The anti-caste-based-reservation protests 2006, that took place in parts of India, were in opposition to the decision of the Union Government of India, the multiparty coalition 'United Progressive Alliance' (headed by the Indian National Congress), to implement reservations for Other Backward Classes in central and private institutes of higher education. In the year 2005, based on the recommendations of the Mandal Commission, the government proposed to reserve 27% of seats in the All India Institute of Medical Studies (AIIMS), Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and other central institutions of higher education for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in order to help them gain higher levels of representation in these institutions. This move led to massive protests by those claiming that the government's (and the Congress party's) proposal is discriminatory and driven by 'vote-bank' politics.[1]
Contents |
India is divided into many endogamous groups, or castes and sub-castes, as a result of centuries of following Varnasrama Dharma, a social system which translates to "types" or "order". This put limitations on access to education, jobs and other rights to the"lower-castes".
During the British Raj, some methods for upliftment of the backward among these parts of the population were introduced. These included reservations in the legislature and in government jobs.[2] After independence, the Indian constitution, introduced provisions for reservations for the scheduled castes and tribes in government institutions in the 1950s, to give a fair reperesentation to the weaker sections of society. 22.5% of the seats in higher education institutes currently set-aside for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
The reservation system was originally supposed to last only for ten years.[3] However, it has continued to this day. In 1989, then Prime Minister Vishwanath Pratap Singh accepted and implemented the proposals of the Mandal Commission, which recommended reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Many Indian states implemented the OBC reservations in their higher educational institutions, which led to protests by those belonging to "upper castes" and opposed to the quota system. However, a select few higher educational institutions - the IITs, IIMs, AIIMS, etc. - were kept out of the purview of the OBC reservations until now.
In some states (for example Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu) where the quotas for SC/ST/OBC have been implemented, the quota amounts to 50% of the available seats in any medical, engineering or other institute falling under the state government. This includes even the unaided private colleges.
In 2006, the Human Resource Development minister, Arjun Singh promised to implement a 27% reservation for OBCs in institutes of higher education (twenty central universities, the IITs, NITs, IIMs and AIIMS) after the 2006 State Assembly elections, in accordance with the 93rd Constitutional Amendment, which was passed unanimously by both Houses of Parliament.[4]
The text of the 93rd amendment reads:
Greater access to higher education including professional education, is of great importance to a large number of students belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and other socially and educationally backward classes of citizens. The reservation of seats for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward Classes of citizens in admission to educational institution is derived from the provisions of clause(4) of article 15 of the constitution. At present, the number of seats available in aided or State maintained institutions, particularly in respect of professional education, is limited, in comparison to those in private aided institutions.
Clause(i) of article 30 of the Constitution provides the right to all minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. It is essential that the rights available to minorities are protected in regard to institutions established and administered by them. Accordingly, institutions declared by the State to be minority institutions under clause(1) of article 30 are excluded from the operation of this enactment
To promote the educational advancement of the socially and educationally backward classes of citizens,i.e., the Other Backward Classes or of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in matters of admission of students belonging to these categories in unaided educational institutions, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause(1) of article 30, the provisions of article 15 were amplified. The new clause(5) of said article 15 shall enable the Parliament as well as the State legislatures to make appropriate laws for the above mentioned purpose[5]
The 93rd Constitutional Amendment allows the government to make special provisions for "advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens", including their admission in aided or unaided private educational institutions. Gradually this reservation policy is to be implemented in private sector institutions and companies as well.[6] This move led to opposition from non-reserved category students, as the proposal, will reduce seats for the General (non-reserved) category from the existing 77.5% to less than 50.5% (since members of OBCs are also allowed to contest in the General category). However, government of India assured that number of seats in these educational institutes will be increased so that effectively there will be no reduction in number of seats available for general category
In an incident on 13 May, medical students protesting in Mumbai were lathi-charged (baton-charged) by the police. The protest had been previously banned by the High Court.[7] The nationwide strike launched by "Anti-reservation" medical students protesting against the lathi-charge, was later joined by like-minded resident doctors from all over India.
The government took measures to counter the protesting doctors by serving them with suspension letters and asking them to vacate the hostels to make way for newly recruited doctors. Some states invoked the 'Essential Services Maintenance Act' (ESMA) and gave notices to the doctors to return to work, failing which legal action would be taken against them. The government also put on alert 6,000 men from Rapid Action Force to take care of any untoward incident. However, in most places the protesters remained defiant despite ESMA. In Delhi, a human chain rally was organized on 20 May, by students of IIT Delhi with the support of PAN IIT. Nearly 150 students went on a 'relay' hunger strike in AIIMS (Delhi) which, lasted for about a month.
A resolution, signed by 2,500 IIT Roorkee students and expressing their opposition, was sent to the President, the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India and the Election Commission, and a deaf ear was turned to it. A peaceful protest march was organised on 23 May.[8] The following were the demands made by the 'Youth for Equality', the anti reservation student body leading the protests:[9]
Several students at the IIT Guwahati decided to boycott classes to protest against the government proposal led by an undergraduate student from Mechanical Engineering Department, Class of 2007, Mr. Shailendra Kumar Mishra. Mr. Mishra went on a three day hunger strike to protest against the same. His selfless contributions to the society were later translated into a Public Interest Litigation filed at the District Court of Guwahati City.[10] In Jaipur, hundreds of striking anti-quota resident doctors went on a door-to-door campaign in Jaipur to garner support for a rally. The doctors affiliated to 'Youth for Equality' began their Jan Samarthan padyatra in the High Court and Banipark areas.[11] In Chennai, more than a hundred students from IIT Madras and city medical colleges protested in front of the government guesthouse in Chepauk[12]
After the government reaffirmed its commitment to implementing reservations, the protesters called for a "Civil disobedience movement".[13] Their protests were also supported by the traders in Delhi, who threatened to shut shops if the government doesn't roll back on its decision. The AIIMS Faculty Association went on a mass casual leave from 25 May 2006 to support the anti-quota stir, but made it clear that basic health-care services would not be disrupted. Whether health care services were really unaffected is questionable.[13] On 27 May 2006, a massive rally was organised in Delhi. The rally was attended by participants from all over India, numbering almost 1 lakh. It was declared that the strike by students and junior doctors would continue.[14]
On 28 May 2006, the government set up an 'Oversight Committee' to "prepare a road map with a time-bound programme to implement 27 per cent reservation for OBCs without compromising merit and addressing apprehensions aired by students propose an effective way to implement reservations keeping the interests of all sections of society in mind". This committee, headed by former Karnataka Chief Minister M Veerappa Moily, will submit its report by 31 August 2006.[15]
On 31 May 2006, in deference to the Supreme Court directive, resident doctors resumed hospital works from 1 June 2006, as the health service was affected seriously due to the strike. However, protest from the part of students (both medical and other streams) has continued and a national coordination committee comprising representatives of medical colleges, IITs and several other educational institutions has been proposed to be formed to lead the agitation.[16] The Supreme Court has also sought the government to clarify the basis on which the reservation policy was being implemented.[17]
The 93rd Constitutional Amendment was passed unanimously in the Lok Sabha except for two abstaining members.[4] The Left parties, while supporting reservations, called for excluding the 'creamy layer' from availing of its benefits;[18] the 'creamy layer' is used in reference to members of economically advanced population belonging to any caste.
The Bharatiya Janata Party, in its two-day national executive meeting, backed quotas but also called for upholding merit and excellence in educational institutes. They asked for the benefits of reservations to be extended to "economically weaker sections of the forward castes", and also for exclusion of the 'creamy layer'.[19]
The Congress party which has introduced these quotas has vociferously backed them. Congress workers allegedly confronted the fasting doctors at AIIMS. They were headed by Sacchar Singh, a relative of HRD minister Arjun Singh. They proceeded with heavy slogan-shouting. It almost became a show-down between both camps; however, the police managed to stop these workers.
The only party which opposed reservations was the Shiv Sena. Its supporters went on a procession to protest the move saying it was votebank politics and a means to divide Hinduism.
There have also been pro-reservation protest marches, such as the march in Chennai led by the PMK, a key constituent of the DMK-led alliance in Tamil Nadu, which demanded that the OBC reservation quotas be implemented without any delay. They have called upon the government to pay no heed to the anti-reservation protestors.[20]
The Supreme Court of India on 10 April 2008 upheld the law for 27% OBC quota the law enacted by the Centre in 2006 providing a quota of 27 per cent for candidates belonging to the Other Backward Classes in Central higher educational institutions that includes the Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT's) and the Indian Institutes of Management (IIM's). But it directed the government to exclude the ‘creamy layer’ among the OBCs while implementing the law and this exclusion has nothing to do with the reservation for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes .[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]
According to the 2001 census, Hindu SCs represent 16.2%, the STs account for 8.2% of the total population of India.[28] Exact figures of OBCs are not collected in the census; the 1980 Mandal Commission, using census data from the 1931, pegs it at 54% of the population. Various recent estimates by government agencies put it anywhere between 29% to 36% of the population. According to the 1999-2000 National Sample Survey, around 36 per cent of the country's population is defined as belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBC). The proportion falls to 32 per cent on excluding Muslim OBCs. A survey conducted in 1998 by National Family Health Statistics (NFHS) puts the proportion of non-Muslim OBCs as 29.8 per cent.[29] The original Mandal report classified 1257 communities as backward. Since the implementation of Mandal report recommendations in 1991 for government jobs, the number of backward communities has grown. As of 2006, 2297 communities are listed as backward, a 90% increase from 1991, while no community has been removed from the list based on progress made.[30]
|
|||||