India Trains Dalits To Clean Sh*t Through Caste System: Suraj Yengde At India Today .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeFUij4GI8I&feature=youtu.be
Thursday, December 27, 2018
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
Glass ceiling, caste wall
Supreme Court order on reservation in promotions sanctifies unequal representation of Dalits in higher bureaucracy.
The governing elite would like to believe that caste discrimination is an overblown problem that is a thing of the past. But for purveyors of the myth that caste no longer determines one’s social standing or life chances, a recent news report should be an eye-opener. In Jabalpur, a doctor belonging to the Scheduled Tribe community was assaulted by the relatives of two patients who wanted them treated by an “upper caste” person. The assailants then took the patients to another hospital for treatment.
Such inhuman treatment of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (SC/STs) is routine in the life of our nation, irrespective of whether they belong to the so-called “creamy layer” or not. Every year, there are more than 40,000 registered cases of atrocities against Dalits though the actual number of heinous crimes committed against this beleaguered community is much higher. It is against the backdrop of this oppressive social milieu that one must view the recent SC pronouncement on reservation in promotion which has dealt a body blow to Dalit aspirations.
The five-judge Constitution Bench not only largely endorsed the 2006 SC judgment in the Nagaraj case relating to reservation for SC/STs in promotion, but also held that the Nagaraj case which had effectively put a stop to reservation in promotions need not be referred for consideration to a larger Bench. The Court has rightly invalidated the Nagaraj case decree that the state should collect quantifiable data of backwardness of SC/STs while considering eligibility for reservation in promotion on the grounds, inter alia, that SC/STs are specifically mentioned in Article 46 and should therefore be deemed to be “the most backward or the weakest of the weaker sections of society and therefore presumed to be backward.” But then comes the Court’s outrageous contradiction when discussing the “creamy layer”. The learned judges argue that the equality principle demands that “unequals” within the same class should be weeded out. “Those persons… who have come out of untouchability or backwardness by virtue of belonging to the creamy layer… (should) be excluded from the benefit of reservation”. Wow! I wonder what that ST doctor in Jabalpur would say about this observation.
There are serious problems with the philosophy underlying the apex court’s verdict on the “creamy layer”. It is based on a worldview that ignores the complexities and rationale behind affirmative action. The raison d’être for reservation is not merely economic as imputed by the Court (poverty exists across castes and communities) but untouchability and its tenacious grip on our society. So ingrained is caste that the ordinary Dalit, irrespective of his material advancement, is still hobbled by his social origins.
On the surface, things seem to have improved but the subterranean volcano of prejudice erupts in case the Dalit breaches the invisible but unyielding caste wall. The recent killing in Telangana of an educated Dalit Christian for marrying an upper caste girl reminds us of what it means to be Dalit. What was sickening was the relentless trolling of the grieving widow in the aftermath. An example: “They are lower castes when it comes to reservation, but when it comes to marriage they think all are equal. Is this fair?” The father-in-law who had arranged the killing was lauded as a hero. Clearly the Court’s view that the so-called “creamy layer” has transcended caste discrimination and untouchability betrays a poor understanding of a social milieu still scarred by caste. What Gandhiji said still holds good today: “Whether a Harijan is nominally a Hindu, Christian, Sikh… he is still a Harijan. He can’t change his spots… He may change his garb… but his untouchability will haunt him during his lifetime.” Caste consciousness is embedded in our culture.
On the issue of adequacy of representation, the Court has struck at the very root of affirmative action in the promotional stages by stating that “as the post gets higher it may be necessary to reduce the number of SC/STs in promotional posts… for the simple reason that efficiency of administration has to be looked at every time promotions are made”. Implicit in this observation is the cultural bias that sees the Dalit as less efficient than his peers and hence the directive that the proportionate reservation of 22.5 per cent should be progressively reduced in the higher tiers of the bureaucracy.
Like in many court cases, this Court has also cherry-picked judgments that suit its argument. However, it is necessary to point out that there have also been several SC verdicts critical of the elitist perception of merit and efficiency. In Vasanth Kumar vs State of Karnataka (1985), Justice Chinnappa Reddy launched a scathing attack on the “meritarian principle” and observed that while “efficiency is not to be discounted… it cannot be permitted to be used as a camouflage to let the upper classes… to monopolise the services, particularly the higher posts and the professional institutions.”
In its uncorrupted form, reservation in promotion implies that at every level in the hierarchy, there should be 22.5 per cent seats reserved for SC/STs but even prior to the Nagaraj judgment, the senior positions in the bureaucracy had been insulated against reservation in promotion. Since 1967, when a five-judge bench headed by Justice Wanchoo decided against reservation in promotions within Class I positions (Group A), no government or court has broken this elitist barrier. The hitherto skewed, discriminatory implementation of the policy is reflected in the statistic that although SC/STs constitute about 23 per cent of all central government employees, they occupy more than 45 per cent of the safai karmachari posts but less than 10 per cent posts in the higher tiers of government. The latest Court order sanctifies this unequal representation of Dalits in the higher levels of government.
The present government’s commitment to reservation cannot be doubted, particularly in view of the PM’s recent assertion that “reservation is here to stay… the dreams of Dr Babasaheb are still incomplete… and reservation is an important tool to achieve this”. However, the recent SC judgment puts paid to any hopes of Dalits ever getting their legitimate share of posts in the upper echelons of government.
Source : The Indian Express
Friday, May 25, 2018
Friday, April 13, 2018
Sunday, March 11, 2018
India's Forbidden Love: An Honour Killing on Trial
The survivor of a brutal honour killing testifies against her parents in the murder trial of her lower-caste husband.
In March 2016, Kausalya and her husband Shankar were brutally attacked on a crowded street in southern India.
Shankar, who came from a lower Dalit caste, died of his injuries. Kausalya survived and accused her parents of orchestrating an honour killing.
Witness follows Kausalya as she fights for justice through the courts, testifying against her parents in a trial where they face the death penalty.
Kausalya's now-estranged grandparents and brother, Gautham, also await the verdict, desperately hoping Kausalya's mother and father will be released.
The unique access to both sides shows a family torn apart by a caste hierarchy that remains deeply-rooted in India's social fabric.
FILMMAKER'S VIEW
By Sadhana Subramaniam
Modern India has changed radically from the country I grew up in during the 1980s and 90s. Having now spent half of my life in the UK, I remain fascinated by the seeming conflict between tradition and modernity in India today, and have always wanted to make a film that explores this.
Two years ago, I came across the CCTV footage of the brutal attack on Shankar and Kausalya that sent shockwaves across India. My gut instinct was that, if handled sensitively and responsibly, this honour killing had the power to reveal something really important about both the deep-rooted caste system in India and the aspirations of a new generation.
To do this properly, I strongly believed that I needed to get access to both Kausalya, Shankar's widow, and also her family, who are accused of orchestrating the murder and from which she is now estranged.
In these situations, it's almost impossible to get the victim's side of the story as they either don't survive or are forced to go back to their families. Equally, parents or relatives accused of orchestrating such attacks generally do not want to speak to filmmakers.
It took me eight months to ensure that both sides were comfortable and on board with the idea of me making a film about their lives. Filmed over 12 months, the film follows both sides of the family in the lead-up to the court trial for Shankar's murder, at which Kausalya's parents were facing the death penalty
As time went on and I began to understand the perspectives of those involved, I realised that even as India hurtles towards modernity, many traditional and entrenched attitudes, such as those that underpin caste, maintain a tight grip on sections of society in this enormous and varied country. This seems to be particularly the case for women.
All too often, the intense stigma of dishonour surrounding intercaste and interfaith marriage means that most cases go unreported and the victims remain unknown. Yet, in Kausalya, I found a brave young woman, campaigning for justice - not prepared to let her husband's murder go unnoticed or accept the role and restrictions that traditional values place upon her.
One thing that surprised me was the discovery that, in some ways, Kausalya's family were also victims of the caste system. This is not to condone the savage violence of honour killings in any way, but to recognise the shame heaped upon families by their community and relatives when their child decides to marry out of caste.
Without understanding and addressing these pressures on individual families, little progress will be made in eradicating such behaviour. I came to the conclusion that to treat caste-motivated violence only as a law and order issue, as opposed to a sociocultural issue, will not help India in the long run.
My hope is that this film will help to raise awareness of the issues surrounding honour killing and caste discrimination. I believe that only by showing the devastating human impact of such hate crimes can the issue be properly debated, understood and, ultimately, resolved.
https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2018/03/india-forbidden-love-honour-killing-trial-180306074425327.html
Source : Aljazeera.com
Tuesday, January 30, 2018
In a first, plea in apex court seeks SC/ST creamy layer's exclusion from quota
Deserving and impoverished biting the dust’
The Supreme Court will hear a petition to exclude the affluent members, or the creamy layer, of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes from the benefits of reservation.
A Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, will hear the petition, which argues that the rich among the SCs/STs are “snatching away” the benefits, while the deserving and impoverished continue to “bite the dust.” It is this lack of percolation of benefits to the poor and really backward among these communities that has led to social unrest, Naxalite movement and perennial poverty, it says.
This is the first time a petition has been filed urging the Supreme Court to introduce the creamy layer concept for the SCs/STs. In 1992, a nine-judge Bench of the court in the Indra Sawhney case, or the Mandal case as it was popularly known, upheld the caste-based reservation for the OBCs as valid. The court also said the creamy layer of the OBCs (those earning a specified income) should not get the benefits of reservation. The ruling, however, confined the exclusion of the creamy layer to the OBCs and not the SCs/STs. Now, the petition filed by Samta Andolan Samiti, which represents the poor strata of the SCs/STs in Rajasthan, wants the creamy layer of the SCs/STs excluded from the benefits.
Scrutiny of assets
The petition, filed by advocate Shobhit Tiwari, refers to the Constitution Bench’s 2006 judgment in the M. Nagaraj case that the “means test [a scrutiny of the value of assets of an individual claiming reservation] should be taken into consideration to exclude the creamy layer from the group earmarked for reservation.”
The uplifted/affluent and advanced sections of the SCs/STs snatch away the maximum benefit and the 95% members of these communities are at a disadvantage. The affluent among the SCs/STs are siphoning off the reservation benefits given to them by the State government as well as the Central government... The benefits of the reservation policy are not percolating down to the people who are in actual need of them,” the petition argues. This lack of percolation of quota benefits to the poorest of the poor ensures that the “weak always remains the weak and the fortunate layers consume the whole cake.”
The petition argues that no class or caste remained homogeneously backward across time. Only the backward portion of castes included in the list of SCs/STs alone are constitutionally entitled to the benefits of reservation.
Source.The Hindu dt 29.1.2018
Blogger views:
The former President Shri.K.R.Narayanan had once said that only 4%of people are affluent among SC/ST population, hence the question of excluding creamy layer doesn't arise in reservation,more over the posts reserved for SC/ST still not filled up fully and kept vacant in many department for best reasons known to them but the same people want to divide the SC/ST people in the name of creamy layer. The must know that reservation for SC/ST are not only based on the economic conditions but also social conditions of SC/ST people in the Hindu society. Those bother about the poor let them first implement the creamy layer scheme to unreserved posts in jop and education institutions.
Friday, January 26, 2018
Anthology chronicles deceits and pleasures of dalit existence
MT.Saju@timesgroup.com
Writers need a great senseof observation when itcomes todetailing innocent pleasures and everyday deceits that take place around them. Tamil writer Bama’s recently-launched collection of 15 short stories chronicle the lives of people with whom she has lived and who are forcedtolive in situations where they are denied freedom and social justice. “My house is testimony to my independence and control over my own destiny,” Bama, a prominent author in contemporary dalitwritings, writes in a short story titled ‘Loss’. “It has been my sanctuary, benignly permitting me tolaugh or weep to my heart’s content within its sheltering walls.”
Titled ‘Just One Word’, the stories are translated from Tamil into English by Malini Seshadri, who has also translated Bama’snovel ‘Vanmam’ into English in 2008. “In these stories you will meet children, women and men whose inner complexities, emotional struggles, and heightened consciousness I have tried to depict, situating them in the social context of their lives,” says Bama. “The characters of these stories bring out emphatically the manifold contradictions based on caste, religion, gender, culture and class that shape their social context.”
Caste domination and social discrimination always find focus in Bama’s works. After her first novel, ‘Karukku’ (1992), she has published ‘Sangati’ (1994), ‘Kusumbukkaran’ (1996), ‘Vanmam’ (2002), ‘Oru Thathavum Erumayum’ (2004), ‘Kondattam’ (2009) and ‘Manusi’ (2011). The plight of the marginalised in society attains space in these stories. “I have written more than 50 short stories and 15 of them have been selected for this collection. Each story is based on the day-to-day experiences of a dalit. We wantedto add a note abouttheexperiences that led to each story, but dropped it due to lack of space,” she said. The stories in ‘Just One Word’ have been published in different periods. Seven storieswere publishedin 2003 under the title ‘Oru Thathavum Erumayum’ (The Old Man and the Buffalo), five storiesfrom the collection ‘Kondattam’ (Celebration) published in 2009, and the rest were written between 2003 and 2015.
“We always thought education would abolish caste hierarchies in society. But that didn’t happen. The educated still look at us only through the eyes of caste. We are struggling to prove our existence. And that’s why wechose‘JustOne Word’ for the title of the book,” said Bama.
Writer and theatre activist A Mangai finds Bama’s ‘women protagonists quarrel, laugh, fight with their husbands and lead their lives alone.’ “They are survivors. They are not ‘heroic’. What they have is a love for life. Bama doesn’t romanticise her female characters. They are equally products of the society they live in, and reek of all the prejudices that operate within it,” Mangai writes in the introduction to the book. Published by Oxford University Press, the book is edited by Mini Krishnan.
Source: The Times of India
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)