Reservations may lead to further disintegration

Kuldip Nayar

FOLLOWING the norms of democracy, the constituent assembly in India, justifiably tagged the seats in the Lok Sabha and the assemblies to the number of voters in a particular state. The larger number secured more members and the smaller less. Little did the Constitution framers realise at that time that such a provision would reward the states without family planning discipline.

This has, indeed, happened. Over the years, Bihar, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh have increased their strength in the Lok Sabha and the assembly on the basis of population. All the five states are Hindi-speaking. They are situated north of Vindhyas and are known as the BIMARU states. Non-Hindi speaking states are however cut up over these states getting more seats.

Census 2000 only confirms that Hindi-speaking states continue to proliferate in population. They beat the country’s annual growth rate of 1.9 per cent. Bihar’s increase is 2.85 per cent, Haryana’s 2.47, Madhya Pradesh’s 2.18, Rajasthan’s 2.49 per cent and UP 2.3 per cent. In contrast, the five states down the Vindhyas are below the annual growth rate. Andhra Pradesh registered 1.3 per cent, Karnataka 1.59 per cent, Kerala 0.90 per cent, Orissa 1.48 per cent and Tamil Nadu 1.6 per cent.

Incidentally, the yearly growth of population in Assam, which is supposed to have changed its demographic complexion because of illegal migration from Bangladesh, is only 1.73 per cent, below the country’s average. It proves the hollowness of the governor’s alarming report that the people from across the border are taking over Assam.

It is clear that the increase and decrease of seats in the Lok Sabha or the assemblies on the basis of population was not fair from the start. More voters should claim more representation. But a way has to be found so that the system doesn’t get distorted.

Parliament has done well to amend the Constitution and freeze the number of seats at the strength prevailing today. Still, Uttar Pradesh has 85 seats in the Lok Sabha and Bihar 54. The amendment evoked no opposition from any political party.

When the draft amendment was placed before the Standing Committee of the home ministry, members from the Hindi-speaking states were as vociferous in their support as were those from the non-Hindi speaking states. None favoured the idea of population being the criterion.

Unfortunately, the principle not to link seats with the population has not been applied to the scheduled castes and tribes. The reserved seats for them may increase, lessening the number of seats in the general category. This is bound to create bad blood between the upper and lower castes. Tagging seats to the population is as reprehensible in the case of Dalits and tribal people as in others. It is clear that the National Democratic Alliance is playing politics.

To my surprise, most MPs are unwilling to join issue on the point of watering down any concession for Dalits and tribal people. Political considerations have come to weigh in the minds of members so much that their attitude is dictated by what is good for the caste, not society as a whole.

This brings me to the larger question of reservation. The extension to the law is given by Parliament every 10 years, without any debate. This seems to suit all parties who have a vested interest in it because of electoral advantages.

When the legislation for extension of reservations in jobs and admissions to professional institutions came up for discussion a few months ago, I appealed to the Prime Minister to put a time limit to reservations on the basis of caste, say, 2 per cent tapering off every year. Thus the pernicious practice would end one day. What was meant to last 10 years has gone beyond 50 years with no end in sight. I argued that the criterion should instead be economic backwardness. Nobody seemed interested in my proposal.

BR Ambedkar, the unchallenged Dalit leader who framed the Constitution, opposed reservations. He considered them as crutches. He agreed to the provision only on the understanding that it would not be continued after 10 years. Even the Supreme Court’s advice that the creamy layer of the Dalits should be debarred from availing of the concessions has been ignored. Dalit leaders, who constitute the creamy layer, are too powerful to allow anything that may give benefits to the lower half among them.

With reservations for backwards, the problem has got more tangled. A bigger front in favour of reservations has developed, although the Dalits and the backward are generally at war with each other. The demand for reservation has been creating a strong feeling of inequality among those who are outside the periphery of reservation. The youth are particularly resentful. They do not buy the argument that the present generation of Hindus must atone for the sins of their ancestors. “50 years should have been adequate for penance,” they argue.

The worst fallout is that the best talent is going abroad. Affirmative action, as prevalent in the US to accommodate the coloured, is understandable in a democratic society but not permanent legislation on the basis of caste. Still worse is the reservation in promotions because the promotees have neither expertise nor acceptance. This is affecting work in government offices. The growing sense of denial may reach a flashpoint and may wash away all kinds of reservations.

Lately, the reservation bug has bitten some Muslim organisations too. Once again there is the same old talk that one heard before partition. People seem to forget how the Hindu-Muslim problem got aggravated in the wake of separate electorate introduced by the British. The gap has not yet been bridged. The unkindest cut comes from a Sikh member of the National Minorities Commission, who has asked MPs of his community to join hands to demand more representation in various institutions in the country.

The safeguards guaranteed to the minorities in the Constitution are the nation’s obligation towards them. But representation on the basis of community may spell ruin for the country.

It is sad that parochial thinking is spreading all over the country— in the name of community, caste etc. This is telling upon the country’s pluralistic thinking, ethos and character. In fact, it this trend isn’t stopped immediately, India may disintegrate.