The
Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Bill, 2023
is one of the four bills relating to the UT that were introduced in Lok Sabha
on 26 July. Gujjar and Bakarwal are akin communities that make up around 10
percent of the J&K population and the largest ST community in the UT.
Why
in the news?
A
bill introduced in Lok Sabha has become an anathema to the Gujjar and Bakarwal
ST communities fearing a dilution of their tribal rights and their empowerment
and therefore was castigated by the former community. Gujjars & Bakarwals
have disputed the Pahari claim of being tribal alleging that the latter has no
similarities with the tribals and comprise diverse caste group, including upper
caste Hindus and Muslims.
Background
of demand for Pahari ST reservation
This
is not the first attempt to be made out but a precursor to the efforts of the previous
govt. for the electoral gains but continuously
Failed
on account of lack of harmonious construction between the Centre and the State.
In 1989 the J&K govt. led by Farooq Abdullah recommended that Paharis
should be included in the list of STs along with Gujjars, Bakarwals, Gaddis,
and Sippis. The recommendation was refuted by the registrar general of India on
the ground that there was no Caste/tribe of that name in its record.
Later,
govt. made an advisory board for the development of Pahari-speaking people that
defined Pahari as all people living in Rajouri and Poonch except those who were
STs.
In
2012 -13 J&K govt. Commissioned a study by Prof. Amin Peerzada of Kashmir
University, who in his report supported the Pahari reservation demand. Later on,
the PDP-BJP led by the Mufti sent the report to the Centre, the report was
refuted once again on the ground that Pahari was not an ethnic group. Earlier
in 2014 Omar Abdullah led govt. had brought a bill proposing a 5 percent quota
for Paharis but N.N. Vohra refused to give his assent to the bill. Finally, Pahari’s
got reservations in jobs and educational institutions in 2019.
Gross
violations of recommendations of Lokur committee
As
per Census-1931, Schedule tribes are termed as "backward tribes” living in
the "Excluded" and "Partially Excluded" areas. The
Government of India Act of 1935 called for the first time for representatives
of "backward tribes" in provincial assemblies.
The
Constitution does not define the criteria for recognition of Scheduled Tribes
and hence the definition contained in the 1931 Census was used in the initial
years after independence.
However,
Article 366(25) of the Constitution only provides a process to define Scheduled
Tribes: “Scheduled Tribes means such tribes or tribal communities or parts of
or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article
342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this Constitution. Hence, the Constitution
doesn’t define the criteria for recognition of scheduled tribes and to fulfill those
lacunae ‘The Lokur Committee’ (1965) was set up to look into criteria for
defining Schedule Tribes. The Committee recommended 5 criteria for
identification, namely, primitive traits, distinct to culture, geographical
isolation, shyness of contact with the community at large, and backwardness.
The recommendations of this committee were ignored while introducing this
skewed reservation bill. The bill is introduced just to consolidate the vote
bank of Paharis.
How
skewed reservation is a tool for electoral gains and to ostracize Kashmir?
At
the heart of the bill lies the BJP’s ambitious plan of reaching out to Paharis
in Jammu’s Pir Panchal region, the only region in J&K where caste fault
lines exist due to the Gujjar-Pahari divide. Paharis constitute Muslims, Hindus,
and Sikhs living in hilly areas of Jammu and Kashmir. Declaring Paharis as a
Schedule Tribe would make them eligible to contest polls on the seats reserved
for already notified STs by the delimitation commission. The reason for BJP’s
outreach to the Pahari-speaking population in Pir Panchal lies in the fact that
they are in a majority in seven out of eight segments of the Pir Panchal
region.
As
part of its plan, the BJP doesn’t want to annoy Gujjar-Bakerwals in the region,
who were notified as an ST in 1991 and have a substantial population in
J&K. The proposed changes in the reservation laws and rules would benefit
the Jammu region more than Kashmir. More than 60% of the population of Paharis
and all members of the Paddaris, Gadda Brahman, and Koli communities live in
the Jammu region. Among the 15 new social groups being added to J&K’s
social caste list (OBC) 12 are from Jammu. As per J&K’s reservation rules,
8% of jobs and admissions in professional colleges are reserved for SCs. The
Jammu region is the lone beneficiary of the SC reservation as the Muslim-majority
Kashmir
region
doesn’t have an SC population. The Jammu region has been the main beneficiary
of reservation laws even before the imposition of Central rule in J&K in
2018. According to the 2011 census, Jammu has 99.27% of J&K’s SC population
(9,17,724 people), while Kashmir has the other 0.73% (6,761 people). Even this
0.73% SC population is non-native.
Reservation
politics used to camouflage the big question of unemployment
Whatsoever
ruling dispensation is doing has no proximity to the fundamental principles of
reservation. The move of the govt to provide reservation benefits to a large
community is in fact a nefarious attempt to dilute the concept of reservation.
Reservation nowadays becomes indispensable to consolidating the vote bank and
camouflaging the question of unemployment. Let us suppose you are standing at
a bus station after many crowded buses have passed, you cling on to a bus or
set foot in a bus after thrusting yourself in, usually, your anger is directed
against your fellow passengers and those who are already sitting, even their behavior
is one of that of extreme indifference and disregard. Our anger should be aimed
at the ineffectiveness of the transportation system and shortage of buses and
you should endeavor to take along your co-passengers in the struggle but
usually, this never gets translated in practice. Often, the same happens in the
case of socio-political order and the same is happening in the question of
reservation in jobs and in education. The struggle should be for such a system
where there is equal and free education to all and equal opportunity for
employment to all. The analysis of political economy clearly points out that if
production is not centered around the profit of a few but rather on social
utility then only equal opportunity and redistribution of resources is
possible.
By: Dheeraj Bharat
Comments
Post a Comment