Interview/ Kishor Makwana, chairman, National Commission for Scheduled Castes
The Supreme Court's judgment on sub-classification of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes has triggered an intense social and political debate. Kishor Makwana, chairman of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, says it is very difficult to implement it. Excerpts from an interview:
Q. How do you view the Supreme Court's judgment on sub-classification of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes?
A. The system of reservation provided for under the Constitution is meant to ensure that the social strata left behind because of the caste system and the practice of untouchability in the Hindu community should come into the social mainstream. The Supreme Court has said that there should be quota within quota within the Scheduled Castes and scheduled tribes to ensure that some specific sections that have not benefited from reservation should also benefit from it. But what will this lead to? It is essential to assess how beneficial the classification will be. Additionally, it is crucial to evaluate the progress of the most backward sub-castes within the SC community and whether they have received social justice.
Q. The court has also observed that creamy layer concept could be applied to the Scheduled Castes.
A. There is another observation made by the Supreme Court, about creamy layer. Today, any individual belonging to the Scheduled Castes, even if he has become a doctor, engineer, scientist, industrialist, has done well from the economic point of view, when he goes in the midst of the community, how will he be treated? He will not be treated based on his economic prosperity. He will be treated like a Dalit. So creamy layer concept fails here. Hence the suggestion which the Supreme Court has given is not in the interest of the society. Even today, I see in many cities that in the flats or housing societies in upper class areas, even if a person is a doctor, he is not given a house. Discrimination does not get over with economic prosperity. The Constitution too has not made the provision for reservation based on economic criteria. The criteria for reservation in the Constitution is inequality due to caste system and untouchability. There is no harm if those within the SC community who are well-off voluntarily choose to forgo their reservation benefits.
Q. The Supreme Court has said the states can sub-classify SC/ST. Can it be implemented?
A. It is very difficult to implement it. It is everyone's responsibility to ensure that the person at the lowest rung within the SC community does not get left behind.
Q. So you feel that this cannot be implemented at present?
A. It should be left to the Scheduled Castes. Some reflection should happen within the community on ensuring that no section is left behind.
Q. Now, it is up to the states to implement it and some states such as Telangana and Karnataka have said they will implement the Supreme Court judgment.
A. Some states are expected to go ahead and implement it (sub-categorisation). They will do it looking at the state-specific conditions. Some will do it based on political considerations because unfortunately, while the framers of the Constitution had social justice in mind while providing for reservation, in the current scenario, reservations are decided on completely different considerations.
It has become completely political. This is not right. It is also antithetical to the basic values of the Constitution.
Q. The Commission had in the past too opposed the idea of sub-categorisation of Scheduled Castes.
A. Yes, twice before the Commission has rejected the idea of sub-categorisation of Scheduled Castes. The Commission has stated that the system of reservation for Scheduled Castes should not be tinkered with.
Q. A Committee headed by the cabinet secretary was set up some months ago to study the issue of sub-categorisation of Scheduled Castes. Was the Commission consulted by the panel?
A. No, we were not approached by the committee.
Q. The Supreme Court's own view on the matter earlier has been that there cannot be sub-classification of Scheduled Castes.
A. Sometimes, the decisions of the Supreme Court do evoke surprise. Over the past 70 years, there have been discussions about reservation, sometimes in the name of religion and at other times about providing reservation to converted SC-ST individuals. This is against the fundamental spirit of the Constitution. It is a political game. This was not the view point of Bababaheb Ambedkar or other leaders of that time.
Q. Can some legal safeguard be brought by the government on this issue?
A. I am not aware of what the government is thinking on the issue. However, the Prime Minister has given an assurance to the MPs belonging to the Scheduled Castes and scheduled tribes who went to meet him that the government is not in favour of implementing creamy layer for these communities.
Q. But the government has not said anything clearly on the issue of sub-classification.
A. Efforts should be made to help those sections that are still more backward within the Scheduled Castes compared to others.
Q. Any concerns that sub-classification, if implemented by the states, could also be decided based on political considerations?
A. Yes, of course, that concern is there. The states which have said yes, such as Telangana or Karnataka, their motive is political and not helping the most backward castes or because they respect the Constitution.