Social Justice

The two main aims to provide reservation as per the Constitution of India are Advancement of Scheduled Castes (SC) and the Scheduled Tribes (ST) or any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens (Eg: OBC) or economically weaker sections (EWS). To an extent, reservation as a policy is pursued by the State to correct the historical injustice done to certain castes by the so-called “upper castes”.

Reservations Have Failed Their Intended Objectives

1. Eradication, not perpetuation of caste was the objective of the reservation policy but caste Based Reservation only perpetuated the notion of caste in society.
2. Reservation was introduced to ensure that the historically underprivileged communities were given equal access to resources but irrespective of the economic progress they continue to remain socially disadvantaged.
3. It has become a tool to meet narrow political ends through invoking class loyalties and primordial identities.
4. The dominant and elite class within the backward castes has appropriated the benefits of reservation and the most marginalised within the backward castes have remained marginalised.
5. Reservation has become the mechanism of exclusion rather than inclusion as many upper caste poors are also facing discrimination and injustice which breeds frustration in the society.
6. The benefits of the reservation were successively enjoyed only by a few communities (or families), excluding the truly deserving ones. Even 70 years after independence, the demand for reservation has only increased.

Need For Sub Categorisation

Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes are made up of several castes which are not homogenous. It is argued that some of the castes among the category remain grossly under-represented despite reservation in comparison to other Scheduled Castes. This inequality within the Scheduled Castes is underlined in several reports, and special quotas have been framed to address it.

1. As India is a welfare state, its obligation is to undertake the emancipation of the deprived section of the community and eradicate inequalities.
2. When the reservation creates inequalities within the reserved castes itself, it is required to be taken care of by the State making sub-classification and adopting a distributive justice method so that State resources do not concentrate in few hands and equal justice to all is provided.
3. Justice involves redistribution and reallocation of resources and opportunities and equitable access to all public and social goods to fulfil the very purpose of the constitutional mandate of equal justice to all.
4. If sub-classification is denied, it would defeat the right to equality by treating unequal as equal. There are unequals within the list of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and socially and educationally backward classes.
5. Various reports indicate that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes do not constitute a homogenous group. The Supreme Court has also stated that States can sub-classify SC and ST in the Central List to provide preferential treatment to the “weakest out of the weak”.

Arguments Against Sub-classification

1. The argument is that the test or requirement of social and educational backwardness cannot be applied to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
2. The special treatment is given to the SCs due to untouchability with which they have suffered since ages.
3. In the N M Thomas V/S State Of Kerala case in 1976, the Supreme Court itself has admitted that Scheduled Castes are not castes but they are a class and hence should be treated as a class.
4. Sub categorisation will be used to appease one vote-bank or the other among the SC/ST and thus a cause of social justice would end being politicised.

The Supreme Court of India in the landmark Mandal case had held that there was no constitutional bar on a state classifying SEBCs as backward and more backward. The constitutional goal of social transformation cannot be achieved without taking into account changing social realities.

Social Security Of Senior Citizens In Nascent Stage

A recent survey by Agewell Research and Advocacy Centre for the United Nations showed that around 51% of respondents were not satisfied with the overall status of social security schemes for the elderly in India. Around 53% of the elderly find it difficult in utilizing the social security schemes and 79% found these are not sufficient to meet their basic needs, which shows the amateur approach of addressing the old age population.

1. Insufficient Support: The allocation of IGNOAPS of Rs.200/500/month is highly underrated considering the inflation across period and living conditions.
2. The Ministry of Social Justice which is the nodal ministry for senior citizen welfare is one among the ministries whose funds are most underutilised. Despite very less budgetary allocations compared to other ministries, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment recently found the ministry spending only 66.58 per cent of the funds allocated.
3. Urban Bias in schemes: Most old age schemes are oriented to urban areas, as the old age homes are spread across urban areas. This is despite more than 65% population living in rural areas.
4. Poor palliative set up in hospitals: The ideals mentioned in schemes like National Programme for the Health Care of Elderly (NPHCE) are poorly implemented in the grassroots level. Poor infrastructure facilities in rural hospitals offer no respite to old age.
5. Not addressing the “ Feminisation” of old age: Most of the schemes are gender-neutral and this marginalises the increasing female old age population.
6. Bureaucratisation of schemes: Despite initiating reforms like Aadhaar enabled Bank accounts, DBT through JAM trinity, there are many cases of exclusion of old age due to complex procedures. For example, an instance of a woman in Odisha pulling her paralyzed mother in a cot to the bank to verify her account.
7. Generic medical facilities: Not addressing the rising Non Communicable diseases among old age population.
8. Rising Mental issues and social isolation are addressed in policy spheres. Most of the policy documents are silent on the aspect of utilising the rich experience of the old age population.
9. Randomisation of selections of scheme beneficiary: Most of the schemes like RVY are appropriated by the well to do category .
10. Lack of awareness of schemes: Most of the rural citizens are only aware of the IGNOAPS and not of any other rights like MWPSC Act and other benefits.
11. Schemes not tailored for suiting the illiterate and non-technocratic masses.
12. By the end of the 2050s, India’s beneficial demographic dividend will be closing and the rising old age population will be a reality. This category of citizens needs a holistic policy with visionary guidelines and sufficient funding to make our governance structure ready for it. States like Kerala, Tamilnadu which have good rural and primary health facilities are initiating coordinated Geriatric care which is a welcome initiative

There needs to be a re-modelling of existing schemes and laws. Old age welfare by social security should not be accorded a peripheral position in the governance sphere and a Centre-state continuous discussion forum is needed. Recent amendments to Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens (Amendment) Bill, 2019 is a welcome initiative.