Ambedkar’s fears have come true as the Dalits, Adivasi and minorities' political interests are not being addressed in Parliament, writes KC Tyagi and Pankaj Chaurasia
Every year on April 14, Dr B.R. Ambedkar Jayanti is commemorated to honour the birth of B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Indian Constitution. His 132nd birthday was celebrated this year. He was a well-known statesman who fought for the rights of the Dalits and other socially backward classes.
Ambedkar aimed to thrive in a just society where each citizen was granted the same equal significance and dignity. He believed that liberty, equality, and fraternity must be upheld to sustain egalitarian justice within a community, but the caste system in India is the biggest barrier to the idea of justice taking root in the Indian social structure which is why Dr Ambedkar prioritised caste for the justice of the oppressed group because the fundamental premise of basic social justice undermines social, economic, and political justice, as well as democracy.
In 1932, the subject of whether the 'untouchables' should be granted separate electorates because they were not an intrinsic part of Hindu social structures but rather were a community with a distinct sociopolitical identity, sparked a heated dispute between Gandhi and Ambedkar. In modern India, many people have reframed the disagreements between Gandhi and Ambedkar into starkly contrasting narratives, with supporters of each man strongly criticising the other's views on caste and anti-caste campaigns. In this context, it is necessary to reexamine the Poona Pact, the agreement reached between Gandhi and Ambedkar in 1932, from a modern standpoint.
In 1932, Mahatma Gandhi and Dr B.R. Ambedkar signed the Poona Pact to cease the Dalit campaign for separate electorates in exchange for legislative bodies. This agreement brought together two of the most prominent leaders of the Indian liberation struggle, who disagreed on Dalit rights. The Puna Accord has always been criticised and debated. The demand for separate electorates for Dalits was raised for the first time in 1917, and it gained traction during the Round Table Conferences in 1930.
In 1932, the British government, which was hesitant to award separate electorates, proposed the Communal Award, which would have granted Dalits distinct electorates. This concept, however, was rejected by Gandhi, who went on a death fast to prevent the introduction of separate electorates. It all came down to a fundamental difference in their points of view. While Gandhi saw caste as a social issue, Ambedkar saw it as a political one.
Following negotiations at Puna, Gandhi and Ambedkar signed the Poona Accord in September 1932. This arrangement reserved Dalit legislative seats rather than having distinct electorates. The Poona Pact, which brought together two of India's most well-known leaders and settled a contentious issue, was a significant turning point in the liberation fight. Detractors claim that the Puna Accord was a compromise because it did not contain separate electorates for Dalit representation. Critics claim that the reservation system has not provided Dalits with sufficient resources and opportunities for success. The Poona Pact dispute for Dalit rights in India is still relevant today.
According to historian Prabodhan Pol, Ambedkar's interpretation of caste hinged on his perception of the Dalit question as a political matter, not only a social one, as Gandhi did. "The Gandhi-Ambedkar dispute centred on how to interpret caste. Ambedkar asserted, for the first time in India's modern history, that caste was a political issue that could not be resolved just by social changes. Ambedkar stressed in his writings and speeches that political democracy was meaningless unless the so-called oppressed classes were equal participants in it.
Ambedkar preferred a rights-based approach, whereas Gandhi preferred a faith-based and spiritual approach. Unlike Ambedkar, Gandhi believed that any exploitative connection could only be repaired if the exploiter changed his mind. As a result, he worked with upper castes to modify their beliefs. "I thus implore you not to deprive Hinduism of one final opportunity to make voluntary atonement for its wicked past." "Give me the opportunity to work among the Hindu castes," he urges Ambedkar. It is unclear why Gandhi took such a strong stance against separate electorates, and this is still debated today.
The legacy of the Poona Accord lingers on to this day for India's 300 million scheduled caste people, today, India accords scheduled castes (SCs) a proportional number of seats in Parliament and assemblies based on their population for instance, in the Lok Sabha, representatives of socially and economically disadvantaged communities are granted 84 of a total of 543 seats. However, Dalits are not particularly concentrated in any one region, which means that they are in the minority in the majority of these seats. This indicates that the majority of voters do not belong to the Scheduled Castes and that their influence is the deciding factor in elections, even though the majority of MPs do for this reason, many Ambedkarite intellectuals keep arguing that the way Dalits are represented has been badly distorted. Because of this, in a society that is heavily influenced by caste, it is impossible for a Dalit member of parliament to truly advocate for members of more oppressed castes because he or she is required to make concessions and appease members of higher castes.
A system like this deprives Dalits of actual leadership, and the community suffers as a result. Leaders are unable to be independent since they must rely on their party's vote bank to be elected. Many Dalit politicians and thinkers are aware of this shackle, and many Dalit politicians and thinkers think that the current system is not good for choosing real leaders. They think that we must make a lot of compromises and that the current arrangement is very different from what the Poona Pact originally proposed. Gandhiji made it possible for this to happen, but Ambedkar's plan was very different.
In 1932, Ambedkar joined the Poona Agreements, knowing its fatal defect and its outcome. So, in 1949, after independence and when drafting the Constitution, he proposed a Dalit electorate and settlement.
The way things are now prove that Babasaheb was right to be worried. In the 60 years since India became independent, it has become clear that the Dalits, Adivasis, and other minorities' political interests are not represented in the Parliament with the way elections work now. Even though some untouchable castes have improved in the 75 years since the Poona Agreement, many castes have lagged. Nonetheless, some castes in this class have maintained their progress today in all states. While certain castes have started to get involved with politics and democracy, many remain outside of the system. As a consequence, there have been more occurrences of violence against Dalits, and the situation has gotten worse. There hasn't been much of a change in the way the community is represented in politics, and because of this, caste-based Dalit parties have been soundly trounced by the BJP.
The Dalits, tribals, labourers, farmers, and members of the most backward castes have been the most negatively impacted by the authoritarian politics of the BJP that have resulted from this. Now, if we examine the state and trajectory of Dalit politics, it appears to be on the verge of collapse. The majority of Dalit leaders have joined the ruling party or have formed alliances with it. In hope of achieving social, economic, political and cultural justice and equitable representation for all oppressed castes, particularly Dalits, Tribals, and Most Backward castes also, we need to have a national discussion about a proportional system of representation for justice for all.
(KC Tyagi is a former MP and JDU leader and Pankaj Chaurasia is a research fellow at Jamia Millia Islamia University)
(The views expressed are personal)
