BOOK REVIEW

Affirmative Action,
Reservation or Appeasement
Ram Puniyani

he political scenario in India is

heavily dominated by quota and
reservation politics. The implementation of the Mandal Commission
report by V P Singh in 1990 totally
changed the political scenario and continues to affect it. Reservation for women
in panchayats sailed through but reservation in Parliament is mired in innumerable problems. Based on the findings
of the Sachar Committee and Ranganath
Mishra Commission there have been
demands for reservation for Muslim
minorities in some states, but the proposal
has met with such hostile opposition
that it is practically impossible that such
a step can be contemplated for implementation. Besides, with the change of
regime in May 2014 and the Bharatiya
Janata Party (BJP) government coming
to power at the centre, such issues will
be relegated to the past. It is against this
background that this path breaking book
written with deep insights into the
Indian social reality and the unevenness
in all sections of society needs to be given serious consideration and debated in
different social and academic forums.
Rudolf Heredia, whose previous intervention, Changing Gods engaged with the
issue of conversions which have been the
bone of contention and the axis around
which the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
(RSS) constructed its politics for decades
was again deeply rooted in Indian reality.
It demonstrated the genesis of the issue
and the need to understand why conversion rather than raising temperatures on this phenomenon. In Taking
Sides Heredia takes pains to go into the
lack of proper process of secularisationdemocratisation which led to the
present morass where multiple sectors
of society suffer from the disadvantages
due to their caste, religion or gender.
His premise is very humane, for him the
central concern is justice, A just society involves our understanding of justice
Economic & Political Weekly

EPW

august 30, 2014

Taking Sides: Reservation Quotas and Minority

Rights in India by Rudolph C Heredia (New Delhi:
Penguin), 2012; pp 383, Rs 499.

as much as it does our understanding of

society (p x). Justice must be done and
seen to be done and not just debated.
There is a need for practical action beyond the debating rooms. This again requires the consent of the governed for
different actions leading towards justice in society. The limits of our actions
in this direction are guided by consensus and legitimacy and how far they can
be stretched. This book sets out to explore those outside limits of action.
Majoritarian Understanding
The author points out that the notion of
justice which revolves around a majoritarian understanding articulated in the
public sphere and the society is unjust.
This is what leads the author to the central concern of his contribution, an inclusively just society. That is, the striving towards equality and freedom of the
individual: groups are the foundations
and the justice mechanism has to be
structurally incorporated into the system.
He points out that despite more than six
decades of independence we continue
to be ambiguous about the socially
excluded and our vulnerable minorities
continue to exist in deprivation. The
author makes a crucial point that these
structural inequalities show us the unfinished business of our freedom struggle
and so the effort of the magnitude of the
second freedom struggle is needed to
overcome these inequalities.
These inequalities also lead to violence against the vulnerable sections of
society. The ruling classes which have
been the major beneficiaries of the freedom movement are least concerned
about overcoming these inequalities; a
just society is not on their agenda. Under
the garb of merit and efficiency they are
vol xlIX no 35

pursuing their hidden agenda of selffulfilment. He challenges us by posing

the question: can we strive for an equitable and egalitarian society, justice for
all and equality for each? He calls for
application of public morality in contrast
to political pragmatism.
He also lays the foundation of the
debate by underlining the exclusive
demands and compromise on the rights
of others. As such this is an effort to
prepare the levelling of the ground, but
in due course it also leads to the rise of
identity politics. He goes on to elaborate
the central concern of our Constitution
to include the excluded. Starting with
the colonial period, he sees the beginning of this inequality in the focusing
of the issue on reserved quotas and
reserved constituencies. It is this that
has led to the binding of the excluded in
a divide and rule agenda. The Census
initiated by the British played the role
of crystallising caste and homogenising
religion. Gender remained out of this
discourse. The excluded sections also
came up with subaltern movements,
building the legacy of liberation ideology in the North and empowerment of
the self respect movement in the South.
The Constitutions quest for justice got
reflected in the Fundamental Rights,
the attempt to outline the notion of a
just society through just means which
also seems to be authors favourite
phrase. This logically leads to going beyond the social contract and to the more
desirable just society.
Diversity in Unity
His notion of equality is deeply linked
with justice and also with evolving
a consensus for the same. The title of
one of the chapters of the book sums
up a comprehensive understanding of
the topic, Equality for All: Justice for
Each, and so the concepts of affirmative
action, positive discrimination and reservation in different situations and circumstances are put in the proper context.
The reservation paradox becomes complicated as different castes start competing
for inclusion in the reserved category
and a competitive politics emerges,
which is very difficult to negotiate, and
also creates different competing caste
41

BOOK REVIEW

groups. Many of these inclusions and exclusions are fairly arbitrary. Heredia
does regard the constitutional context in
which the minority rights were enshrined as the defining moment of our
republic. The focus issues are different
for different minorities, for Muslims it is
discrimination and marginalisation, for
Christians it is religious freedom and
secular tolerance. One of the major issues
complicating the debate on reservations
is that the Scheduled Caste (SC) quota for
dalit religious minorities has not been extended beyond Sikhs and Buddhists. The
SCs amongst the Muslims and Christians
are deprived of this. He makes the apt
point that The challenge of old pluralities and a new pluralism will demand
not just unity in diversity but also diversity in unity. The issue of reservations
for women is an equally painful chapter
where the process has begun in some
ways but continues to be in various stages
of transition. We do not want an assimilative majoritarianism so our divided society does require an integrative politics.
That protects the communitys diversity.
Despite these provisions, one can
say that reservation has done little to
alleviate the situation of the sections
for which it was intended. It has provided little succour to some communities but the structural obstacles remain.
Another fact which is changing the
contours of the situation is the changing
economic-industrial structure. It is transforming the ground reality and some
from the disadvantaged sections have
become part of this new situation also.
The emergence of the creamy layer
who have benefitted from reservations
and continue to demand the same
also persists.
It is true that the sign of a just regime
should be in a just outcome, not only in
laying down laws and procedures. The
most difficult task for the government is
to see that quotas for vulnerable groups
are complementary to the interests of
other vulnerable groups. And this is
where the divergent political parties
have different and conflicting approaches.
We can also divide political parties into
two groups. One aims for such a just
society by various means, the other
being those which want to leave the
42

process at the prevalent formal equality

and so being for a totally unjust situation.
Those against reservations or affirmative
action in a way are opposed to substantive justice and equality, the status quo
being their hallmark. These parties oppose reservations, affirmative action,
and discussion on minority rights and in
a way are opposed to the constitutional
morality of liberty, equality and fraternity. On the other side the legislatures
have been restrained by the judiciary
when they cross the limits imposed by
constitutional legality to keep such
actions within the structure of Constitution. Affirmative action and reservation quotas have to be reconciled and
balanced with the fundamental rights
as affirmed in the Fundamentals Rights
in Articles 14 to 17. The minority rights
have to be in consonance with the Fundamental Rights in the Constitution.
Covering a lot of ground the book
takes us through a journey of the inequalities prevalent in all sections of
society and the multiple issues raised
thereby. It becomes clear that the Hindu
right, the RSS progeny currently in
power is by and large opposed to all
sorts of affirmative action. In the name
of equality it wants status quo and
formal equality. Heredia does well to
sum up by stating that
In India, caste, religion and patriarchy emerge as three most resilient obstacles for a
just society through just means. One is hitting against the solid wall of majoritarianism if one talks about reservation for religious minorities, despite the fact that the
condition of this section is abysmal. Very
aptly the challenge is our quest must move
against and beyond the injustices that these
institutions (caste, religion and patriarchy)
have imposed on our people, without burdening them with new ones or consolidating
old ones.

This is quite a tall order, more so in

situations where the privileged groups,
upper castes, majority religion and men
are asserting their privileges through the
politics of the Hindu right. We do need a
second freedom struggle to overcome
the present impasse over social change.
The policies of inclusion have to be
planned and implemented with commitment, which is lacking; and care, which is
nowhere to be seen. In the absence of
august 30, 2014

powerful social movements the policymakers do not feel duty-bound to provide justice. It is only due to the pressure
of social movements and the disadvantaged groups that the state and political
parties will pay attention to this issue.
Retrograde March
During the last three decades the march
of social change is in the retrograde
direction. The whole exercise of the
Mandal Commission was offset by the
Ram temple movement and the accompanying assertion of communal politics.
One must say that this remarkable book
looks at the deeper foundation of the issues involved. It begins with the prevalent ideas and notions, and traces the
roots of social inequalities and the structural constraints in the direction of social change for equality. While the author has done a commendable job in outlining the deeper issues and challenges
involved, he misses underlining that in
the current situation the forces of social
change for a just society are being seriously undermined by the RSS combine,
the Sangh parivar and its vision of a unified Hindu society living in harmony
with its deeper inequality. Such a book
needed an elaboration of this main obstacle to social change. It also misses out
on the social transformation which has
come due to economic changes leading
to a section of the deprived now joining
the privileged groups like the IIT-MBA
class, and talking in the language of
formal equality. Movements like Youth
for Equality with their adverse impact
on social change needed comprehensive
treatment.
The book engages with the diverse dimension of the issues involved and the
need to overcome them through affirmative action, reservation or positive discrimination. Its strength lies in its treatment of a comprehensive relationship
between different inequalities and exclusions. It is a valuable intervention in
the ongoing debate of reservations for
religious minorities, disadvantaged
castes and women.
Ram Puniyani (ram.puniyani@gmail.com)
is a writer, social activist, teacher and public
speaker.
vol xlIX no 35

EPW

Economic & Political Weekly