[But Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist who is seeking another term in elections expected in May, has trumped them all: He has enacted an amendment to the country’s constitution that amounts to a sea change in India’s system of affirmative action.]
By Joanna Slater
 |
|
Indian
Prime Minister Narendra Modi waves to the crowd as he arrives in
Medininagar
on Jan. 5. (Rajesh Kumar/AFP/Getty Images)
|
NEW
DELHI — Election season has
arrived in the world’s largest democracy, and politicians across India are
rolling out measures to woo voters — debt relief for farmers, tax breaks for
small businesses, even subsidized cars.
But Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a Hindu
nationalist who is seeking another term in elections expected in May, has
trumped them all: He has enacted an amendment to the country’s constitution
that amounts to a sea change in India’s system of affirmative action.
To Modi’s supporters, the move is a
masterstroke, shoring up his traditional voters and underlining his commitment
to uplifting India’s poor. For his detractors, it is a political gimmick that
highlights the government’s inability to create jobs and may not withstand a
legal challenge.
The constitutional amendment is a dramatic
step that suggests Modi, elected in 2014 with a commanding majority, is not as
confident as he once was about his reelection prospects. His Bharatiya Janata
Party (BJP) suffered electoral defeats in three states in December, a
significant setback.
According to reports, the Modi government is
mulling further voter-pleasing moves in the coming weeks, including extensive
relief for farmers and steps to exempt some Indians from paying income taxes.
But the constitutional amendment came as a
surprise. For decades, India has had a far-reaching system of affirmative
action. Quotas reserve nearly 50 percent of government jobs and spots in public
universities for members of communities subjected to centuries of
discrimination. They include indigenous tribes, Dalits — formerly known as “untouchables”
— and a variety of lower-caste groups. Together, they make up the majority of
India’s population.
Modi introduced an amendment that would
reserve a further 10 percent of central government jobs and university spots
for members of “economically weaker” sections of society. Because lower-caste
groups are covered by existing quotas, the proposal will largely benefit
upper-caste communities that often support the BJP. The proposal raced through
India’s two houses of parliament — with the support of opposition parties — and
became law on Jan. 12.
If affirmative action is an emotive issue in
the United States, it is doubly so in India. The system of quotas, or “reservations”
as they are known here, is part of the constitutional fabric and seeks to
address a deep and continuing problem with prejudice and social exclusion. But
now some say that the reservations have grown too large or that they ultimately
stigmatize their recipients.
The
BJP is simply responding to long-standing demands for quotas “on the basis of
economic deprivation,” said G.V.L. Narasimha Rao, a party spokesman, denying
that the decision was driven by the impending elections. “Critics and skeptics can
say anything,” but the move is part of the prime minister’s commitment to a
“pro-poor, pro-people government,” he said.
To be
eligible for the new reservations, a person’s family must earn less than
800,000 rupees ($11,200) a year. Critics point out that in India, such a limit
effectively includes most of the population. By some measures, all but the top
10 percent of households by income would qualify.
Opposition parties supported the new quotas
even while questioning their timing and intent. If the BJP was “really keen on
mandating welfare measures to those who deserve it, it would have done it a lot
sooner,” said Priyanka Chaturvedi, a spokeswoman for the opposition Congress
party. Voters can “see through such measures,” she said.
Milan
Vaishnav, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and
author of a recent book on Indian politics, called the step “an 11th-hour Hail
Mary pass” by the BJP. The party came to power promising rapid economic growth
and job creation, he noted. “It’s a pretty big admission that this government
failed to live up to what it promised.”
The quotas for the “economically weak” are
aimed at shoring up support among the BJP’s core voters, added Mahesh
Rangarajan, a political commentator and historian at Ashoka University. Such
urban, educated voters have not had access to India’s system of positive
discrimination in the past, he noted.
The new reservations are “a good step,” said
Himanshu Tiwari, 22, a master’s student from the city of Ayodhya who voted for
the BJP in the last election. Reservations based on caste affiliation have been
in place for nearly 70 years, he said. “Now economic criteria should be the
benchmark for everyone.”
Modi’s new reservations will be challenged in
court, where they face an uncertain future. A landmark decision by India’s top
court in 1992 limited quotas to 50 percent of government posts. The same
judgment said that economic status could not be the sole basis of quotas.
Some
experts say the latest quotas are unconstitutional. The use of economic
criteria to underpin reservations is a “spectacular” act of “cynical
legislation,” wrote Partha Chatterjee, a political theorist who teaches at
Columbia University. Meanwhile, he wrote, opposition parties “fully aware of
the mischief that was being done nonetheless acquiesced . . .
for fear of being dubbed anti-poor in an election season.”
Niha Masih contributed to this report.
Read more
