Comment

Why not Separate Electorates?

The issue of reservations for Dalits in promotions has come to the forefront once again. The debate is centered on the question whether decline in standards of governance due to reservation-based promotions is justified. There may be social unrest and instability if the government denies reservations in promotions. There may also be social instability if the government gives reservations. More importantly, the basic problems of Dalits is not solved by such measures. Dalit IAS officers are known for their anti-Dalit attitudes. They are more eager to get co-opted and accepted into the upscale society. The fate of ordinary Dalit will scarcely be improved by such reservations.

The challenge is to solve the basic problems of bread and butter of the Dalits and not be content with merely co-opting the leaders of their community while leaving the masses to rot. At the root of the problem lies the fact that elected individuals start pursuing the interests of the prominent castes and classes and disregard the interests of the Dalits and the poor. This happens because Dalits and Brahmins; poor and rich; workers and industrialists together elect their representatives. Dr B R Ambedkar was afraid that only such Dalits would be elected from reserved constituencies as in vogue presently who will toe the line of the upper castes. In his essay Emancipation of the Untouchables he wrote: "It is common experience that the representative prefers the interests of his class to that of his voters. And why should it be otherwise? There is a homely saying that man's skin sits closer to him than his shirt... The proposals for occupational and functional representation furnish proof that there is a great body of opinion against the system of territorial constituencies." Dr Ambedkar had agreed to reservations in joint electorates under the pressure of Gandhi's undertaking a fast unto death.

A handful of Dalits are co-opted in the mainstream in this dispensation. These handful Dalits promote the interests of the upper castes while preserving their personal gains. For example a Dalit MP is happy with the money he receives via MPLADS and is content to leave questions of vital interest of the Dalits in the cold storage. As a result main issues relevant for Dalits—such as land reforms, economic policies to promote generation of jobs, restrictions on job-eating technologies, speedy justice and extortion of the poor by the government employees—have not been placed on the nation's agenda. Naturally there is resentment in the Dalit community.

The Congress has decided to expand reservations in promotions to diffuse this unrest. Reservations in elections and government jobs are proving inadequate to co-opt the Dalits; hence reservations are being expanded though they are fundamentally futile.

This policy is doubly harmful. On the one hand the quality of governance and education suffers. On the other hand the basic problems of the Dalits remain unattended. It should be admitted, however, that a few Dalits do benefit from this dispensation.

It is time that concerned people relook at the proposal for separate electorates for Dalits as suggested by Dr Ambedkar. It is more likely that representatives elected from exclusively Dalit constituencies will be more accountable to the voters. The representative elected from joint constituencies is free to promote the interests of any class that he wishes even if the individual elected is a Dalit person. For example, an MP elected from a joint constituency of agricultural labourers and landlords is free to promote the interests of either group. But a representative elected exclusively from a constituency of agricultural labourers will be bound to promote the interest of agricultural labourers alone. Majority of people in the country fall into the categories of self-employed petty businessmen, agricultural labour and small farmers. These three constituencies may account for about 90 percent of the voters. It will not be possible for a government made by these MPs to ignore the interests of this majority if the individuals were elected from these constituencies-excluding the big trading companies, big farmers, and industrialists.

The dilemma is whether to make these separate constituencies on the basis of caste or on the basis of present occupation. Dr Ambedkar had demanded separate constituencies based on caste. The problem here is that a person is forever locked into his caste. A son of cobbler IAS officer who has graduated from IIM will still cast his vote and contest elections from the constituency of cobblers. Another problem is of creamy layer. It is often seen that Dalit officers are anxious to join the upper caste and look down upon their caste-brothers. Their personal interests are served if their caste-brothers remain backward so that the facilities earmarked for their caste can be more easily appropriated by their family without competition from new claimants.

So there is a point in making separate electorates on the basis of occupation instead of caste. Time has come to make separate occupational constituencies where the representatives are forced to promote the interests of the voters instead of providing reservations to selected persons from the Dalit community who toe the line of the upper castes and rich.        [contributed]

Frontier
Vol. 45, No. 27, 13-19, 2013

Your Comment if any