Just two days before Biden touched down on Indian soil for the G20 summit, Indian newspapers and TV channels ran with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat’s newfound commitment to inclusivity and empathy for marginalised communities. The timing of his emotionally charged statement could not have been missed. He said that reservation should continue until there’s discrimination in society — backpedalling on the views he made eight years ago when he called for a review of the system.
A nagging question must have crossed the G20 delegates’ minds: Is this the same organisation that has faced repeated bans by the Indian government? Hasn’t this organisation remained under the relentless scrutiny of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) since MK Gandhi’s assassination in 1948? The RSS is also reported to have been involved in the 2002 Gujarat riots, the poor handling of which became the reason for the rejection of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visa to the US, as he was the CM in the state back then. As the Modi government continues to evade questions on the threats to communal harmony in India, Biden saw a crucial moment to speak on the issue during his visit to Vietnam on 10 September. The impact of his words rippled far beyond the Vietnamese shores, echoing loudly across the globe. “As I always do, I raised the importance of respecting human rights and the vital role the civil society and a free press have in building a strong and prosperous country with Modi,” he said.
This evokes a fundamental, dramatic, and emotionally charged query: Was Bhagwat’s support for reservation a heartfelt concern for the welfare of Dalits or was it a meticulously orchestrated performance designed to impress G20 leaders? If it was genuine, one might have expected the RSS chief to align his organisation’s constitution with that of India on the same day. The orchestrated spectacle, akin to the Modi government’s concealment of slums to welcome G20 dignitaries, provokes profound questions about the complex nature of this unfolding drama.
Also read: What’s the definition of minority, asks Hindu Right press as it worries about ‘demographic…
RSS isn’t the first
It’s not just the RSS — across the globe, leaders with various motivations have occasionally challenged the sanctity of affirmative action, occasionally subjecting these crucial principles to scrutiny. Marion Anne Le Pen in France, Nigel Farage in the United Kingdom, Donald Trump in the US, Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkey, Gotabaya Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka, and Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe have carved their own trajectories, sometimes by harnessing populism or fanning divisive sentiments. However, a resounding and indisputable lesson resonates through this diverse narrative: In democratic societies, the constitution serves as the lifeblood, and at its core lies the principle of equal opportunity for all.
Tampering with the foundational principles of democracy, particularly affirmative action, has historically yielded devastating results. In Bolivia, the resonance of mass protests echoed throughout the nation as Evo Morales attempted to consolidate his rule in 2020. In Venezuela, the streets transformed into a poignant stage for dissent as Nicolas Maduro sought to rewrite the constitution in 2017. Thousands of miles away, the windswept squares of Egypt swarmed with passionate protesters in 2013 when Mohamed Morsi grasped for unchecked powers. Zimbabwe, under Mugabe’s regime, notorious for repeatedly introducing constitutional adjustments, ultimately succumbed to the pressure of a disillusioned populace and an opportunistic military. Turkey and Poland, once celebrated for their democratic progress, now teeter on a precarious precipice, with Erdoğan’s consolidation of power and Poland’s judicial reforms sparking accusations of democratic erosion.
Sri Lanka’s 2022 constitutional crisis, Kyrgyzstan’s ousting of Kurmanbek Bakiyev in 2010, and Ukraine’s fervent public resistance to Russian forces over the last decade serve as stark reminders that a nation’s foundational document represents more than just ink on paper—it embodies the very essence of its democracy.
These narratives underscore the ominous perils that arise when the lines in the sand, the very principles uniting societies, are redrawn or obliterated. They illuminate the undeniable fact that the sanctity of a constitution, encompassing provisions like affirmative action, isn’t a vague concept but rather the bedrock upon which democratic societies firmly stand. To meddle with it, with no genuine consensus or valid cause, is to invite chaos and jeopardise the core pillars of justice, equality, and representation.
Also read: Lalit Modi, Nirav Modi are not OBCs. BJP calling them so is an insult…
Where top courts stepped in
Where elected representatives faltered in safeguarding affirmative action, the highest courts courageously stepped forward to uphold the sanctity of their constitutions. Supreme courts across the globe have played pivotal roles in preserving reservation and affirmative action in democratic governments.
In a landmark moment in 1978, the case of Regents of the University of California v Bakke marked a victory for affirmative action. Through a passionate challenge brought forth by Bakke, the Supreme Court ruled that racial quotas must not serve as limitations to aspirations. Instead, it declared that our pursuit of diversity and equality should mould our ambitions.
In a heartfelt decision in 2008, Canada’s Supreme Court, in the case of R v Kapp, fervently championed the rights of marginalised communities. In the face of historical injustices, the court upheld a programme that favoured indigenous fisherpeople, reaffirming the nation’s commitment to equity.
In the pivotal decisions of ADPF 186 and ADI 2131 cases, Brazil’s Supreme Court fortified the global foundation of equality. By upholding racial quotas in university admissions, the Court not only addressed Brazil’s deep-rooted historical racial disparities but also set a powerful international precedent. It underscored the indispensable role of affirmative action in the pursuit of equality and justice.
These cases illuminate the fact that the principles of equality and justice, upheld by provisions like affirmative action, are not mere ideals but the guiding stars leading nations toward a fairer and more inclusive future.
Furthermore, it is crucial to emphasise that there is no deadline for affirmative action or reservation in a democracy. A democratic nation, by its very essence, commits to principles of equality, justice, and inclusivity. These principles are not negotiable, nor do they have an expiration date. They are the heartbeat of any true democracy.
The participation of organisations like the RSS, with their dual religious and political nature, in discussions related to constitutional matters raises valid concerns about their commitment to democratic principles. Every individual and organisation has the right to express their views in a democratic society. However, it is imperative to uphold a clear demarcation between religious or ideological entities and the elected institutions entrusted with the responsibility of framing and amending constitutional provisions. This demarcation is not just a procedural formality; it is the bedrock of democratic governance, ensuring that decisions are made in the best interests of all citizens, free from the undue influence of external agendas. It serves as a safeguard to protect the democratic values that underpin a just and equitable society.
The author is the president of Foundation for Human Horizon, a UN-affiliated NGO that’s
leading the Anti-Caste legislation movement in the USA and an Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Research Scholar at Johns Hopkins University. Views are personal.
(Edited by Humra Laeeq)