Countering social discrimination
By Zoya Hasan
The exclusion of the creamy layer is of the essence as it provides a way out of purely group-based categories of reservation. It is the most effective way of meeting the demands of social justice and inclusive education by giving benefits to the most deserving.
HIGHER EDUCATION has grown enormously since Independence — from 25 to 348 universities and 700 to 17,625 colleges. From the 1970s onwards, there has been an escalating demand for higher education, professional and technical education in particular, especially for engineering and medical colleges, and management schools. But ironically in sharp contrast to the spiralling growth and demand, six decades after Independence the opportunities for admission to these institutions are still largely monopolised by a small privileged section of society. This points to the persistence of social discrimination. Students from middle classes and forward castes traditionally associated with more education — making up about 20 per cent of the population — dominate higher education.
The effectiveness of reservation as an instrument to rectify this imbalance might be a matter of debate. But there is no denying that the Government is well within its rights to provide reservation up to 50 per cent of the total number of seats in government and aided institutions. The Constitution provides for additional reservation for the socially and educationally backward groups. The reservation for Other Backward Classes, much like the reservation policy for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, is premised on the understanding that in a regime of formal equality and open competition, members of a previously victimised group burdened by accumulated disabilities and disadvantages, will not be able to compete, and will, in fact, fall further behind. Preferential treatment can remedy these inequities. This is the rationale behind the concept of reservation for backward classes. The Supreme Court has also categorically upheld this upper limit of 50 per cent for reservation, in Indira Sawhney vs. the Union of India.
Though there is a deliberate effort to target Union Minister for Human Resource Development Arjun Singh, suggesting that he was behind the pushing of quotas solely for the political benefit of the Congress party, we need to keep in mind that the decision was taken by the political class as a whole and the 103rd constitutional amendment was unanimously passed. Besides, a decision of such significance could only have been possible with the knowledge and support of the Congress leadership and the United Progressive Alliance.
As it has turned out, the UPA Coordination Committee has rightly decided to go ahead with its inclination to widen the scope of the reservation policy, despite the pressure of the agitations and protests. It has now announced that it will implement the 27 per cent OBC reservation in Central educational institutions in 2007. In implementing and working out the modalities of the quota scheme, we need to address three critical issues that form the crux of the argument against reservation. The first issue is a basic question as to whether reservation is indeed the best way of rectifying inequities. The second is the issue of whether quotas and academic excellence are fundamentally incompatible, as is suggested in some quarters. Finally, the point as to whether the OBCs are affluent and therefore do not deserve reservation.
Almost everybody who is opposed to quotas claims to favour affirmative action. Starting from different vantage points, quotas and affirmative action converge strikingly in many ways, both are mechanisms of preferential treatment to facilitate inclusion of disadvantaged groups. The principal difference is that quotas are constitutionally mandated, while affirmative action may not be. Given the persistence of social discrimination, the question that must be posed should not be confined to the limited point as to whether preferential treatment must be in the form of quotas or affirmative action of a broader scope. Rather, the question should be: would alternative measures produce the same outcomes that mandatory quotas produce?
While reservation might not be the best or the only method of correcting longstanding discrimination, however, it is one of the more workable and feasible mechanisms for increasing access of disadvantaged groups to higher education; chiefly because it is transparent, enforceable, and easy to monitor. In the hysteria generated by the protests, we must not forget that the Indian reservation policy has been quite effective and has produced positive outcomes.
For example, the proportion of Scheduled Caste students in the seven Indian Institutes of Technology (2003-02 to 2003-04) is about 9 per cent, which is below their allocated quota of 15 per cent but even this would have been hard to achieve in the absence of quotas. The proportion of OBC graduates, on the other hand, is a mere 8.6 per cent. So far, with the exception of a few institutions, such as the Jawaharlal Nehru University, which has designed an admission policy that gives additional points for social and regional backwardness helping to increase the OBC student intake to roughly 20 per cent of the student population, there is very little evidence of voluntary schemes of affirmative action in other institutions of higher learning. The fact that very few institutions have introduced voluntary measures of affirmative action for the disadvantaged sections and the continuation of the anti-quota protests despite the announcement of an increase in the number of seats in Central educational institutions leads one to the conclusion that the real issue is not affirmative action per se but hostility to any policy intervention that sets out to empower the underprivileged and dilute the monopoly of the privileged in education. That is why we need reservation for different groups in higher education because the nature of Indian society ensures that without such measures, social discrimination and exclusion will persist and be strengthened.
The second argument is that quotas militate against academic excellence and will lead to further deterioration of academic standards. This flawed theory is contradicted by the experience of American universities and the south Indian experience. As has been pointed out in the ongoing debate, the experience of affirmative action in American universities has been extremely positive with no dilution of academic standards. Likewise, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala have had high levels of quotas for decades with no evident decline in standards as compared to north Indian universities. In fact, it is widely accepted throughout the world that diversity makes educational institutions more interesting, and, therefore, adds quality to education.
The third point that troubles the anti-reservationists is the issue of economic status and determining who is eligible for reservation. Given the political momentum behind the policy of reservation for the OBCs, a shift to an economic criterion is unlikely; yet, the current controversy over OBC reservation placed the economic criteria on the political centre stage once again. There are two factors here. One is the social composition of the OBCs and, the second, the definition of the creamy layer. As distinct from the SCs and the STs, we must recognise that there is internal differentiation and intra-group inequality among the OBCs. The Supreme Court in the Indira Sawhney vs. the Union of India case addressed how economic factors should figure in the definition of backwardness, which means that the government must find ways to disqualify the more advantaged individuals in these classes and help the truly backward.
Although reservation for the OBCs is necessary, the Government should ensure that it does not reproduce inequalities within groups that reservation seeks to remedy between groups. The creamy layer rules presume that there are individuals within the group who have the economic and political clout to overcome discrimination and hence it is important to exclude them. But the rules should allow for a situation in which a group continues to be an OBC but individuals within that group are excluded. In India, both economic and caste criteria are difficult to apply because of the large informal economy, and the obfuscation of the economic criteria on account of corruption. But whatever the difficulties, we need to evolve criteria that should exclude the affluent in the OBC communities who have access to jobs and higher education. Creamy layer rules should be more complex than a simple economic cut-off; it should include a wide variety of considerations relating to employment, property, jobs, schooling, and access to higher education.
Two major conclusions emerge: The application of creamy layer rules although complicated and contentious permits the Government to consider a combination of factors, both group and individual, both caste and class, in the definition of backwardness. Secondly, the exclusion of the creamy layer is of the essence as it provides a way out of purely group-based categories of reservation. It is the most effective way of meeting the demands of social justice and inclusive education by giving benefits to the most deserving. To allow the undeserving to benefit from reservation is to deny protection to those who deserve to be protected.
(The writer is Professor, Centre for Political Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.)
The exclusion of the creamy layer is of the essence as it provides a way out of purely group-based categories of reservation. It is the most effective way of meeting the demands of social justice and inclusive education by giving benefits to the most deserving.
HIGHER EDUCATION has grown enormously since Independence — from 25 to 348 universities and 700 to 17,625 colleges. From the 1970s onwards, there has been an escalating demand for higher education, professional and technical education in particular, especially for engineering and medical colleges, and management schools. But ironically in sharp contrast to the spiralling growth and demand, six decades after Independence the opportunities for admission to these institutions are still largely monopolised by a small privileged section of society. This points to the persistence of social discrimination. Students from middle classes and forward castes traditionally associated with more education — making up about 20 per cent of the population — dominate higher education.
The effectiveness of reservation as an instrument to rectify this imbalance might be a matter of debate. But there is no denying that the Government is well within its rights to provide reservation up to 50 per cent of the total number of seats in government and aided institutions. The Constitution provides for additional reservation for the socially and educationally backward groups. The reservation for Other Backward Classes, much like the reservation policy for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, is premised on the understanding that in a regime of formal equality and open competition, members of a previously victimised group burdened by accumulated disabilities and disadvantages, will not be able to compete, and will, in fact, fall further behind. Preferential treatment can remedy these inequities. This is the rationale behind the concept of reservation for backward classes. The Supreme Court has also categorically upheld this upper limit of 50 per cent for reservation, in Indira Sawhney vs. the Union of India.
Though there is a deliberate effort to target Union Minister for Human Resource Development Arjun Singh, suggesting that he was behind the pushing of quotas solely for the political benefit of the Congress party, we need to keep in mind that the decision was taken by the political class as a whole and the 103rd constitutional amendment was unanimously passed. Besides, a decision of such significance could only have been possible with the knowledge and support of the Congress leadership and the United Progressive Alliance.
As it has turned out, the UPA Coordination Committee has rightly decided to go ahead with its inclination to widen the scope of the reservation policy, despite the pressure of the agitations and protests. It has now announced that it will implement the 27 per cent OBC reservation in Central educational institutions in 2007. In implementing and working out the modalities of the quota scheme, we need to address three critical issues that form the crux of the argument against reservation. The first issue is a basic question as to whether reservation is indeed the best way of rectifying inequities. The second is the issue of whether quotas and academic excellence are fundamentally incompatible, as is suggested in some quarters. Finally, the point as to whether the OBCs are affluent and therefore do not deserve reservation.
Almost everybody who is opposed to quotas claims to favour affirmative action. Starting from different vantage points, quotas and affirmative action converge strikingly in many ways, both are mechanisms of preferential treatment to facilitate inclusion of disadvantaged groups. The principal difference is that quotas are constitutionally mandated, while affirmative action may not be. Given the persistence of social discrimination, the question that must be posed should not be confined to the limited point as to whether preferential treatment must be in the form of quotas or affirmative action of a broader scope. Rather, the question should be: would alternative measures produce the same outcomes that mandatory quotas produce?
While reservation might not be the best or the only method of correcting longstanding discrimination, however, it is one of the more workable and feasible mechanisms for increasing access of disadvantaged groups to higher education; chiefly because it is transparent, enforceable, and easy to monitor. In the hysteria generated by the protests, we must not forget that the Indian reservation policy has been quite effective and has produced positive outcomes.
For example, the proportion of Scheduled Caste students in the seven Indian Institutes of Technology (2003-02 to 2003-04) is about 9 per cent, which is below their allocated quota of 15 per cent but even this would have been hard to achieve in the absence of quotas. The proportion of OBC graduates, on the other hand, is a mere 8.6 per cent. So far, with the exception of a few institutions, such as the Jawaharlal Nehru University, which has designed an admission policy that gives additional points for social and regional backwardness helping to increase the OBC student intake to roughly 20 per cent of the student population, there is very little evidence of voluntary schemes of affirmative action in other institutions of higher learning. The fact that very few institutions have introduced voluntary measures of affirmative action for the disadvantaged sections and the continuation of the anti-quota protests despite the announcement of an increase in the number of seats in Central educational institutions leads one to the conclusion that the real issue is not affirmative action per se but hostility to any policy intervention that sets out to empower the underprivileged and dilute the monopoly of the privileged in education. That is why we need reservation for different groups in higher education because the nature of Indian society ensures that without such measures, social discrimination and exclusion will persist and be strengthened.
The second argument is that quotas militate against academic excellence and will lead to further deterioration of academic standards. This flawed theory is contradicted by the experience of American universities and the south Indian experience. As has been pointed out in the ongoing debate, the experience of affirmative action in American universities has been extremely positive with no dilution of academic standards. Likewise, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala have had high levels of quotas for decades with no evident decline in standards as compared to north Indian universities. In fact, it is widely accepted throughout the world that diversity makes educational institutions more interesting, and, therefore, adds quality to education.
The third point that troubles the anti-reservationists is the issue of economic status and determining who is eligible for reservation. Given the political momentum behind the policy of reservation for the OBCs, a shift to an economic criterion is unlikely; yet, the current controversy over OBC reservation placed the economic criteria on the political centre stage once again. There are two factors here. One is the social composition of the OBCs and, the second, the definition of the creamy layer. As distinct from the SCs and the STs, we must recognise that there is internal differentiation and intra-group inequality among the OBCs. The Supreme Court in the Indira Sawhney vs. the Union of India case addressed how economic factors should figure in the definition of backwardness, which means that the government must find ways to disqualify the more advantaged individuals in these classes and help the truly backward.
Although reservation for the OBCs is necessary, the Government should ensure that it does not reproduce inequalities within groups that reservation seeks to remedy between groups. The creamy layer rules presume that there are individuals within the group who have the economic and political clout to overcome discrimination and hence it is important to exclude them. But the rules should allow for a situation in which a group continues to be an OBC but individuals within that group are excluded. In India, both economic and caste criteria are difficult to apply because of the large informal economy, and the obfuscation of the economic criteria on account of corruption. But whatever the difficulties, we need to evolve criteria that should exclude the affluent in the OBC communities who have access to jobs and higher education. Creamy layer rules should be more complex than a simple economic cut-off; it should include a wide variety of considerations relating to employment, property, jobs, schooling, and access to higher education.
Two major conclusions emerge: The application of creamy layer rules although complicated and contentious permits the Government to consider a combination of factors, both group and individual, both caste and class, in the definition of backwardness. Secondly, the exclusion of the creamy layer is of the essence as it provides a way out of purely group-based categories of reservation. It is the most effective way of meeting the demands of social justice and inclusive education by giving benefits to the most deserving. To allow the undeserving to benefit from reservation is to deny protection to those who deserve to be protected.
(The writer is Professor, Centre for Political Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.)
posted by e-tafakkur at 1:55 PM
7 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
HALAH BANG IZAAM..
Kok nggak pernah nelpon2 lagi ;)
Btwm blog aku udah diupdate lho..mampir2 ya
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Muslims clogging Inclusive Growth of India
Muslims and Indian Civil Society:
The Economic development of the nation needs strategic utilization of natural, physical, human, financial and social resources. Unless we establish socio-economic justice through resource allocation among religious communities, it is meaningless to talk about civil society development and inclusive growth. Abandoned Indian Muslims (as 15% Indian population) definitely need more focused plans and strategies for inclusive growth of India.
Our Strength - Unity in Diversity:
The Sachar Committee Report revealed the facts that Muslims are not far better than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of India and thus needs special attention in our national plans and policies framed for inclusive growth. We need to believe that the strength of India is ‘Unity in Diversity’. The religious communities may have diversity in believes and approaches, but are united for the nation. Indian Muslims are instinct part of the nation with diversified approach in believes and approach to practice.
Interest Free Banking for Inclusive Growth of India:
The Sachar Committee did not consider the constraint of ‘Interest’; the most important reason for financial exclusion of Indian Muslims, rather advocated financial inclusion of Indian Muslims through participation in Scheduled banks. Since majority of Indian Muslims are poor and orthodox, their financial exclusion is mainly due to prohibition of interest in Islam. We must not forget that Indian Muslims shares 18.35% Indian population living below poverty line. So unless Indian Muslims is allowed transacting interest free banking, their financial inclusion is not possible. Without financial inclusion of Indian Muslims, their economic development is not possible. And without economic development of Indian Muslims, it is not possible for India to achieve the much desired real inclusive growth of the nation.
Sachar Committee Report – Half work done!
The Sachar Committee Report reflects that Muslims are under financial loss over Rs. 23,766 crores per annum in terms of credit through Scheduled Commercial Banks; as their share in outstanding loans under PSA is just 4.7% compared to 12% share in PSA accounts. A community with more than 31% population living below poverty line and 39.4% as self employed workers, such credit loss pushes it towards more backwardness; ultimately making inclusive growth more difficult. The Sachar Committee not only denied the requirement of Interest free banking for Muslims; but also failed to suggest any suitable measure to make our financial system more interactive and attractive for Muslims.
Recommendations of Sachar Committee - Imperfect measures
After Sachar Committee Report, the government took some initiatives to follow the suggestions made by the committee, but none of the initiatives is ensuring financial inclusion of Indian Muslims. The Sachar Committee has reported that participation of Muslims in Micro Finance is very low and share of Muslims in credit through SIDBI and NABARD are also very low. Instead of analyzing the causes of financial exclusion of Muslims, the committee just advocated to increase number of Scheduled Banks in Muslim areas, promotion of Micro Finance and deployment of more funds to NMDFC, SIDBI and NABARD. This approach is irrational because the measures suggested by the Committee are against the orthodox approach and financial requirements of Indian Muslims.
Approach of RBI toward Indian Muslims:
RBI is not paying due attention on financial exclusion of Indian Muslims. It should have studied the impact of ‘Interest’ on Indian Muslim’s financial inclusion and suggested some measures to comply with religious and financial need of Indian Muslims. But RBI (might be with intention to avoid any additional procedural changes) has already declined the feasibility of interest free banking in India. RBI should have considered why Muslims are just 0.78% in its working force. Similarly it was not discussed about reasons that why Muslim’s share in credit through SIDBI is just 0.48% and through NABARD is under 4%.
Dr. C. Rangarajan Committee Report ignored Muslims:
Under such extreme financial exclusions, it was supposed that the high level committee for financial inclusion would focus on Muslims. It was not a surprise to see that there was no Muslim member in that committee, but unfortunately the committee did not pen a single word about financial exclusion of Indian Muslims. Generally it is not expected that such committees would make community wise study; but since the report worth mentioned specific plans for 100% financial inclusions of SCs and STs, it was duly expected to have some comments on Indian Muslims which is not far better than SCs and STs of India.
While the Terms of Reference assigned to the Committee on Financial Inclusion contained the task ‘to identify the barriers confronted by vulnerable groups in accessing credit and financial services, including supply, demand and institutional constraints’ The report submitted by Dr. C. Rangarajan Committee did not carry any personal intervention report with vulnerable group. Moreover it did not study the financial exclusion in urban areas. Thus the report did not serve the designated purpose. So it is not justify for the government implementing the suggestions of the report with no study of minority community and with any case of committee’s interference with vulnerable group. If this would be the approach of our high level committees, how financial inclusion mission could be a success?
Dr. Raghuram Rajan Committee Report - Missing Inclusive Growth potentials:
The Planning Commission of India set another high level committee to prepare a report on financial sector reforms. This committee is also 0% representation of Muslims. The committee prepared a draft report after interference with more than 82 persons. Unfortunately there was no Muslim among those 82 persons. Neither the committee considered the issue of financial exclusion of Indian Muslims, nor suggested any proposal to ensure financial inclusion of Muslims. How could we set financial sector reform, unless we consider factors responsible for financial exclusion of minorities? With such abandoned financial exclusion of Indian Muslims by committees after committees, we may not be able to develop a civil society nor succeed to achieve the desired real inclusive growth.
Government Schemes for Minorities:
In Muslim concentrated areas, the physical infrastructure is always found lacking behind the actual requirements; and the community based institutions constrained by regulations and closed after no support from government schemes. Moreover the schemes announced by government to empower Minorities are also not inclined with Muslim NGOs which could have utilized and help to develop the social resources of Muslims. Such practices of dethroning Muslim social and institutional resources will certainly snag development of civil society and inclusive growth process.
Policy initiatives are required for real inclusive growth:
In the interest of the nation it is wise to take due initiatives instigate Indian Muslims into mainstream section to help India realize the desired inclusive growth.
1. There should be a parliamentary committee to study abandoned financial exclusion of Indian Muslims and recommend measures to ensure financial inclusions of Muslims.
2. At least one Muslim should be incorporated as member of any committee constituted for study and analysis of national level issue, because it is not justify ignoring minority community while doing strategic study for the nation as a whole.
3. If any committee has no Muslim member, the committee must have physical interaction with Muslim NGOs or institutions to ensure inclusion of the Muslims in that study, recommendations and schemes framed after that.
4. Minority related schemes should ensure participation of Muslim NGOs so that Muslim social resources could grow in civil society manner otherwise the process of isolation may threat wastage of Muslim social resources or it may go against national interest.
5. RBI must consider ways and means to include Muslims as working staff and find means to attract Muslims involvement in monetary and financial service businesses. It may need to incorporate products suitable to shariah compliant.
6. There should be at least 12% working staff in special financial institutions like NMDFC, SIDBI and NABARD. Moreover such institutions should introduce interest free credit schemes for Muslims because interest is most important hurdle in financial inclusion of Indian Muslims.
7. Interest Free credit schemes is not only required by Indian Muslims but also by our vulnerable section associated to agriculture, rural, small and micro industries where due to financial sickness entrepreneurs are unable to take financial risk, thus need risk free credit scheme. It is possible that credit on profit loss sharing basis may be provided to these groups through inducing shariah bound investors to interact with these groups.
8. To allow inflow of capital on profit loss sharing basis for our vulnerable enterprises associated with unorganized sector, it is necessary that such investments should be exempted from all taxes and free from undue formalities.
9. If we succeed to mobilize capital on profit loss sharing basis (for unorganized sector) from Islamic countries, it may along with capital investment, generate resources for allied industries and also boost export potentials.
10. The introduction of Islamic Banking for unorganized sector may help our economy in dual manner. At one end it will boost capital investment in unorganized sector without cutting resources of organized sector; on the other end it will generate new sources of employment and income opportunities to shift load of labour from organized sector to unorganized sector.
Our policy makers and administrative forces need to study the prospects and feasibility of interest free banking and finance for unorganized sector to avoid possible need to loan waiving schemes in future. It depends on our own wisdom whether we take challenges as opportunities or threats. The issue of Interest free or Islamic Banking must be addressed before we frame our financial sector reform and it must be tackled with thorough and sincere study by our financial experts.
Hope the leader will use their wisdom to study and analyze the issue of Indian Muslim financial resources and adopt suitable policies. This sincere attention and due efforts in this regard will surely ameliorate India develop a true civil society and achieve the much desired real inclusive growth.
Syed Zahid Ahmad
Mobile - (091) 9869814113
E Mail - aicmeu@yahoo.com
Salam'alaikum Mr. Izzam.
Hopefully Allah's Bless upon you still then.
Thanks to you that I could read your book who was brought by My Uncle.
In deep my hearth, I'm very-very proud to you cause your expectation has accomplished. This mean that I'm very-very whiped by that, my spirit has been burning again as academician. Once more, Thanks a lot my brother.
My suggestion for your book are:
1. Hendaknya, antara judul dan isi buku ada korelasi yang kuat karena kalau saya melihat buku antum, korelasi antara keduanya masih lemah. Seperti antara tema judul yang "memandang dunia" dengan isi yang banyak bercerita tentang "dunia" sangat sedikit sekali (kebanyakan isi buku tentang cerita seperti diary).
2. Jangan lupa mengedit ulang sampai sempurna kata-kata yang salah ketik untuk menambah kenikmatan di dalam membaca.
3. Coba isi buku ditambah dengan gambar-gambar (jangan hanya gambar penulisnya saza dhong) supaya lebih memikat hati.
4. Mungkin sarannya ini saza dulu karena saya masih suka membaca bukunya berulang-ulang. Lagian ntar kalau kebanyakan saran, ustadz Izzam nanti langsung ngambek, terus nelpon echa dan nidya, atau echa dan nidya lainnya, sampai berjam-jam. Kasihan ntar dengan kantongnya, bisa tipis karena beli pulsa terus. He he he...
Congratulation...!
Good...!
and Good Luck...!
Post a Comment
<< Home