Controversy Around Use of Term Dalit

Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry's advisory has asked the media to avoid using the term ‘Dalit’.

Orders of the Bombay and Madhya Pradesh High Courts directed the Centre and state governments to refrain from using the term 'dalit'.

A decade ago, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes disfavoured the use of 'Dalit'.

Why not

• This is because the term found no mention in the Constitution of India or any statute.
• ‘Scheduled Caste’ is a legal status. Therefore, ‘Scheduled Caste’ is the appropriate way to refer to this class of people.
• Some Dalits prefer staying with the constitutionally-decided terminology of 'Scheduled Caste'.
• They feel it inappropriate to be “lower” when they have reached great heights in their careers.
• These are the ones who constantly seek to escape their stigmatised identities but are unable due to their known caste status.
• So, many refrained from using the word Dalit long before.
• They preferred identities such as Ambedkarite, Ravidassi or Valmiki to identify with an exceptional individual.

Why not harm

• The term has evolved over a period of time and has come to symbolise different things in different contexts.
• But it is a word loaded with emotions reflecting the struggle of a community to reassert its identity.
• It advocates the claim to the rights that were denied to them for centuries.

Reservation – Critical analysis

Constitutional /Legal Provisions

• Articles 15(4) and 16(4) state that the equality provisions do not prevent the government from making special provisions in matters of admission to educational institutions or jobs in favour of backward classes, particularly the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs).
• Article 16(4A) allows reservations to SCs and STs in promotions, as long as the government believes that they are not adequately represented in government services.
• Two Articles 330 and 332 lay down that there shall be reservation of seats in the Lok Sabha (Article 330) and State Legislative Assembly (Article 332) in proportion to the number of the Scheduled Castes in various states.
• Article 335 mandates that reservations have to be balanced with the ‘maintenance of efficiency’
• In the Indra Sawhney case of 1992, the Supreme Court fixed the upper limit for the combined reservation quota should not exceed 50% of seats.
• In 2019, the 103rd Constitution Amendment Act was passed empowering both Centre and the states to provide 10% reservation to the EWS category of society in government jobs and educational institutions.
• The Constitution  (77th Amendment) Act, 1995 was passed by parliament, inserting Article 16(4A), which enables the state to make any law regarding reservation in promotion for SCs and STs.
  • The amendment introduced the words “with consequential seniority” after “in matters of promotion” in Article 16(4A).
• Other amendments followed. Article 16(4B) provides that reserved promotion posts for SCs and STs that remain unfilled can be carried forward to the subsequent year. 
• Article 16(4B) ensures that the ceiling on the reservation quota – capped at 50% by Indra Sawhney – for these carried forward unfilled posts does not apply to subsequent years.
• The 2001 amendments to it, clarified that the article will not apply to the state relaxing evaluation standards in matters of promotion.

Arguments against Reservation

• Distorts the playing field and is against Equality.
• Should be made on the basis of income rather than social background.
• Leads to an inefficient bureaucracy.
• Against national unity as it divides people, escalate caste-based divisiveness and encourage sub-nationalisms
• Perception that majority of lower castes have stepped up the social ladder and are now on an equal status compared to the general population.
• There are much better and innovative ways to solve those issues. However, reservation prevents the leadership to come up with viable solutions.

Arguments Favoring Reservation

• Even today Dalits, backward Muslims, and Adivasis face social discrimination and exclusion that poor people from general caste backgrounds do not face.
• Exclusion for generations , means that government must take steps to correct the unequal distribution of rights.
• Deep rooted historical negligence and injustice caused to these backward communities require a consistent approach.
• They cannot suddenly start competing with those who had access to those means for centuries.
• Meritocracy is important, however, it will have no meaning without equality. The caste based reservation also minimized the gap between upper and lower castes to a great extent.
• No evidence that reservations have affected the efficiency of administration
• As for economically weak SCs and STs, they need both financial support as well as reservation to ensure fair access to employment and education.

Rohini Commission

A commission headed by Justice (Retd.) G Rohini (up to 31st January 2021.)has been examining sub-categorisation of Other Backward Classes (OBC) for almost three years now.

• OBCs are granted 27% reservation in jobs and education under the central government but only a few affluent communities among the over 2,600 included in the Central List of OBCs have secured a major part of this.
• The commission requested for an appropriate budget provision for a proposed all-India survey for an estimate of the caste-wise population of OBCs.
• The reason given was the absence of data for the population of various communities to compare with their representation in jobs and admissions as the data of the Socio-Economic Caste Census (SECC) were not considered reliable.
• In August 2018, it was announced that the data of OBCs will also be collected in Census 2021 but there have been no other announcements after that.

Commission’s Terms of References

• To examine the uneven distribution of reservation benefits among different castes in the central OBC list.
• To work out the mechanism, criteria, norms and parameters in a scientific approach for sub-categorisation within such OBCs.
• To take up the exercise of identifying the respective castes/communities/sub-castes/synonyms for comprehensive data coverage.
• To study and recommend correction of any repetitions, ambiguities, inconsistencies and errors of spelling or transcription.

Findings So Far

According to the 2018 data analysis of 1.3 lakh central jobs and admissions to central higher education institutions given under OBC quota:

• 24.95% of these jobs and seats have gone to just 10 OBC communities.
• 97% of all jobs and educational seats have gone to just 25% of all sub-castes classified as OBCs.
• 983 OBC communities, 37% of the total, have zero representation in jobs and educational institutions.
• 994 OBC sub-castes have a total representation of only 2.68% in recruitment and admissions.
• According to the 2018-19 annual report of the Department of Personnel and Training, OBC recruitment in central jobs is considerably low.
• For example, there was not a single professor and associate professor appointed under the OBC quota in central universities.
• Posts reserved for them were being filled by people of general category as OBC candidates were declared ‘None Found Suitable’ (NFS).

The issue of the sub-categorisation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for reservations is also in the highlights after the Supreme Court (SC) has referred it to a larger Bench.

Maratha reservation

Recently, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court referred to a Constitution Bench the question of whether states have the power to exceed the 50 per cent reservation limit. 
Background

• This verdict came after petitions were filed challenging the Maharashtra law providing reservation to Marathas in jobs and admission to medical and dental institutions. 
• The petitions were against the June 27, 2019 order of the Bombay High Court which upheld the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018.
• The petitioners argued that the quota would breach the 50 per cent ceiling set by the Supreme Court nine-judge bench in its ruling on the Indra Sawhney vs Union of India case.
• The law was enacted during the rule of BJP government and it provided a 16 per cent quota to the Maratha community in the matter of jobs and admissions.

Earlier Verdict of the High Court

• The High Court upheld the law and said 16 percent reservation was not justifiable and that it should not exceed 12 per cent in education and 13 percent in jobs, as recommended by the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC) (M G Gaikwad Commission)
• The High Court had said that the “50% limit of reservation can be crossed subject to availability of quantifiable and contemporaneous data reflecting backwardness, inadequacy of representation and without affecting the efficiency in administration”.
• The verdict of the High Court was based  on the findings of the 11-member MSBCC, which submitted in November 2018 that the Maratha community is socially, economically and educationally backwards.

Verdict of the Supreme Court: 

• The recent reference means the question will have to be answered by at least an 11-judge bench.
• The apex court said that the reservation law will not apply to the year 2020-2021, but it however clarified that it will not affect admissions already made to postgraduate courses. 

Implications

• By upholding the “Maratha quota”, the Gaikwad Commission, state of Maharashtra and the High Court seem to be creating precedence for a community-specific quota.
• Such a caste- or community-specific quota has a different logic and trajectory from that of a grouping of communities into classes of citizens deserving affirmative action.
• This is likely to open a Pandora’s Box in that all similar claims by other communities (Gujjars of Rajasthan, Dhangars of Maharashtra and so on) could be accepted as being exceptional. The Maratha reservation demands, like those of the Patidars in Gujarat, the Kapus in Andhra Pradesh and the Jats in Haryana, are the inevitable outgrowths of the political warping of the logic of reservations.
• Suppose a community is found to be backward and it is not included in the present list of OBCs, what is the justification for creating a separate quota for it?
• However, such a strategy effectively means that one community is assured of a guaranteed quota while all others have to compete within the quota.
• For the 19 per cent reservation for OBCs in the state, all the OBC communities need to compete whereas for the 12 or 13 per cent under the HC ruling, only the Marathas get to compete.

Scavenging

Manual scavenging refers to the unsafe and manual removal of raw (fresh and untreated) human excreta from buckets or other containers that are used as toilets or from the pits of simple pit latrines. Manual scavenging was banned 25 years ago with the passing of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, but it continues to find practitioners.

Measures taken:

• Imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of Rs 2,000 for pushing a person to manual scavenging.
• Self Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers(SRMS), a successor scheme to NSLRS ( National Scheme for Liberation and Rehabilitation of Scavengers and their Dependents), was introduced in 2007 with the objective to rehabilitate remaining manual scavengers and their dependents in alternative occupations, in a time bound manner.
• Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, forbids the employment of any person for the task of manual scavenging by any agency or individual.
• Supreme Court issued a slew of directions in 2014 to prevent and control the practice and also to prosecute the offenders. It also directed the government to pay a compensation of 10 lakh rupees to the family members of those killed in acts of manual scavenging since 1993.
• Apart from these under Swachh Bharat Mission focus has been given on conversion of insanitary latrines into sanitary latrines.

Challenges remain :-

• In the earlier Act, the district magistrate had the power to solve all the cases, but that’s not the case with the current one. If the assigned public official isn’t doing his duty of identifying manual scavengers and processing their rehabilitation, there is no mechanism to pull them up
• The Act does not address critical aspects of provisions like the rehabilitation of those who were liberated from manual scavenging before passing the law in 2013.
• National Safai Karmachari Commission which was mandated to implement the act has not been functioning properly. Its website has not been updated about recent developments and new initiatives.

Caste Discrimination in Higher Education

The death of Payal Tadvi, a 26-year-old resident doctor at Mumbai’s BYL Nair Hospital, has exposed yet again the insidious nature of discrimination and casteism against Scheduled Caste (SC)/Scheduled Tribe (ST) students in educational institutions. Tadvi belonged to the Bhil Muslim community, recognised as an ST group. The death of Rohith Vemula, the Dalit student pursuing his PhD at the University of Hyderabad, whose suicide was described as “institutional murder” in 2016 is also a case in point.

Discrimination at Educational institutions and Jobs

• Discrimination happens in different ways. At the institute level, it could be a teacher failing a student because of personal bias against their rural background.
• Or it could be teachers and students making casteist comments against students.
• Dalit children have been made to sit separately while eating in government schools.
• Sometimes the government itself puts students at disadvantage by not implementing its policies. When a student avails the post-metric scholarship, for example, they sometimes don’t get it for the next one or two years.
• The person either drops out or goes to a private loan shark, ending up in a vicious cycle of debt and, eventually, poverty.
• People belonging to lower castes have little chances to be called for an interview
• Another pertinent issue is the experience of caste discrimination in educational institutions and the level of politicisation of such issues on the college/university campuses.
• Sometimes disagreements between student groups on the university campuses take on ugly forms.
• According to a 2010 report by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on the Prevention of Atrocities against Scheduled Castes, a crime is committed against a Dalit every 18 minutes.

Thorat Committee (2007) findings on discrimination

• The Thorat Committee report eventually served as a milestone in efforts to identify caste-based discrimination in higher educational institutes.
• It revealed that about 69 per cent of the SC/ST students reported that they did not receive adequate support from teachers and about half of them cited inaccessibility and indifference as reasons for less contact with teachers.
• About one-third gave caste background as reason for avoidance by the teachers, and 72 per cent of SC/ST students mentioned some kind of discrimination during teaching sessions.
• About 76 per cent of students mentioned that their papers were not examined properly and 88 per cent mentioned that they got fewer marks than they expected.
• About 84 per cent of these students mentioned that evaluation in practical and viva was unfair and 85 per cent of them mentioned that the SC students didn’t receive enough time with the examiners, as compared to higher caste students.
• Besides, a large chunk of SC/ST students experienced social isolation and discrimination during their stay in the hostels at AIIMS.
• The report also delineated the discrimination felt by SC/ST faculty members employed at AIIMS, Delhi.

Measures needed for Inclusive Educational System

• Banish Untouchability in Educational institutions: The government must proactively ensure a discrimination free education atmosphere.
• Constitutional safeguards and protective legal clauses can play a great enabling role.
• Reservations combined with economic opportunities and social empowerment of Dalits could stem atrocities against them
• Country needs a better basis of reservation which includes the poor and the backward groups and excludes the rich and the dominating sections among all castes.
• The present reservation system requires serious amendments.
• Before extending reservation to more groups, the entire policy needs to be properly examined, and its benefits over a span of nearly 60 years have to be gauged.
• A change of attitude is needed among the ruling classes to stem the tide.
• The private sector will have to accept the social responsibility setting aside its sole profit motive.

National commission for backward classes

With 123rd constitutional amendment bill the National Commission on Backward Classes (NCBC) was granted constitutional status, at par with the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes.

• The new National Commission for Backward Classes will be constituted under Article 338B and will commence functioning as a constitutional authority, in the same manner as the National Commission for Scheduled Castes under Article 338 and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes under Article 338A.
• Under the Constitution Amendment Bill, the duties of the NCBC will include:
  • Investigating and monitoring how the safeguards provided to the backward classes under the Constitution and other laws are being implemented
  • Inquiring into specific complaints regarding violation of rights
  • Advising and making recommendations on the socio-economic development of such classes.
• The central and state governments will be required to consult with the NCBC on all major policy matters affecting the socially and educationally backward classes.

• Powers of civil court:-
• The new Commission will exercise the function of hearing the complaints/grievances of socially and educationally backward classes. It will have the powers of a Civil Court for this purpose.
  • Under the Constitution Amendment Bill, the NCBC will have the powers of a civil court while investigating or inquiring into any complaints.  These powers include: (i) summoning people and examining them on oath, (ii) requiring production of any document or public record, and (iii) receiving evidence.
• It will have the duty of advising of the socio economic development of the socially and educationally backward classes and evaluate the progress of their development, unlike the present Commission which does not have this role.
• The NCBC will be required to present annual reports to the President on working of the safeguards for backward classes.  These reports will be tabled in Parliament, and in the state legislative assemblies of the concerned states.

Composition and service conditions:  

• Under the Constitution Amendment Bill, the NCBC will comprise of five members appointed by the President.  Their tenure and conditions of service will also be decided by the President through rules.

Role of NCSC

• Currently, under the Constitution the NCSC has the power to look into complaints and welfare measures with regard to Scheduled Castes, backward classes and Anglo-Indians.  The Bill seeks to remove the power of the NCSC to examine matters related to backward classes.

Should we have caste category in 2021 Census

There is a demand of inclusion of caste category in 2021 census.

History of caste census

• The first census of 1872 collected information about caste. The 1872 and 1881 censuses attempted to classify people fundamentally according to the varna system.
• In 1891 census, subdivision of major caste was introduced.
• In 1901 census, caste of only Hindus and Jains were recorded and in case of other religion name of tribe or race were recorded.
• In 1921 census, the category of depressed classes was used first time.
• In 1931 census, Column eight in the general schedule provided for an entry of ‘ caste tribe or race ‘.
• In 1941, Second World War starts so census was not fully done and data was not released.
• From the outset of 1872, there was never a formal definition of the census for caste, race or tribe. The recorded details changed in every census from 1872 to 1941.
• In post independence India, caste was considered irrelevant. It was assumed that caste counting would further create divisions so caste census was stopped since 1951.
• But Caste census of SC/STs continues as there were provisions in the constitution to give reservation
• In 2011 census, caste was not included due to logistical reason despite of huge demand
• Although, caste information was collected later through Socio-Economic and Caste Census, 2011

Need of caste census

• Our political system and courts are still using caste data from 1931 census. This does not address the change and requirement of present time.
  • To make available authentic information regarding the socio economic condition  and education status of various castes and sections of the population
  • It would help government for identification of beneficiaries for various socio-economic welfare schemes.
  • It would help to streamline caste based reservation system.
• It would help to identify hundreds of nomadic and excluded castes in India.
• At administrative level, it would help to manage caste conflict

Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC)

• The Ministry of Rural Development commenced the Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC) in June 2011 through a comprehensive door to door enumeration across the country.
• It has generated information on a large number of social and economic indicators relating to households across the country.
• The announcement for Caste count during 2011 Census has given rise to a big row among its supporters and opponents.

Procedure followed

• SECC uses the parameters laid down by the S R Hashim committee (urban area) and NC saxena committee (Rural area). They recommended a three-fold classification of households.
• Excluded Households- These would be identified by assets owned and income.  These households are not eligible for welfare benefits of the government.
• Automatically included Households – These would be the households facing extreme social destitution. These households are automatically included for the welfare benefits of the government.
• Other Households- These households would be eligible for graded benefits decided on the basis of multiple deprivation indicators.
• Census in Rural Area has been conducted by the Department of Rural Development.
• Census in Urban areas is under the administrative jurisdiction of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation.
• Caste Census is under the administrative control of Ministry of Home Affairs: Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India.
• It was not conducted as per The Census act, 1948.
• Respondent based canvasser method was adopted for the survey. Under the 'Canvasser' method the enumerator approaches every household and records the answer on the schedules himself after ascertaining the particulars from the head of the household or other knowledgeable persons in the household.

Methodology

• The Enumerator (a Government servant) would ask the questions, while a data entry operator to be provided by consortium of Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) will enter the responses into a hand held device.
• Acknowledgement slips will be provided to each household after the enumeration.
• Each SECC Draft List was to be placed before Gram Sabha for inviting Claims & Objections.

Problem with SECC data on caste

• SECC 2011 data was criticized by few experts as it was not reliable. The methodology is not full proof and there are many errors and omissions in the draft data.
• Question about caste was included in BPL census (later SECC) without much preparation.  Hasty inclusion of caste question has resulted in largely unusable data.
• The SECC asked interviewer to write down the name of the caste exactly as articulated by the respondent. This led to repetition of various castes as sometimes same caste is spelt in different ways. By some reports, SECC has come out with 46 lakh categories of caste, sub-caste, synonyms, different surnames, gotras in the caste and clan names
• As far as reliability is concerned, it is not confidential like the census, so respondents could have skewed their answers to be eligible for schemes or due to a number of social reasons.
• The procedure of claim and objections are not properly followed.

Present status of SECC data on caste

• The caste data that was collected was sent to the all the states in November 2014 for clubbing them to consolidate the caste count.
• Later, Government said that a total of 8 crore errors were found in caste particulars and all states and Union Territories, of which approx 6.75 crore errors have been rectified.
• Government has not yet  released the caste data of SECC
• However, the government has released provisional data of rural India to addresses multi-dimensionality of poverty