-reservation intellectuals and activists. Asks D. Shyam Babu, fellow at the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation: "What purpose is served by amending Article 17? After all, laws have been passed to strengthen Article 17 and if untouchability prevails, one needs to question the non-implementation of the laws passed in support of Article 17." Bhan counters that the Prevention of Atrocities Act and the Civil Rights Protection Act haven't even made a dent in the system. "The conviction rate is hardly 2 per cent in such cases, that is if they're taken note of at all," he says.
About reservations, Bhan says bogus candidates are claiming scheduled caste status to avail of special privileges and the incidents seem to be only increasing with each passing year. "In the Badayun district of UP alone, 300 false cases came to our notice. Moreover, when we sent a questionnaire to states seeking information on the steps being taken to improve the lot of SC students, their answers invariably were 'almost nothing'," says Bhan. Rather than ensure that laws are complied with and reservation not misused, the chairman would rather just abolish the caste system via an amendment.
Among the other changes he has proposed are the deletion of objectionable references to Dalits in the scriptures, Manusmriti and Ramcharit Manas. "Expunge derogatory references in them," recommends Bhan.
He also proposes dropping surnames in any application for jobs. "The surname is the first indicator of an individual's caste. We should do away with surnames. Instead, educational qualifications like BA or MA can be prefixed."
Reactions to Bhan's proposals have swung from open scepticism to downright rejection. "Why doesn't he have the courage to denounce the scriptures instead of proposing to amend the Constitution? Will his party allow him to do that," counters D. Raja of the CPI. He cautions that Bhan's proposal should be debated politically and that the UPA is committed to reservation in the CMP.
"Our party is committed to a casteless society but the ground reality is different. That's why Parliament has felt the need to extend reservation after every 10 years, though it was meant only for the first 10 years after the Constitution was accepted," says Raja. He accuses Bhan and the BJP for
proposing a formula without taking into account the prevalent situation. "Untouchability is prohibited but practised in different ways. What Bhan should be looking at is how to strengthen Article 17 rather than proposing to amend it," says Raja.
Union rural development minister Raghuvansh Prasad says it's not the right time to remove reservations. "The Constitution makers did put a 10-year time limit, but the ground realities forced them to extend it. The scheduled castes have not been coopted yet into society and reservations should stay till that happens," says Prasad.
Raja is not alone in questioning Bhan's motives.
Social activist Kancha Iliah says such an amendment will be scuttled even as it is proposed. Having presented his case to the US House Committee on Human Rights, Iliah said, "we have asked for affirmative action from the US specially in companies run by them and other MNCs, and informed the committee that the Indian government supports reservation in the private sector". Iliah senses a brahminical conspiracy behind the move to scrap reservations when he says that the RSS has always been opposed to reservation. "Did Suraj Bhan ask for the caste system to be banished from the religious pithas when he went about seeking their support?" asks Iliah.
But Bhan is prepared for an onslaught of criticism. Meanwhile, Dalit activist Chandra Bhan Prasad says the commission should get realistic and not widen the already existing rift in the system. "When we're debating over whether to allow reservation in the private sector, the commission should be exploring those avenues," he says. But the chairman of the SC Commission believes he is on the right track. Two birds with one stone. Abolish caste. With it, reservation.
Labels: Hindu Human Rights
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home