Context:

As the battle over reservations for Muslims continues to escalate in the run-up to the Lok Sabha elections with the BJP registering its dissent that religion cannot be the basis of providing reservations as it goes against the Constitution and the poor in the country include all Hindus, Christians, and Parsis and all should get the benefits of reservations.

Religion- Based Reservations

Every now and then, the subject of providing reservations based on religion is raised by various individuals, both within the political field and outside. Some state governments have attempted to implement reservations through the back door. But the efforts were thwarted by the courts. Proponents of religion-based reservations argue that sections within minority communities are educationally and socially deprived and thus deserve affirmative action similar to that available to Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC).

Historical Background

• Constitutional and Constituent Assembly Perspectives
  • These demands conflict with both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution as framed by the Constituent Assembly. The Constituent Assembly debated the issue of seat reservation in central and provincial legislatures for minorities extensively and concluded that religion-based reservations were not beneficial for the country.
• Appeal to the Constituent Assembly
  • On May 25-26, 1949, the Constituent Assembly debated the Report of the Advisory Committee on Minorities, Fundamental Rights, etc. The chair of the panel emphasised the minorities to trust the good sense and fairness of the majority and work towards a unified community in India. The argument was that in the long run, in the interest of all to forget the distinctions between majority and minority.
• The Constitution and Its Amendments
  • The adopted Constitution of India, although amended to expand the scope of reservations to benefit OBCs and economically weaker sections from upper castes, refrained from permitting religion-centric reservations. These amendments extended caste-based positive discrimination but did not alter the foundational principle against religion-based quotas.
• Supreme Court Cap on Reservations
  • The Supreme Court, through a 1992 ruling, capped all reservations at 50 percent. Currently, reservations apply to SC, ST, OBC communities, and the economically weaker sections among the upper castes. Introducing religion-based reservations would require sharing the existing quota among more claimants, which could have significant political fallout.
  • This has led to calls for increasing the upper limit of 50 percent through new legislation and including religious minorities as beneficiaries. Some have even proposed placing these new reservation laws in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution to make them immune to judicial intervention.

Arguments For and Against Religion-Based Reservations

• In Favour of Religion-Based Reservations
  • Some representatives argued for religion-based quotas to ensure minority grievances were addressed. They proposed an amendment for reservations based on population for Muslims and other minority communities in central and provincial legislatures. However, this proposal faced objections. Supporters cited examples from other countries to back minority rights but met with resistance. Critics argued that reservations for Muslims would harm Hindu-Muslim relations and perpetuate past animosities, stating that reservations acted as a protection with a crippling effect.
• Opposition to Religion-Based Reservations
  • Some representatives opposed religion-based reservations, believing they fostered separatism and communalism. Others stressed that a secular state couldn't recognize minorities based on religion. The committee initially recommended reservations for minorities but later found them inappropriate for free India. They noted that separate electorates had removed much of the political poison, and reservations for religious communities led to separatism, which was against a secular democratic state.

Socio-Political Implications

• Proponents' Arguments to Promote Social Cohesion
  • Proponents argue that religion-based reservations can integrate marginalised communities by providing educational and employment opportunities, reducing social alienation, and fostering communal harmony. These reservations aim to address historical injustices and socio-economic disadvantages, promoting social cohesion and reducing inter-community disparities.
• Controversies and Complex Legal Challenges
  • The controversy over religious-based reservations includes Andhra Pradesh’s 4% reservation for Muslims being struck down and West Bengal’s proposal for 10% reservation for backward Muslims. While the Constitution prohibits religious discrimination, it allows affirmative action for backward classes, leading to complex legal challenges and differing interpretations.
• Political Reactions and Criticisms
  • Leaders criticise religion-based reservations, asserting that they are undermining the constitutional framework. While some Muslim communities benefit from OBC reservations, many are excluded. Reports like the Sachar Committee identify Muslims as backward. Controversial moves, like Karnataka abolishing a 4% reservation for Muslims, spark legal and social debates.
• Dalit Muslim Inclusion Debate
  • Dalit Muslims seek inclusion under the Scheduled Caste quota, but the government opposes this, citing different religious origins. This issue highlights the tension between religious identity and constitutional mandates for social justice, pending further inquiry.
• Political Mobilization and Identity Politics
  • Religion-based reservations can mobilise political support from specific communities, leading to community-based politics and vote banks. While empowering marginalised groups, it risks entrenching identity politics, affecting broader policy decisions and potentially causing social unrest if perceived as preferential treatment.

Analysis and Suggestions

• Legal Framework to Balance Social Justice
  • The legal framework for religion-based reservations is complex, balancing social justice with constitutional principles. Judicial interpretations attempt this balance, but ambiguity remains about extending reservations to religious minorities, reflecting India’s socio-political landscape.
• Need for Clear Guidelines and Empirical Evidence
  • Clear guidelines on religion-based reservations are needed to align with constitutional principles of equality. Policymakers should rely on empirical data to identify backward communities, with comprehensive studies like the Sachar Committee providing insights for targeted interventions.
• Balanced Framework and Public Awareness
  • Reservations should balance social justice with meritocracy, avoiding compromising merit-based selection. Public awareness of affirmative action policies is crucial for societal support. Political leaders should prioritize long-term community interests and uphold constitutionalism, avoiding exploiting reservations for electoral gains.

Conclusion

While it may be argued that the Constitution can be amended to provide religion-based reservations, such an amendment would go against the grain of the Constitution. The idea of expanding reservations to religious minorities is not in keeping with the principles laid down by the Constituent Assembly and the spirit of the Constitution. Therefore, religion-centric reservations cannot and should not be allowed.

Source: Vivekananda International Foundation