Abuse & Discrimination Blacken India’s Institutes of ‘Higher Learning’
Caste discrimination continues to blot the environs of prestigious institutions of higher learning in India, rendering Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Indian Constitution hollow. That India, seventy plus years after it was born as a republic has failed to address the issue of abuse and discrimination tells a bitter and sorry tale.
Two months ago, it was the turn of the Rabindra Bharati University to join institutions across the country with this black mark. In June 2019, there were reports of an assistant professor of Rabindra Bharati University being subjected to casteist taunts by some Trinamool students' union members after she refused to increase their marks in the post-graduation examination.
As reported in both the Indian Express and The Telegraph, students ‘shamed’a professor of the institute –who happen to belong to the one of the Scheduled Castes (SC)--for her caste, skin color and gender. A special fact-finding committee was set up by vice-chancellor Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhuri after the professor complained about this acute harassment. However, it was 22 days before the committee held its first meeting. Worse, the meeting didn’t result in any concrete action against the accused students which compelled the heads of four departments and the directors of three schools of advanced studies of the university to resign from their posts. Contrary to what actually transpired, State Education Minister Partha Chatterjee tried to explain this away , “We will not tolerate such treatment to teachers by any student. The guilty students will be punished no matter which group they belong to. I have informed chief minister Mamata Banerjee about this incident and she has asked me to keep her informed about the probe.... I have requested the teachers to withdraw their resignations and resume work.”
This recent incident in West Bengal becomes the last in a long line of such sorry ones. Sabrangindia has carried an in-depth analysis of how deep the caste-ist attitudes go in so-called progressive Bengal. [“Calcutta University worshipping the Chandal” was the vicious campaign carried out in 1921, when Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee appointed Mukund Behari Mallick, a Pali teacher, in the University.] This article may be read here:
1. Saraswati Karketta, most recent victim of institutional, caste based intimidation at Rabindra Bharati University, Calcutta
2. How caste is alive and kicking in Bengal
This discrimination is not limited to teachers; even students belonging to the marginalized sections are subjected to harassment and torture by the seniors, the batch mates as well as the professors, so much so that many of them are forced to commit suicide. To give an instance, a 30-year old medical student of the Rohtak Medical College in Haryana committed suicide after the HoD refused to sign his thesis. Omkar Baridabad, a resident of Hubballi, was found hanging in his hostel room on the night of June 13. Omkar’s batchmates claimed that HoD Geeta Gathwala had abused him when he requested her to sign his thesis on the last date of submission. It's said the HoD had not signed his thesis for a long time and at the last moment once again spoke about he being a reserved candidate.
Suicides by Dalit and Adivasi students:
1. Payal Tadvi
Dr. Payal Tadvi (26), practicing at BYL Nair Hospital and pursuing her post-graduation committed suicide on May 22, 2019, in her hostel room in Mumbai. A person belonging to the ST, Tadvi faced continuous harassment by her upper caste (Savarna) colleagues and roommates. Despite repeated complaints to the authorities, no action was taken eventually forcing Tadvi to commit suicide.
2. Rohith Vemula
Suicide of the Dalit scholar Rohith Vemula on January 17, 2016 sparked a controversy across the nation and resuscitated the issue of caste-based discrimination in universities of our nation. Vemula, a Dalit student and a PhD candidate at the University of Hyderabad, was a victim of institutional murder, often inflicted on Dalits and marginalized like him. His heart-wrenching suicide note read, “My birth is my fatal accident. I can never recover from my childhood loneliness.”
3. Muthukrishnan Jeevanantham
Dalit research scholar, Muthukrishnan Jeevanantham (27), was studying at the eminent Jawaharlal Nehru University. He met a similar fate like that of Rohith Vemula and committed suicide in March 2017 in a friend’s room. Just a few days before his death, in his last public post, he wrote, “There is no Equality in M.phil/PhD Admission, there is no equality in viva–voce, there is only denial of equality…”
4. Delta Meghwal
Delta Meghwal (17) from Barmer in Rajasthan, was pursuing a teacher training course in Nokha in Bikaner. During her course, she was forced to clean the hostel premises and regularly faced casteist slurs by the authorities. In March 2016, she was instructed by the hostel warden to clean the PT instructor’s room where she was raped. Her body was found the next day in the water tank of the hostel.
5. Aniket Ambhore
Aniket Ambhore was a Dalit student in IIT Bombay who was discriminated against on the basis of his caste. He committed suicide in 2014. His parents had submitted a 10-page testimony to the Director of IIT Bombay, elaborating the kind of caste discrimination he faced in his life. An enquiry committee was set up; however, its findings were never made public.
6. V Priyanka, E Saranya and T Monisha
V Priyanka, E Saranya and T Monisha, all 19-year old, studying Naturopathy in SVS Yoga Medical College in Kallakurichi, near Villupuram, committed suicide in 2016 to escape the torture they faced at the hands of the college chairperson Vasuki Subramaniam who was also accused of charging an exorbitant fee. In their suicide note, the girls said that the students had filed several complaints against Subramanian, but to no avail. Citing “torture” by the management, the girls hoped that their suicide would finally force authorities to take action against the chairman.
7. Anil Meena
Anil Meena belonged to a tribal family of agriculturists, and had qualified the entrance exam to the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). However, in 2012, within two years of his stay, he committed suicide at the age of 22. Anil Meena along with other students from the SC/ST category were not allowed to write the exams as they fell short on attendance. However, the same rules didn’t apply to the general category students, evidently showcasing a caste bias. Students like Anil Meena were deliberately neglected by the teachers and authorities in AIIMS because they belonged to the reserved category.
8. Bal Mukund Bharti
Bal Mukund Bharti was another victim of caste discrimination at AIIMS, who also chose to take his life than bear the brunt of a society based on caste hierarchy. A final year student of MBBS in AIIMS, Bal Mukund had attempted suicide a day earlier but was saved by his friends. He repeatedly faced casteist prejudices by the faculty members in AIIMS who felt that a Harijan or Adivasi did not deserve to study medicine. He committed suicide on March 30, 2010.
9. Senthil Kumar
Senthil Kumar belonged to a sub caste of Dalits named ‘Panniyandi’, and was a student of Hyderabad Central University. He was one of the first to pursue a doctorate from his community. However, because he was from a reserved category, Senthil faced severe discrimination to the extent that he wasn’t even allotted a supervisor. Depressed with the incessant institutional discrimination, Senthil committed suicide in 2008.
10. Manish Kumar Guddolian
Manish Kumar Guddolian, a Chamar (Dalit), was studying in the Department of Computer Science and Technology of IIT Rourkee. Manish was subjected to constant torture and casteist assaults by his classmates and the hostel warden which even forced him to live out of the campus. Unable to tolerate the agony, Manish committed suicide at the age of 20 in 2011.
11. Jaspreet Singh
Jaspreet Singh was a fourth-year medical student at the Government Medical College, Chandigarh. A Dalit by caste Jaspreet was humiliated by one of the professors who threatened to continually fail him in his papers. “Do whatever you can do, I will make you to do your MBBS all over again,” taunted Prof N.K. Goel, Head of Department, Community Medicine. Due to this harassment, Jaspreet committed suicide in 2008 and named the professor in his suicide note.
These are just a few incidents wherein the students belonging to the marginalized sections of the society chose death over humiliation.
SC/ST representation in higher education:
The University Grants Commission (UGC), a statutory body charged with coordination, determination and maintenance of standards of higher education, have 903-degree awarding universities/institutions under it. However, college to student ratio is poor with only 28 colleges per lakh population. Not to forget, most of these institutes are located in Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities making them inaccessible and unaffordable for the marginalized sections. Further, historical discrimination against the SCs and STs has led to their under-representation in majority of areas. A miniscule proportion of them manage to reach to the higher level of education, however, they continue to face caste discrimination, compelling them to drop out or take their lives, as mentioned in the previous section.
According to the Higher Education, All India & States Profile, 2017-18, of the 3,66,42,358 students in higher education, only 14.41% are from the SC and 35.02% from the Other Backward Class (OBC). The condition of STs is the worst amongst all, with representation of a mere 5.22%. Females belonging to these categories are subjected to a double whammy with a representation of around 47% across each category.
UGC Guidelines on caste discrimination:
Though India has in place, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which was enacted to tackle institutionalised and often violent caste based denial and discrimination (amended in 2015), we have done little to engender a just application of this law. Or to create ‘Discrimination Committees’ within institutions that address the problem. Much like the Sexual Discrimination at the Workplace issue, this is still an issue still evolving within India. Owing to the rising cases of discrimination, UGC had formulated guidelines in 2011 to prevent caste discrimination in higher educational institutions, which were amended in 2016 to include “discrimination on the basis of colour, caste and race” in the anti-ragging regulations. This also followed the findings of Thorat Committee report appointed by the UPA II government.
The 2011 guidelines read:
UGC had again sent a reminder to the universities in 2013 to send action taken reports as mentioned in the 2011 guidelines.
The 2016 amended guidelines are as follows:
Despite repeated guidelines, universities across India have failed to take any action against the increasing caste discrimination on campus. As a result, a month ago UGC warned of coming down heavily on colleges and universities that are not complying with its guidelines on putting in place a mechanism to address caste-based discrimination on campuses. The warning came in the backdrop of Dr. Payal Tadvi suicide case.
“We will first make a list of colleges and universities that are not complying with our guidelines on caste-based discrimination and ask them to immediately do so. We will be sending out a circular to the institutes in a day or two and appropriate action will be taken against the erring institutions,” said Rajnish Jain, secretary, UGC. “There is a need to be more sensitized and institutes affiliated under the UGC need to deal with such (caste-based) cases more sensitively. We would be writing again to the institutes emphasizing on implementation,” UGC chairman DP Singh told Economic Times.
Pretty words, however do not substitute sincere action. The Hyderabad Central University (HCU) that will historically be remembered for taking the life of bright and energetic Dalit scholar Rohith Vemula, was also manipulated by the Modi.1 government into re-installing Appa Rao Podille, the notorious Vice Chancellor, to whom Vemula had addressed two letters (December 18, 2015 and January 17,2016). Brazen against the mounting criticism the Modi 1.0 regime one step further. Appa Rao had been first suspended when Vemula’s death caused a nationwide uproar and protests erupted. Within weeks however, with armed police to protect him, he was brought back even while protesting students and professors were not only beaten up but subject to a spate of malicious proescutions.
Rubbing Salt on Dalit wounds further, the Modi government then appointed Vipin Srivastava as Pro VC, a man who was allegedly held responsible for Dalit Scholar Senthil Kumar Death in 2008.
These moves by the Modi 1.0 government had been also accompanied by slashing of UGC scholarships and fellowships, earlier available to Dalit, OBC and minority students. A gross 20,000 such were slashed each year of the previous government.
According to a recent survey by a group of researchers from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), BITS Pilani and Christ University, many universities have yet to implement the recommendations made by the UGC to address caste-based discrimination. Less than a third (42) of the 132 institutes surveyed had any information that could enable students or faculty to access the Equal Opportunity Cells (EOCs) or SC-ST Cell or lodge a complaint. Only 4 of the 15 institutes (deemed as ‘institutes of excellence’), 4 of the 13 IITs (that were established before 2008), and none of the 6 first generation IIMs had this information, the survey revealed. “Some of these institutes claim to have a cell on their websites but there is no information available as to how one could lodge a complaint or approach the committee. They are supposed to make such information publicly available,” said Sumithra Sankaran, research associate at IISc.
In 2007, a committee was set up by the central government, headed by the then UGC Chairperson Sukhdeo Thoratto investigate allegations of harassment of SC/ST students at AIIMS. The committee found out that there was rampant discrimination against SC/ST students. It found evidence of informal segregation in the AIIMS hostels, with SC/ST students being forced to shift into certain hostels following harassment, abuse and violence by dominant caste students. SC/ST students reported that they faced social isolation in dining rooms, on sports fields and at cultural events. Students also told the Thorat committee about discrimination by teachers, which took the form of “avoidance, contempt, non-cooperation, and discouragement and differential treatment.” 84% of the SC/ST students surveyed said examiners had asked them about their caste directly or indirectly during their evaluations. Despite an extensive report with recommendations to curtail the discrimination, it continues to exist till date with students committing suicides as the last resort.
All in all, UGC has failed to take any penal actions against the erring universities till date. Interestingly, as per section 5 of the UGC Act, 1956 which talks about the composition of the commission, there is no provision for including a person from the SC/ST category in it. The 12-member commission, consisting of the chairman, vice-chairman and 10 other members are to be appointed by the central government and must include people who have knowledge or experience in agriculture, commerce, forestry or industry; who are members of the engineering, legal, medical or any other learned profession. However, if the representation of SC/ST students in higher education is so poor, one can comprehend the negligible possibility of the marginalized sections to reach the highest rung and be a part of the commission.
‘Sabka Sath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas,’? The slogan of the regime rings hollow.
Related Articles:
- Caste-igated: How Indians use casteist slurs to dehumanize each other
- Lessons Unlearned: Nine years after the Thorat Committee report
- They Chose Death over Humiliation
- Appa Rao Must Go, HCU Admin Guilty of Conflict Leading to Rohith’s Death: Scientists
- Rohith Vemula's Colleagues Appeal to President of India to sack "Dalit-hating" HCU vice-chancellor Podile Appa Rao
- To Live & Die as a Dalit: Rohith Vemula
- Rubbing Salt on Wounds: Modi Regime appoints Anti-Dalit Prof as Pro VC, HCU
- Why Appa Rao is more Important to the BJP than Rohith Vemula
- Rohith’s death: We are all to blame
Abuse & Discrimination Blacken India’s Institutes of ‘Higher Learning’
Caste discrimination continues to blot the environs of prestigious institutions of higher learning in India, rendering Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Indian Constitution hollow. That India, seventy plus years after it was born as a republic has failed to address the issue of abuse and discrimination tells a bitter and sorry tale.
Two months ago, it was the turn of the Rabindra Bharati University to join institutions across the country with this black mark. In June 2019, there were reports of an assistant professor of Rabindra Bharati University being subjected to casteist taunts by some Trinamool students' union members after she refused to increase their marks in the post-graduation examination.
As reported in both the Indian Express and The Telegraph, students ‘shamed’a professor of the institute –who happen to belong to the one of the Scheduled Castes (SC)--for her caste, skin color and gender. A special fact-finding committee was set up by vice-chancellor Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhuri after the professor complained about this acute harassment. However, it was 22 days before the committee held its first meeting. Worse, the meeting didn’t result in any concrete action against the accused students which compelled the heads of four departments and the directors of three schools of advanced studies of the university to resign from their posts. Contrary to what actually transpired, State Education Minister Partha Chatterjee tried to explain this away , “We will not tolerate such treatment to teachers by any student. The guilty students will be punished no matter which group they belong to. I have informed chief minister Mamata Banerjee about this incident and she has asked me to keep her informed about the probe.... I have requested the teachers to withdraw their resignations and resume work.”
This recent incident in West Bengal becomes the last in a long line of such sorry ones. Sabrangindia has carried an in-depth analysis of how deep the caste-ist attitudes go in so-called progressive Bengal. [“Calcutta University worshipping the Chandal” was the vicious campaign carried out in 1921, when Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee appointed Mukund Behari Mallick, a Pali teacher, in the University.] This article may be read here:
1. Saraswati Karketta, most recent victim of institutional, caste based intimidation at Rabindra Bharati University, Calcutta
2. How caste is alive and kicking in Bengal
This discrimination is not limited to teachers; even students belonging to the marginalized sections are subjected to harassment and torture by the seniors, the batch mates as well as the professors, so much so that many of them are forced to commit suicide. To give an instance, a 30-year old medical student of the Rohtak Medical College in Haryana committed suicide after the HoD refused to sign his thesis. Omkar Baridabad, a resident of Hubballi, was found hanging in his hostel room on the night of June 13. Omkar’s batchmates claimed that HoD Geeta Gathwala had abused him when he requested her to sign his thesis on the last date of submission. It's said the HoD had not signed his thesis for a long time and at the last moment once again spoke about he being a reserved candidate.
Suicides by Dalit and Adivasi students:
1. Payal Tadvi
Dr. Payal Tadvi (26), practicing at BYL Nair Hospital and pursuing her post-graduation committed suicide on May 22, 2019, in her hostel room in Mumbai. A person belonging to the ST, Tadvi faced continuous harassment by her upper caste (Savarna) colleagues and roommates. Despite repeated complaints to the authorities, no action was taken eventually forcing Tadvi to commit suicide.
2. Rohith Vemula
Suicide of the Dalit scholar Rohith Vemula on January 17, 2016 sparked a controversy across the nation and resuscitated the issue of caste-based discrimination in universities of our nation. Vemula, a Dalit student and a PhD candidate at the University of Hyderabad, was a victim of institutional murder, often inflicted on Dalits and marginalized like him. His heart-wrenching suicide note read, “My birth is my fatal accident. I can never recover from my childhood loneliness.”
3. Muthukrishnan Jeevanantham
Dalit research scholar, Muthukrishnan Jeevanantham (27), was studying at the eminent Jawaharlal Nehru University. He met a similar fate like that of Rohith Vemula and committed suicide in March 2017 in a friend’s room. Just a few days before his death, in his last public post, he wrote, “There is no Equality in M.phil/PhD Admission, there is no equality in viva–voce, there is only denial of equality…”
4. Delta Meghwal
Delta Meghwal (17) from Barmer in Rajasthan, was pursuing a teacher training course in Nokha in Bikaner. During her course, she was forced to clean the hostel premises and regularly faced casteist slurs by the authorities. In March 2016, she was instructed by the hostel warden to clean the PT instructor’s room where she was raped. Her body was found the next day in the water tank of the hostel.
5. Aniket Ambhore
Aniket Ambhore was a Dalit student in IIT Bombay who was discriminated against on the basis of his caste. He committed suicide in 2014. His parents had submitted a 10-page testimony to the Director of IIT Bombay, elaborating the kind of caste discrimination he faced in his life. An enquiry committee was set up; however, its findings were never made public.
6. V Priyanka, E Saranya and T Monisha
V Priyanka, E Saranya and T Monisha, all 19-year old, studying Naturopathy in SVS Yoga Medical College in Kallakurichi, near Villupuram, committed suicide in 2016 to escape the torture they faced at the hands of the college chairperson Vasuki Subramaniam who was also accused of charging an exorbitant fee. In their suicide note, the girls said that the students had filed several complaints against Subramanian, but to no avail. Citing “torture” by the management, the girls hoped that their suicide would finally force authorities to take action against the chairman.
7. Anil Meena
Anil Meena belonged to a tribal family of agriculturists, and had qualified the entrance exam to the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). However, in 2012, within two years of his stay, he committed suicide at the age of 22. Anil Meena along with other students from the SC/ST category were not allowed to write the exams as they fell short on attendance. However, the same rules didn’t apply to the general category students, evidently showcasing a caste bias. Students like Anil Meena were deliberately neglected by the teachers and authorities in AIIMS because they belonged to the reserved category.
8. Bal Mukund Bharti
Bal Mukund Bharti was another victim of caste discrimination at AIIMS, who also chose to take his life than bear the brunt of a society based on caste hierarchy. A final year student of MBBS in AIIMS, Bal Mukund had attempted suicide a day earlier but was saved by his friends. He repeatedly faced casteist prejudices by the faculty members in AIIMS who felt that a Harijan or Adivasi did not deserve to study medicine. He committed suicide on March 30, 2010.
9. Senthil Kumar
Senthil Kumar belonged to a sub caste of Dalits named ‘Panniyandi’, and was a student of Hyderabad Central University. He was one of the first to pursue a doctorate from his community. However, because he was from a reserved category, Senthil faced severe discrimination to the extent that he wasn’t even allotted a supervisor. Depressed with the incessant institutional discrimination, Senthil committed suicide in 2008.
10. Manish Kumar Guddolian
Manish Kumar Guddolian, a Chamar (Dalit), was studying in the Department of Computer Science and Technology of IIT Rourkee. Manish was subjected to constant torture and casteist assaults by his classmates and the hostel warden which even forced him to live out of the campus. Unable to tolerate the agony, Manish committed suicide at the age of 20 in 2011.
11. Jaspreet Singh
Jaspreet Singh was a fourth-year medical student at the Government Medical College, Chandigarh. A Dalit by caste Jaspreet was humiliated by one of the professors who threatened to continually fail him in his papers. “Do whatever you can do, I will make you to do your MBBS all over again,” taunted Prof N.K. Goel, Head of Department, Community Medicine. Due to this harassment, Jaspreet committed suicide in 2008 and named the professor in his suicide note.
These are just a few incidents wherein the students belonging to the marginalized sections of the society chose death over humiliation.
SC/ST representation in higher education:
The University Grants Commission (UGC), a statutory body charged with coordination, determination and maintenance of standards of higher education, have 903-degree awarding universities/institutions under it. However, college to student ratio is poor with only 28 colleges per lakh population. Not to forget, most of these institutes are located in Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities making them inaccessible and unaffordable for the marginalized sections. Further, historical discrimination against the SCs and STs has led to their under-representation in majority of areas. A miniscule proportion of them manage to reach to the higher level of education, however, they continue to face caste discrimination, compelling them to drop out or take their lives, as mentioned in the previous section.
According to the Higher Education, All India & States Profile, 2017-18, of the 3,66,42,358 students in higher education, only 14.41% are from the SC and 35.02% from the Other Backward Class (OBC). The condition of STs is the worst amongst all, with representation of a mere 5.22%. Females belonging to these categories are subjected to a double whammy with a representation of around 47% across each category.
UGC Guidelines on caste discrimination:
Though India has in place, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which was enacted to tackle institutionalised and often violent caste based denial and discrimination (amended in 2015), we have done little to engender a just application of this law. Or to create ‘Discrimination Committees’ within institutions that address the problem. Much like the Sexual Discrimination at the Workplace issue, this is still an issue still evolving within India. Owing to the rising cases of discrimination, UGC had formulated guidelines in 2011 to prevent caste discrimination in higher educational institutions, which were amended in 2016 to include “discrimination on the basis of colour, caste and race” in the anti-ragging regulations. This also followed the findings of Thorat Committee report appointed by the UPA II government.
The 2011 guidelines read:
UGC had again sent a reminder to the universities in 2013 to send action taken reports as mentioned in the 2011 guidelines.
The 2016 amended guidelines are as follows:
Despite repeated guidelines, universities across India have failed to take any action against the increasing caste discrimination on campus. As a result, a month ago UGC warned of coming down heavily on colleges and universities that are not complying with its guidelines on putting in place a mechanism to address caste-based discrimination on campuses. The warning came in the backdrop of Dr. Payal Tadvi suicide case.
“We will first make a list of colleges and universities that are not complying with our guidelines on caste-based discrimination and ask them to immediately do so. We will be sending out a circular to the institutes in a day or two and appropriate action will be taken against the erring institutions,” said Rajnish Jain, secretary, UGC. “There is a need to be more sensitized and institutes affiliated under the UGC need to deal with such (caste-based) cases more sensitively. We would be writing again to the institutes emphasizing on implementation,” UGC chairman DP Singh told Economic Times.
Pretty words, however do not substitute sincere action. The Hyderabad Central University (HCU) that will historically be remembered for taking the life of bright and energetic Dalit scholar Rohith Vemula, was also manipulated by the Modi.1 government into re-installing Appa Rao Podille, the notorious Vice Chancellor, to whom Vemula had addressed two letters (December 18, 2015 and January 17,2016). Brazen against the mounting criticism the Modi 1.0 regime one step further. Appa Rao had been first suspended when Vemula’s death caused a nationwide uproar and protests erupted. Within weeks however, with armed police to protect him, he was brought back even while protesting students and professors were not only beaten up but subject to a spate of malicious proescutions.
Rubbing Salt on Dalit wounds further, the Modi government then appointed Vipin Srivastava as Pro VC, a man who was allegedly held responsible for Dalit Scholar Senthil Kumar Death in 2008.
These moves by the Modi 1.0 government had been also accompanied by slashing of UGC scholarships and fellowships, earlier available to Dalit, OBC and minority students. A gross 20,000 such were slashed each year of the previous government.
According to a recent survey by a group of researchers from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Science (IISc), BITS Pilani and Christ University, many universities have yet to implement the recommendations made by the UGC to address caste-based discrimination. Less than a third (42) of the 132 institutes surveyed had any information that could enable students or faculty to access the Equal Opportunity Cells (EOCs) or SC-ST Cell or lodge a complaint. Only 4 of the 15 institutes (deemed as ‘institutes of excellence’), 4 of the 13 IITs (that were established before 2008), and none of the 6 first generation IIMs had this information, the survey revealed. “Some of these institutes claim to have a cell on their websites but there is no information available as to how one could lodge a complaint or approach the committee. They are supposed to make such information publicly available,” said Sumithra Sankaran, research associate at IISc.
In 2007, a committee was set up by the central government, headed by the then UGC Chairperson Sukhdeo Thoratto investigate allegations of harassment of SC/ST students at AIIMS. The committee found out that there was rampant discrimination against SC/ST students. It found evidence of informal segregation in the AIIMS hostels, with SC/ST students being forced to shift into certain hostels following harassment, abuse and violence by dominant caste students. SC/ST students reported that they faced social isolation in dining rooms, on sports fields and at cultural events. Students also told the Thorat committee about discrimination by teachers, which took the form of “avoidance, contempt, non-cooperation, and discouragement and differential treatment.” 84% of the SC/ST students surveyed said examiners had asked them about their caste directly or indirectly during their evaluations. Despite an extensive report with recommendations to curtail the discrimination, it continues to exist till date with students committing suicides as the last resort.
All in all, UGC has failed to take any penal actions against the erring universities till date. Interestingly, as per section 5 of the UGC Act, 1956 which talks about the composition of the commission, there is no provision for including a person from the SC/ST category in it. The 12-member commission, consisting of the chairman, vice-chairman and 10 other members are to be appointed by the central government and must include people who have knowledge or experience in agriculture, commerce, forestry or industry; who are members of the engineering, legal, medical or any other learned profession. However, if the representation of SC/ST students in higher education is so poor, one can comprehend the negligible possibility of the marginalized sections to reach the highest rung and be a part of the commission.
‘Sabka Sath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas,’? The slogan of the regime rings hollow.
Related Articles:
- Caste-igated: How Indians use casteist slurs to dehumanize each other
- Lessons Unlearned: Nine years after the Thorat Committee report
- They Chose Death over Humiliation
- Appa Rao Must Go, HCU Admin Guilty of Conflict Leading to Rohith’s Death: Scientists
- Rohith Vemula's Colleagues Appeal to President of India to sack "Dalit-hating" HCU vice-chancellor Podile Appa Rao
- To Live & Die as a Dalit: Rohith Vemula
- Rubbing Salt on Wounds: Modi Regime appoints Anti-Dalit Prof as Pro VC, HCU
- Why Appa Rao is more Important to the BJP than Rohith Vemula
- Rohith’s death: We are all to blame
Related Articles
Theme
Campaigns
Videos
Archives
Archives
Podcasts
How the UP Pvt Universities Ordinance clamps down on fundamental freedoms
The Yogi Adityanath-led Uttar Pradesh (UP) Cabinet recently passed a draft ordinance, Uttar Pradesh Private Universities Ordinance, 2019 (refer page 6 to 9), banning the use of private university campuses for “anti-national activities,” thereby bringing 27 private universities in the state under an umbrella law. All existing universities have been given a year to adopt all the provisions under the draft law and those found violating any provisions including the provision on “anti-national activities” will face penal action. The ordinance is all set to be introduced in the monsoon session of the assembly, that is scheduled to commence from July 18.
Image Courtesy: https://realreport.in/
The question that now arises is whether this ordinance is a step towards creating a band of “patriotic youth”, denied of the right or power of free, rational thought and questioning, or submissive youth with no mind space to explore ideas, question or dissent?
Controversial provisions in the ordinance:
The ordinance, cleared on June 18, is aimed at creating a uniform law to govern all private universities of the state and bring it in line with the “best practices of (the) international universities.” Currently, private universities in the state are set up and run under separate acts and through a separate set of sanctions. The ordinance will bring 27 private universities under one law. There are presently 29 private universities in the state. Notably, the ordinance is silent on which two universities will be excluded from the purview and the reasons for this exclusion.
While the draft ordinance has multiple provisions relating to the governance, fee structure, admission to the weaker sections, hiring of professors, etc., what specifically makes this ordinance both controversial and raises concern is its overarching clause on restraining students from indulging in “anti-national activities.”
The draft ordinance mentions the objectives that should be included while creating new universities as well as in the existing universities. The ordinance reads, “rashtriya ekikaran, dharma nirpekshata, samajik samrasta, antarashtriya sadbhav, naitika smekan evam desh bhakti ke samvardhan ke prayas ke udesh bhi sammalit kiye gaye hain.” (national integration, secularism, social harmony, international goodwill, ethics, as well as attempts to inculcate patriotism have also been included.)
It lays down more diktat. That, universities must act to inculcate “desh bhakti” (patriotism) in students. It also says universities must preserve the “secular, democratic fabric and aspire for universal brotherhood and tolerance”. It further reads, “Among the requirements, which are required to be fulfilled by the establishing institution, a provision has been made to give an undertaking that their university will not be involved in any anti-national activities and neither will they allow such activity inside their campus or in their name.”
Apart from a one year time frame for the existing universities to adopt the draft ordinance, the new universities will be required to give an undertaking that their campuses will not be used for any “anti-national” activities. What is worse, and worrying is that, the State Higher Educational Council (SHEC) will act as a monitoring and controlling body that will be empowered to file reports with the government for action if it is unable to get information from any private university within a specified period of time. This amounts to giving a state body the powers of a new role that smacks of vigilantism.
Other provisions in the ordinance:
Apart from the most controversial provision, the draft ordinance proposes that a minimum of 75% of teachers appointed to the private universities would be permanent and not contractual and their quality would be monitored online. Further, it says that a university in a city would need to have a minimum land space of 20 acres while in rural areas they would need to be spread over 50 acres.
It further provides for reservation of 10% seats with 50% fees for the economically weaker sections. A provision for admission by rotation has been made for the courses having less than 1% available seats. The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) evaluation has been made mandatory for all private universities. Further, recognition of a university will be withdrawn if there is gross misuse of funds or fraud. The state government has been empowered to de-notify the university and its assets and liabilities would be passed on to the sponsoring institution.
A provision for setting up a Rs 5-crore endowment fund has been made. The new provisions bar sale, transfer or leasing out of the university land. The university land can be mortgaged to banks and financial institutions and not to any individual. A provision for inspection by the SHEC once a year has been made to ensure the quality of higher education. A common academic calendar would be uniformly implemented in all universities to ensure a similar time frame for admissions, examinations and declaration of results. Admission procedure, opening and last dates and prescribed fees would be displayed in the public domain. The draft ordinance provides for an evaluation committee for setting up a university.
Concerning questions:
While the draft ordinance, if passed by the assembly, will bring uniformity in the way the private universities function in the state, there are certain pressing issues relating to the controversial provisions.
- What is Anti-National?
Firstly, the ordinance hasn’t defined what is “anti-national.” In fact, we do not have a single statute across the nation which defines this term. Nor is it advisable, given that we are a diverse people that make up a nation, to have any such definition. Who will decide whether a particular activity is secular or non-secular? On what grounds will the SHEC take action against the ‘defaulting universities.’ The Indian Constitution and its abiding principles of equality and non discrimination are all that are really required to be observed as first principles in our Institutions.
While the other provisions like ensuring 75% of teachers are permanent and not contractual are easy to monitor, how can one such 'value' and 'subjectivity' driven provision ever be monitored? What is particularly a matter of concern is the 'non-compliance' with any of the provisions under the ordinance, including the controversial provision, will be termed as a violation of the University guidelines, bringing it under the scanner and may also lead to its de-recognition.
UP deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya defended the ordinance, has termed this ordinance as “a very big decision” to maintain the sanctity of the “temple of education.” “It is true that a very big decision has been taken by the Cabinet. Not just in Uttar Pradesh but in any educational institution across the country, anti-national activities will never be accepted,” Mr. Maurya said. “The UP government has taken a decision in this direction that in the temple of education, only education should happen and there should be no liberty given to carry out anti-national practices,” he added.
The term “anti-national” has often been used to further this regime's political agenda, mainly by demonising both universities and students. Further, the term is so vague and open to interpretation, that it has no place in law. Can it then be concluded that actions will be taken as per the whims and fancies of the authorities?
- Why the need for this clause?
While it is understood that a uniform law with same admission dates, procedure, etc will ease the complexity and confusion faced by the students in every academic year, one wonders why has this one particular clause, of ensuring no anti-national activities take place on the campus, has been explicitly inserted in the draft ordinance? What is the rationale behind this, considering that there are enough laws in place to check on terrorism, conspiracy, and waging war against the state which apply to all citizens alike, including university students and professors? Is this even the right parameter to ensure “quality education,” as is the stated objective of this ordinance?
This provision appears to be a mechanism of ‘campus control’ by the authorities in order to monitor and channelize what is being taught in the universities and what things the students are exposed to. It also appears to be an overestimation of the power of pedagogy with no clear understanding of what a university is meant to achieve. Can patriotism be imposed in a classroom or through punitive action? How do we monitor something we don’t even know the meaning or definition of?
Universities are a centre of knowledge where individuals think, learn, unlearn, grow and progress, which in turn helps our nation prosper. It is certainly not a space to create ‘desh bhakts.’ In fact, patriotism can never be imposed, be it a school, a university or any other institution. It is a feeling one imbibes after learning about his/her nation, the learning based on an understanding of the intense struggles of people against power and privilege, diversity of its culture and so much more.
It is only when the young, especially students, are given open spaces to think, grow and critique can we develop an empowered youth which will take this legacy ahead. A top-down approach will just curb the freedom of thinking individuals through political control of higher education space.
Also, it is naive to assume that in this world, where there are a myriad of sources of information and misinformation, especially given the ever active social media, to gain information and ideas and to express opinions, that penalising institutions will succeed in keeping a check on students’ behaviour. What will happen through this measure however is a 'dumbing down' of Institutional rigour.
Besides, universities already have their own rules and regulations in place which include measures or caveats against any support for activity (or participation in any part of any activity) that will put the nation’s security at stake or will endanger it's integrity.
To give an example, the first schedule of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Act, 1966 talks about national integration, social justice, secularism, among other things. It says, “The University shall endeavour to promote the study of the principles for which Jawaharlal Nehru worked during his life-time, national integration, social justice, secularism, democratic way of life, international understanding and scientific approach to the problems of society.” However, no where in the entire act is there a punitive action for violation of the aforementioned clause.
Even the Central Universities Act, 2009 doesn’t mention any such provision. Section 5 mentions the objects of a university established under this act. It reads, “The objects of the University shall be to disseminate and advance knowledge by providing instructional and research facilities in such branches of learning as it may deem fit; to make special provisions for integrated courses in humanities, social sciences, science and technology in its educational programmes; to take appropriate measures for promoting innovations in teaching-learning process and interdisciplinary studies and research; to educate and train manpower for the development of the country; to establish linkages with industries for the promotion of science and technology; and to pay special attention to the improvement of the social and economic conditions and welfare of the people, their intellectual, academic and cultural development.”
Why then a penal provision in this draft ordinance at all?
U.P. Private Universities Association secretary Pankaj Agarwal welcomed the move but said there is nothing new in the proposed law. “We have these points in the constitution of our university and abide by them,” he said, adding that educational institutions are sensitive towards these objectives.
Academicians and politicians together oppose the anti-national clause:
Interestingly, the opposition in UP has termed the controversial ordinance as an attempt to spread “RSS ideology in educational institutions.” UPCC general secretary and spokesman Dwijendra Tripathi said, “The hidden purpose behind the law is to create fear and pressure on educational institutions for foisting RSS ideology. The law, when enacted, will act as the sword of Damocles and the universities will constantly face the threat of derecognition,” adding that this ordinance was “sort of dictatorship.” In a tweet, the Congress said: “Given that free speech has often been labeled as “anti-national” & Indians have suffered for it, the UP govt must define exactly what they mean by “anti-national activities.” It further said that universities have to remain a space where students feel free and secure.
Samajwadi Party chief and former UP CM Akhilesh Yadav also criticised the move saying it will lead to the closure of private varsities in the state. He called it a restriction that will force people to not open private universities in UP. UP minister Sidharth Nath Singh, however, called the draft ordinance a ‘significant decision’ that will improve the standard of education and will control “errant private universities.” But SP leader and Rampur MP Azam Khan thinks that the government should create a system for education first. “The kids are playing on the streets, working in hotels, working in the houses of rich people, how will we stop that?” he said speaking to a news channel.
National secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India, Taslim Rehmani, also opposed the ordinance saying it will insult the sentiments of the country. He said that there are enough rules and legislation against anti-national activities in the country and by bringing such ordinance “the government is creating a narrative that people are anti-national in the country.” Joining him was NCP leader and Rajya Sabha member Majeed Menon who said that there was no need for such a law as the penal code is already there and it takes care of all anti-national activities.
Nandini Sundar, Professor of Sociology at the Delhi School of Economics, has said that such an ordinance would have a “chilling effect on all research, teaching and activity in the university. Even if "anti-national" activities are not defined, the target is quite clear – anything that is critical or questioning the current government will be considered as "anti-national".” Reacting to the draft ordinance, writer and scholar Ganesh Devy said, “Universities are meant for generating thought and meaningful social questions…This kind of "fatwa" is the end of the university system.”
Ghanshyam Shah, sociologist and former Professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, is of the opinion that the ordinance defeats the very purpose of a university. He says, “University is meant for free and open discussion. And nothing is sacrosanct as far as the discussion within the university campus is concerned. Now this "anti-national" – one wonders what is meant by that. Anything I might want can make an "anti-national". I want development for Dalits and I might be accused to be an "anti-national" because you are not talking about India’s upliftment, but dalit upliftment. So any opposition or any criticism of those in power would be then "anti-national".”
The list goes on.
However, the ruling BJP has predictably defended the move, saying it will promote national integration, equality and harmony, while pulling the plug on any terror-related activities in the state.
Increasing crackdown on Universities and student bodies:
This contentious ordinance comes at a time when there has been an increasing crackdown on educational spaces. One cannot forget the infamous case of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in February 2016 when a group of students including Umar Khalid and Kanhaiya Kumar, were charged with sedition after they had allegedly organized the Afzal Guru protest and had raised slogans like ‘azadi azadi’ and ‘Bharat ke tukde tukde’ circulated in doctored videos. Mohammad Afzal Guru was a Kashmiri separatist, who was convicted for his role in the 2001 Indian Parliament attack.
Later in October 2016, Najeeb Ahmed, a first year M.Sc Biotechnology student at JNU went missing after the alleged attacks on him by members of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the ruling party.
Within months of the present Yogi government assuming power in the state, combined with Vice Chancellors (VC) of a majoritarian ilk being brought in to head central universities, including the famed Benaras Hindu University (BHU), violent police action was allowed inside the campus against students protesting the imposition of anti-Constitutional measures. In September 2017, women students were brutally beaten by the police when they were protesting against the unconstitutional gender discrimination being practiced by the university. The students had demanded to speak to the VC Girish Chandra Tripathi, who like most others was appointed for his Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) affiliation, but there was heavy police security deployed outside the VC’s house. The ABVP went on to call the girls legitimate protest a political stunt against Modi and the university, considering that Modi was to visit the institution but later cancelled it allegedly due to the protests. Apart from the RSS-affiliate, ABVP being given a free hand at BHU and other universities, the nexus between brute use of state power on the young is there for all to see.
Just recently, there were reports of Students’ Union soon to be replaced by Students’ Council in Allahabad University, UP on the grounds that the university campus is not conducive to conduct free and fair elections. In response to this, former president of the student union and youth leader Richa Singh had tweeted, “In violation of all democratic norms and fundamental right (Right to Union), the Student Union Elections have been banned in University of Allahabad. Union govt. is hell bent on suppressing all voices of dissent and democratic institutions.”
Few months back, in February 2019, 14 students of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) were charged with sedition following a clash with the ABVP and Hindu Yuva Vahini after the Hindutva organisations started vandalizing the premises. This was immediately preceded by a controversial and communal statement by a reporter from Republic TV. She had said, “I am reporting from the University of terrorists.” Last year, Yogi Adityanath had sparked a controversy after he raised the demand of scrapping the AMU’s minority status.
There have been a string of such incidents which, put together, amount to a brazen attack on the student bodies and professors who have raised their voice against injustice on campus. The criminalisation of dissent has meant that young student leaders across the country face criminal cases simply because they have organised themselves and raised a voice.
Anand Teltumbde of the Goa Institute of Management, who was arrested for his alleged Maoist links in connection with the Elgar Parishad case, had rightly said, “This election, if they form the government, probably everything would be finished. Every institute is being headed by clones of Modi.” Jawaharlal Nehru University Teachers' Association (JNUTA) president Atul Sood has alleged that the government has "destroyed" primary and secondary education and access to education has been "completely taken away.” “The past five years have seen a concerted attack on the public funded university and other institutions of higher learning,” he added.
BJP, Nationalism and the loss of freedom of speech:
BJP’s ‘nationalistic’ and Hindutva ideology is well known across the nation. Infact, the second time PM, Narendra Modi, has repeatedly made appeals based on a supremacist nationalism through his election campaign by reiterating his party’s ‘valiant attack’ on the terrorists through the Uri and Balakot air strikes, despite the Election Commission directing him, and the rest of the political class, not to use the defence forces for electoral gain. In the context of questioning, so vital to a democracy, whoever questioned the intelligence failures that led to the death of 44 soldiers lives was termed ‘anti-national’ or a traitor. The very act of questioning the regime, the government of the day has been sought to be silenced through drumming up such a hysteria.
It is not as if previous governments have not, bon occasion, cracked down on sharply dissenting opinion. Or that protest was not criminalised before. It is the systemic use of such measures post 2014, however, that has taken the stifling of dissent to new heights.
Activists, academicians and even the common public have been charged with sedition, defamation and other penal provisions when they have said or published something which doesn’t portray the government in a good light.
Take the recent case of the arrest of independent journalist Prashant Kanojia by the UP police for defamation after he had allegedly tweeted a critical post against the UP CM Yogi Adityanath. Four days later, on June 12, an eight-member team of the Pune police raided the Ranchi residence of Jesuit Father Stan Swamy who is a great upholder of the rights of Adivasis and an ‘accused’ in the Bhima Koregaon/Elgaar Parishad case in which police have so far booked 23 people, including prominent rights activists and intellectuals.
One cannot forget the ‘institutional murder’ of P.Hd Dalit research scholar Rohith Vemula in January 2016 at the Hyderabad Central University (HCU). Five Dalit scholars including Vemula were suspended and evicted from the hostel after a standoff between the Ambedkar Students Association (ASA) and the ABVP. Reportedly, it was a minor scuffle which escalated into a full blown brawl after the administration succumbed to external political pressure, from BJP politicians and the central government, and repeatedly took partisan steps against ASA activists, including passing an extraordinary order that banned a set of ASA students from “common places in groups.” After protesting for weeks, Vemula committed suicide on January 17, 2016. The VC, Professor Appa Rao was then accused of a negligent and an insensitive behaviour and academicians had demanded that he steps down from his position. However, his appointment was yet another case of nepotism with reports saying that he outsmarted more than 35 candidates and became the VC in September 2015, thanks to the strong backing from the then Union Urban Development Minister, M. Venkaiah Naidu.
In yet another clash between academic freedom and jingoistic nationalism, the Haryana Central University found itself in the middle of a controversy when students from the English department performed Mahasweta Devi's noted play 'Draupadi' on September 21, 2016 which was branded as ‘sedition.’ ABVP, RSS leaders joined by Modi's Minister for State, Rao Inderjit, had reportedly claimed the play is 'anti-national' because it depicts an Adivasi woman confronting the commander of the security forces who have raped her.
The student’s wing of the ruling regime, the ABVP, is all pervasive and has been at the centre of almost every controversy in universities across the nation. Be it plays, magazines, protests, the ABVP has termed it as ‘anti-national’ and seditious. Take the case of Widerstand – the Magazine banned by Pondicherry University (PU) in August, 2016. Reportedly, 4000 copies of the annual magazine Widerstand, published by the Student’s Council (SC) of the PU, were confiscated after the administration of the university buckled under the pressure of the ABVP, which had even burnt multiple copies of the magazine, claiming that it had ‘anti-nationalist’ stance, presumably while chanting “Bharat Mata ki Jai.” Notably, the SC comprised mainly of left-leaning Student Federation of India (SFI) and Ambedkar Student Association (ASA).
There have been multiple such cases in the past five years plus.
Given this trajectory, this move by Uttar Pradesh to promulgate this ordinance is just one more step towards the larger design of the regime.
India’s education sector as a whole has been on shaky ground, let alone the higher education. One cannot forget the Modi government’s yet another controversial decision, that will certainly have a far reaching impact on the higher education, when it announced its plan to replace the apex higher education regulator body, the University Grants Commission (UGC) with Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) by repealing the UGC Act, 1951. A brief glance at the composition of the HECI clearly reveals that the HECI will have extraordinary powers, without any checks and balances, as it’s only a bunch of government appointees who will just be telling the government what it wants done. Individual universities will have no power to demand consultation, inquiry, or even appeal against any of its decisions.
Here again the ordinance comes into question. Under the garb of inculcating patriotism for nation building and improving the quality of education, if it is made into a law, such an enactment will end the era of universities creating critical thinking individuals. It will instead create individuals through a ‘cookie-cutter’ template where young adults, the future of our nation, learn in closed chambers, that too those pre-decided by the authorities.
Howard Zinn, American historian and socialist thinker had rightly said, “If patriotism were defined, not as blind obedience to government, not as submissive worship to flags and anthems, but rather as love of one's country, one's fellow citizens (all over the world), as loyalty to the principles of justice and democracy, then patriotism would require us to disobey our government, when it violated those principles.”
Related Articles:
How the UP Pvt Universities Ordinance clamps down on fundamental freedoms
The Yogi Adityanath-led Uttar Pradesh (UP) Cabinet recently passed a draft ordinance, Uttar Pradesh Private Universities Ordinance, 2019 (refer page 6 to 9), banning the use of private university campuses for “anti-national activities,” thereby bringing 27 private universities in the state under an umbrella law. All existing universities have been given a year to adopt all the provisions under the draft law and those found violating any provisions including the provision on “anti-national activities” will face penal action. The ordinance is all set to be introduced in the monsoon session of the assembly, that is scheduled to commence from July 18.
Image Courtesy: https://realreport.in/
The question that now arises is whether this ordinance is a step towards creating a band of “patriotic youth”, denied of the right or power of free, rational thought and questioning, or submissive youth with no mind space to explore ideas, question or dissent?
Controversial provisions in the ordinance:
The ordinance, cleared on June 18, is aimed at creating a uniform law to govern all private universities of the state and bring it in line with the “best practices of (the) international universities.” Currently, private universities in the state are set up and run under separate acts and through a separate set of sanctions. The ordinance will bring 27 private universities under one law. There are presently 29 private universities in the state. Notably, the ordinance is silent on which two universities will be excluded from the purview and the reasons for this exclusion.
While the draft ordinance has multiple provisions relating to the governance, fee structure, admission to the weaker sections, hiring of professors, etc., what specifically makes this ordinance both controversial and raises concern is its overarching clause on restraining students from indulging in “anti-national activities.”
The draft ordinance mentions the objectives that should be included while creating new universities as well as in the existing universities. The ordinance reads, “rashtriya ekikaran, dharma nirpekshata, samajik samrasta, antarashtriya sadbhav, naitika smekan evam desh bhakti ke samvardhan ke prayas ke udesh bhi sammalit kiye gaye hain.” (national integration, secularism, social harmony, international goodwill, ethics, as well as attempts to inculcate patriotism have also been included.)
It lays down more diktat. That, universities must act to inculcate “desh bhakti” (patriotism) in students. It also says universities must preserve the “secular, democratic fabric and aspire for universal brotherhood and tolerance”. It further reads, “Among the requirements, which are required to be fulfilled by the establishing institution, a provision has been made to give an undertaking that their university will not be involved in any anti-national activities and neither will they allow such activity inside their campus or in their name.”
Apart from a one year time frame for the existing universities to adopt the draft ordinance, the new universities will be required to give an undertaking that their campuses will not be used for any “anti-national” activities. What is worse, and worrying is that, the State Higher Educational Council (SHEC) will act as a monitoring and controlling body that will be empowered to file reports with the government for action if it is unable to get information from any private university within a specified period of time. This amounts to giving a state body the powers of a new role that smacks of vigilantism.
Other provisions in the ordinance:
Apart from the most controversial provision, the draft ordinance proposes that a minimum of 75% of teachers appointed to the private universities would be permanent and not contractual and their quality would be monitored online. Further, it says that a university in a city would need to have a minimum land space of 20 acres while in rural areas they would need to be spread over 50 acres.
It further provides for reservation of 10% seats with 50% fees for the economically weaker sections. A provision for admission by rotation has been made for the courses having less than 1% available seats. The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) evaluation has been made mandatory for all private universities. Further, recognition of a university will be withdrawn if there is gross misuse of funds or fraud. The state government has been empowered to de-notify the university and its assets and liabilities would be passed on to the sponsoring institution.
A provision for setting up a Rs 5-crore endowment fund has been made. The new provisions bar sale, transfer or leasing out of the university land. The university land can be mortgaged to banks and financial institutions and not to any individual. A provision for inspection by the SHEC once a year has been made to ensure the quality of higher education. A common academic calendar would be uniformly implemented in all universities to ensure a similar time frame for admissions, examinations and declaration of results. Admission procedure, opening and last dates and prescribed fees would be displayed in the public domain. The draft ordinance provides for an evaluation committee for setting up a university.
Concerning questions:
While the draft ordinance, if passed by the assembly, will bring uniformity in the way the private universities function in the state, there are certain pressing issues relating to the controversial provisions.
- What is Anti-National?
Firstly, the ordinance hasn’t defined what is “anti-national.” In fact, we do not have a single statute across the nation which defines this term. Nor is it advisable, given that we are a diverse people that make up a nation, to have any such definition. Who will decide whether a particular activity is secular or non-secular? On what grounds will the SHEC take action against the ‘defaulting universities.’ The Indian Constitution and its abiding principles of equality and non discrimination are all that are really required to be observed as first principles in our Institutions.
While the other provisions like ensuring 75% of teachers are permanent and not contractual are easy to monitor, how can one such 'value' and 'subjectivity' driven provision ever be monitored? What is particularly a matter of concern is the 'non-compliance' with any of the provisions under the ordinance, including the controversial provision, will be termed as a violation of the University guidelines, bringing it under the scanner and may also lead to its de-recognition.
UP deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya defended the ordinance, has termed this ordinance as “a very big decision” to maintain the sanctity of the “temple of education.” “It is true that a very big decision has been taken by the Cabinet. Not just in Uttar Pradesh but in any educational institution across the country, anti-national activities will never be accepted,” Mr. Maurya said. “The UP government has taken a decision in this direction that in the temple of education, only education should happen and there should be no liberty given to carry out anti-national practices,” he added.
The term “anti-national” has often been used to further this regime's political agenda, mainly by demonising both universities and students. Further, the term is so vague and open to interpretation, that it has no place in law. Can it then be concluded that actions will be taken as per the whims and fancies of the authorities?
- Why the need for this clause?
While it is understood that a uniform law with same admission dates, procedure, etc will ease the complexity and confusion faced by the students in every academic year, one wonders why has this one particular clause, of ensuring no anti-national activities take place on the campus, has been explicitly inserted in the draft ordinance? What is the rationale behind this, considering that there are enough laws in place to check on terrorism, conspiracy, and waging war against the state which apply to all citizens alike, including university students and professors? Is this even the right parameter to ensure “quality education,” as is the stated objective of this ordinance?
This provision appears to be a mechanism of ‘campus control’ by the authorities in order to monitor and channelize what is being taught in the universities and what things the students are exposed to. It also appears to be an overestimation of the power of pedagogy with no clear understanding of what a university is meant to achieve. Can patriotism be imposed in a classroom or through punitive action? How do we monitor something we don’t even know the meaning or definition of?
Universities are a centre of knowledge where individuals think, learn, unlearn, grow and progress, which in turn helps our nation prosper. It is certainly not a space to create ‘desh bhakts.’ In fact, patriotism can never be imposed, be it a school, a university or any other institution. It is a feeling one imbibes after learning about his/her nation, the learning based on an understanding of the intense struggles of people against power and privilege, diversity of its culture and so much more.
It is only when the young, especially students, are given open spaces to think, grow and critique can we develop an empowered youth which will take this legacy ahead. A top-down approach will just curb the freedom of thinking individuals through political control of higher education space.
Also, it is naive to assume that in this world, where there are a myriad of sources of information and misinformation, especially given the ever active social media, to gain information and ideas and to express opinions, that penalising institutions will succeed in keeping a check on students’ behaviour. What will happen through this measure however is a 'dumbing down' of Institutional rigour.
Besides, universities already have their own rules and regulations in place which include measures or caveats against any support for activity (or participation in any part of any activity) that will put the nation’s security at stake or will endanger it's integrity.
To give an example, the first schedule of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Act, 1966 talks about national integration, social justice, secularism, among other things. It says, “The University shall endeavour to promote the study of the principles for which Jawaharlal Nehru worked during his life-time, national integration, social justice, secularism, democratic way of life, international understanding and scientific approach to the problems of society.” However, no where in the entire act is there a punitive action for violation of the aforementioned clause.
Even the Central Universities Act, 2009 doesn’t mention any such provision. Section 5 mentions the objects of a university established under this act. It reads, “The objects of the University shall be to disseminate and advance knowledge by providing instructional and research facilities in such branches of learning as it may deem fit; to make special provisions for integrated courses in humanities, social sciences, science and technology in its educational programmes; to take appropriate measures for promoting innovations in teaching-learning process and interdisciplinary studies and research; to educate and train manpower for the development of the country; to establish linkages with industries for the promotion of science and technology; and to pay special attention to the improvement of the social and economic conditions and welfare of the people, their intellectual, academic and cultural development.”
Why then a penal provision in this draft ordinance at all?
U.P. Private Universities Association secretary Pankaj Agarwal welcomed the move but said there is nothing new in the proposed law. “We have these points in the constitution of our university and abide by them,” he said, adding that educational institutions are sensitive towards these objectives.
Academicians and politicians together oppose the anti-national clause:
Interestingly, the opposition in UP has termed the controversial ordinance as an attempt to spread “RSS ideology in educational institutions.” UPCC general secretary and spokesman Dwijendra Tripathi said, “The hidden purpose behind the law is to create fear and pressure on educational institutions for foisting RSS ideology. The law, when enacted, will act as the sword of Damocles and the universities will constantly face the threat of derecognition,” adding that this ordinance was “sort of dictatorship.” In a tweet, the Congress said: “Given that free speech has often been labeled as “anti-national” & Indians have suffered for it, the UP govt must define exactly what they mean by “anti-national activities.” It further said that universities have to remain a space where students feel free and secure.
Samajwadi Party chief and former UP CM Akhilesh Yadav also criticised the move saying it will lead to the closure of private varsities in the state. He called it a restriction that will force people to not open private universities in UP. UP minister Sidharth Nath Singh, however, called the draft ordinance a ‘significant decision’ that will improve the standard of education and will control “errant private universities.” But SP leader and Rampur MP Azam Khan thinks that the government should create a system for education first. “The kids are playing on the streets, working in hotels, working in the houses of rich people, how will we stop that?” he said speaking to a news channel.
National secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India, Taslim Rehmani, also opposed the ordinance saying it will insult the sentiments of the country. He said that there are enough rules and legislation against anti-national activities in the country and by bringing such ordinance “the government is creating a narrative that people are anti-national in the country.” Joining him was NCP leader and Rajya Sabha member Majeed Menon who said that there was no need for such a law as the penal code is already there and it takes care of all anti-national activities.
Nandini Sundar, Professor of Sociology at the Delhi School of Economics, has said that such an ordinance would have a “chilling effect on all research, teaching and activity in the university. Even if "anti-national" activities are not defined, the target is quite clear – anything that is critical or questioning the current government will be considered as "anti-national".” Reacting to the draft ordinance, writer and scholar Ganesh Devy said, “Universities are meant for generating thought and meaningful social questions…This kind of "fatwa" is the end of the university system.”
Ghanshyam Shah, sociologist and former Professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, is of the opinion that the ordinance defeats the very purpose of a university. He says, “University is meant for free and open discussion. And nothing is sacrosanct as far as the discussion within the university campus is concerned. Now this "anti-national" – one wonders what is meant by that. Anything I might want can make an "anti-national". I want development for Dalits and I might be accused to be an "anti-national" because you are not talking about India’s upliftment, but dalit upliftment. So any opposition or any criticism of those in power would be then "anti-national".”
The list goes on.
However, the ruling BJP has predictably defended the move, saying it will promote national integration, equality and harmony, while pulling the plug on any terror-related activities in the state.
Increasing crackdown on Universities and student bodies:
This contentious ordinance comes at a time when there has been an increasing crackdown on educational spaces. One cannot forget the infamous case of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in February 2016 when a group of students including Umar Khalid and Kanhaiya Kumar, were charged with sedition after they had allegedly organized the Afzal Guru protest and had raised slogans like ‘azadi azadi’ and ‘Bharat ke tukde tukde’ circulated in doctored videos. Mohammad Afzal Guru was a Kashmiri separatist, who was convicted for his role in the 2001 Indian Parliament attack.
Later in October 2016, Najeeb Ahmed, a first year M.Sc Biotechnology student at JNU went missing after the alleged attacks on him by members of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the ruling party.
Within months of the present Yogi government assuming power in the state, combined with Vice Chancellors (VC) of a majoritarian ilk being brought in to head central universities, including the famed Benaras Hindu University (BHU), violent police action was allowed inside the campus against students protesting the imposition of anti-Constitutional measures. In September 2017, women students were brutally beaten by the police when they were protesting against the unconstitutional gender discrimination being practiced by the university. The students had demanded to speak to the VC Girish Chandra Tripathi, who like most others was appointed for his Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) affiliation, but there was heavy police security deployed outside the VC’s house. The ABVP went on to call the girls legitimate protest a political stunt against Modi and the university, considering that Modi was to visit the institution but later cancelled it allegedly due to the protests. Apart from the RSS-affiliate, ABVP being given a free hand at BHU and other universities, the nexus between brute use of state power on the young is there for all to see.
Just recently, there were reports of Students’ Union soon to be replaced by Students’ Council in Allahabad University, UP on the grounds that the university campus is not conducive to conduct free and fair elections. In response to this, former president of the student union and youth leader Richa Singh had tweeted, “In violation of all democratic norms and fundamental right (Right to Union), the Student Union Elections have been banned in University of Allahabad. Union govt. is hell bent on suppressing all voices of dissent and democratic institutions.”
Few months back, in February 2019, 14 students of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) were charged with sedition following a clash with the ABVP and Hindu Yuva Vahini after the Hindutva organisations started vandalizing the premises. This was immediately preceded by a controversial and communal statement by a reporter from Republic TV. She had said, “I am reporting from the University of terrorists.” Last year, Yogi Adityanath had sparked a controversy after he raised the demand of scrapping the AMU’s minority status.
There have been a string of such incidents which, put together, amount to a brazen attack on the student bodies and professors who have raised their voice against injustice on campus. The criminalisation of dissent has meant that young student leaders across the country face criminal cases simply because they have organised themselves and raised a voice.
Anand Teltumbde of the Goa Institute of Management, who was arrested for his alleged Maoist links in connection with the Elgar Parishad case, had rightly said, “This election, if they form the government, probably everything would be finished. Every institute is being headed by clones of Modi.” Jawaharlal Nehru University Teachers' Association (JNUTA) president Atul Sood has alleged that the government has "destroyed" primary and secondary education and access to education has been "completely taken away.” “The past five years have seen a concerted attack on the public funded university and other institutions of higher learning,” he added.
BJP, Nationalism and the loss of freedom of speech:
BJP’s ‘nationalistic’ and Hindutva ideology is well known across the nation. Infact, the second time PM, Narendra Modi, has repeatedly made appeals based on a supremacist nationalism through his election campaign by reiterating his party’s ‘valiant attack’ on the terrorists through the Uri and Balakot air strikes, despite the Election Commission directing him, and the rest of the political class, not to use the defence forces for electoral gain. In the context of questioning, so vital to a democracy, whoever questioned the intelligence failures that led to the death of 44 soldiers lives was termed ‘anti-national’ or a traitor. The very act of questioning the regime, the government of the day has been sought to be silenced through drumming up such a hysteria.
It is not as if previous governments have not, bon occasion, cracked down on sharply dissenting opinion. Or that protest was not criminalised before. It is the systemic use of such measures post 2014, however, that has taken the stifling of dissent to new heights.
Activists, academicians and even the common public have been charged with sedition, defamation and other penal provisions when they have said or published something which doesn’t portray the government in a good light.
Take the recent case of the arrest of independent journalist Prashant Kanojia by the UP police for defamation after he had allegedly tweeted a critical post against the UP CM Yogi Adityanath. Four days later, on June 12, an eight-member team of the Pune police raided the Ranchi residence of Jesuit Father Stan Swamy who is a great upholder of the rights of Adivasis and an ‘accused’ in the Bhima Koregaon/Elgaar Parishad case in which police have so far booked 23 people, including prominent rights activists and intellectuals.
One cannot forget the ‘institutional murder’ of P.Hd Dalit research scholar Rohith Vemula in January 2016 at the Hyderabad Central University (HCU). Five Dalit scholars including Vemula were suspended and evicted from the hostel after a standoff between the Ambedkar Students Association (ASA) and the ABVP. Reportedly, it was a minor scuffle which escalated into a full blown brawl after the administration succumbed to external political pressure, from BJP politicians and the central government, and repeatedly took partisan steps against ASA activists, including passing an extraordinary order that banned a set of ASA students from “common places in groups.” After protesting for weeks, Vemula committed suicide on January 17, 2016. The VC, Professor Appa Rao was then accused of a negligent and an insensitive behaviour and academicians had demanded that he steps down from his position. However, his appointment was yet another case of nepotism with reports saying that he outsmarted more than 35 candidates and became the VC in September 2015, thanks to the strong backing from the then Union Urban Development Minister, M. Venkaiah Naidu.
In yet another clash between academic freedom and jingoistic nationalism, the Haryana Central University found itself in the middle of a controversy when students from the English department performed Mahasweta Devi's noted play 'Draupadi' on September 21, 2016 which was branded as ‘sedition.’ ABVP, RSS leaders joined by Modi's Minister for State, Rao Inderjit, had reportedly claimed the play is 'anti-national' because it depicts an Adivasi woman confronting the commander of the security forces who have raped her.
The student’s wing of the ruling regime, the ABVP, is all pervasive and has been at the centre of almost every controversy in universities across the nation. Be it plays, magazines, protests, the ABVP has termed it as ‘anti-national’ and seditious. Take the case of Widerstand – the Magazine banned by Pondicherry University (PU) in August, 2016. Reportedly, 4000 copies of the annual magazine Widerstand, published by the Student’s Council (SC) of the PU, were confiscated after the administration of the university buckled under the pressure of the ABVP, which had even burnt multiple copies of the magazine, claiming that it had ‘anti-nationalist’ stance, presumably while chanting “Bharat Mata ki Jai.” Notably, the SC comprised mainly of left-leaning Student Federation of India (SFI) and Ambedkar Student Association (ASA).
There have been multiple such cases in the past five years plus.
Given this trajectory, this move by Uttar Pradesh to promulgate this ordinance is just one more step towards the larger design of the regime.
India’s education sector as a whole has been on shaky ground, let alone the higher education. One cannot forget the Modi government’s yet another controversial decision, that will certainly have a far reaching impact on the higher education, when it announced its plan to replace the apex higher education regulator body, the University Grants Commission (UGC) with Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) by repealing the UGC Act, 1951. A brief glance at the composition of the HECI clearly reveals that the HECI will have extraordinary powers, without any checks and balances, as it’s only a bunch of government appointees who will just be telling the government what it wants done. Individual universities will have no power to demand consultation, inquiry, or even appeal against any of its decisions.
Here again the ordinance comes into question. Under the garb of inculcating patriotism for nation building and improving the quality of education, if it is made into a law, such an enactment will end the era of universities creating critical thinking individuals. It will instead create individuals through a ‘cookie-cutter’ template where young adults, the future of our nation, learn in closed chambers, that too those pre-decided by the authorities.
Howard Zinn, American historian and socialist thinker had rightly said, “If patriotism were defined, not as blind obedience to government, not as submissive worship to flags and anthems, but rather as love of one's country, one's fellow citizens (all over the world), as loyalty to the principles of justice and democracy, then patriotism would require us to disobey our government, when it violated those principles.”
Related Articles:
Related Articles
Theme
Campaigns
Videos
Archives
Archives
Podcasts
‘Jai Shri Ram’ and BJP connect, both a constant in mob lynching cases: Analysis
As reported in Sabrang India, Ansari who had come to his hometown, Jamshedpur, for a vacation, was returning back on a bike with two of his friends at night on June 18. Mid way, he was stopped by a group of men, tied to a pole and then brutally beaten up on the grounds that the bike he was travelling on was stolen by him, as it didn’t have a registration number. In the video that has gone viral on social media, it can be seen how the mob first asks his name and then forces him to say ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Jai Hanuman.’ The next day the villagers handed Ansari to the police with the allegedly stolen bike and strikingly, the police booked Ansari under the charges of theft and put him behind the bars. When his condition worsened in the jail on June 21, he was taken to the Seraikela Sadar Hospital, where he died around 10am on Saturday. The family has alleged that Ansari’s death was the result of the brutal beatings by the mob and the apathy of police who, instead of treating him and taking action against the accused, put Ansari in the jail.
While this is just another case of mob lynching, which have unfortunately now become an everyday phenomenon, our analysis of such cases in the past one year reveals that there is a similar pattern in the way these crimes take place and the profiles of the accused, while the victims are mainly Muslims and then Dalits. In short, the attack on minorities by these lawbreakers is on a constant rise.
Increasing cases of mob lynching and the RSS-BJP connect:
Acts of mob lynching were not so rampant until 2015, before which there might have been one or two odd incidents. However, within one year of Narendra Modi-led BJP coming to power, which is infamous for its ideological roots in right-wing supremacism, these barbaric incidents have been on a rapid rise. The first incident post the BJP’s rule, that shook the entire nation was the lynching of a 55-year old Muslim farm worker, Mohammad Akhlaq, in Dadri, UP, when a mob brutally thrashed Akhlaq and his son Danish following an announcement at a temple that the family had consumed and stored beef, on September 28, 2015. Akhlaq succumbed to his injuries while Danish survived. Since then, a total of 179 people, both men and women, have been the victims of mob lynching of which 96 have lost their lives. The following graph on the number of victims who have lost their lives due incidents of mob lynching clearly reveals that the cases of mob lynching have increased in the BJP era.
A look at cases of lynchings in the last one year alone (June, 2018 to June, 2019) will reveal that 84 people were severely injured in these brutal attacks of which 50 died. Of the 84 victims, the highest were witnessed in Maharashtra (12), followed by Assam (11) and then Bihar (10). It is essential to note that all of the aforementioned states are BJP-ruled! The communally sensitive state of Uttar Pradesh had 8 victims, 7 in Jharkhand and Gujarat each. The lowest number of victims were in Manipur and Karnataka, with one victim each.
| STATE | NUMBER OF VICTIMS |
| Assam | 11 |
| Maharashtra | 12 |
| Jharkhand | 7 |
| West Bengal | 6 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 8 |
| Gujarat | 7 |
| Chhattisgarh | 1 |
| Tripura | 3 |
| Tamil Nadu | 2 |
| Bihar | 10 |
| Karnataka | 1 |
| Rajasthan | 4 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 6 |
| Andhra Pradesh | 2 |
| Haryana | 3 |
| Manipur | 1 |
| TOTAL | 84 |
It is pertinent to note that of these 84 victims, 69 (i.e. 84%) were attacked by the local mob over the suspicion that they were illegally transporting cattle or beef or they had killed a cow, they were childlifters or they had robbed some commodity. The highest cases took place under the suspicion of the victims being childlifters followed by any cow-related activity (read as crime). In many of these cases, social media played a significant role in provoking the locals.
Right from the Akhlaq’s lynching to the latest case of Tabrez Ansari’s lynching, in majority of these cases the accused are a part of BJP or enjoy impunity due to BJP’s support. In the Dadri lynching case, involving 18 accused, one of the prime accused Hariom Sisodia, after being released on bail in October, 2017 had clearly said how BJP had promised to save them from any legal tussle but then failed to do so. He had said, “The BJP leaders said that we will ensure justice, we will make sure you are financially okay, and we will get you jobs. But they did nothing. I'm unemployed. The main thing was 'case wapas ho jayega', but that has not happened yet.” Further, Mahesh Sharma, a Union Minister and Lok Sabha lawmaker from Gautam Budh Nagar, attended the funeral of Ravi, Sisodia's cousin, the 18th accused, who died in police custody in October 2017. Another accused, Vishal Singh, son of a local BJP leader Sanjay Rana, was seen in a BJP rally, addressed by the UP CM, Yogi Adityanath, in Bisada village in Greater Noida on March 31, 2019. In fact, in a brazen show of support, the Dadri BJP MLA, Tejpal Singh Nagar, had promised jobs to all the accused in the National Thermal Power Corporation, Dadri on contract basis.
Take the Alwar lynching case of 2017, where a 55-year old Muslim dairy farmer, Pehlu Khan and his four sons were returning from Jaipur after purchasing a cattle and were stopped by a mob of self-appointed cow vigilantes. Despite showing relevant documents, Khan was beaten to death in Alwar, Rajasthan. The six accused were said to be affiliated to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), the youth wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Shockingly, the then Union Minister, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, denied the reports and said, “No such incident took place as described by opposition in the house.”
In June 2018, Mohammad Qasim (38), a cattle trader, was lynched to death and Samsuddin (65) brutally assaulted in Hapur, UP over rumours of cow slaughter. The key offender, Yudhistir Singh Sisodia, claimed responsibility for this act and also warned of similar consequence to others. In a sting operation conducted by NDTV, he blatantly said "Meri fauj tayaar hai. Koi gaaye kaate, s*** mai usko katwaa denge, s*** ko khade khade. Hazaar baar jail jaana pade jaayenge (My army is ready. If anyone slaughters a cow, we will kill them and go to jail a thousand times)." One wonders how he found the courage to say all this without the fear of any legal consequences? Was he sure of getting a bail? How did he get to enjoy the sense of impunity?
Cut to the recent lynching case in Jharhand, the key accused Pappu Mandal’s Facebook profile reveals his Hindutva ideology as well as his connection with or aspiration to connect with the BJP. In a December 8, 2014 post, Mandal uploaded a photo with the BJP sash and captioned it as ‘BJP.’ Further, on March 26, 2018 he uploaded a photo with a sword and captioned it ‘Jai Shri Ram.’ Notably, Ansari was forced to chant ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Jai Hanuman’ when he was being assaulted by Mandal and his goons.
Similar Modus Operandi and profiles of the accused:
Consider any mob lynching case and one will find a similar ‘modus operandi’ in majority of these cases along with a similar profile of the accused. Our analysis has revealed that whenever such an incident takes place, the victims are in transit in relatively remote areas and are suddenly and violently attacked by an angry mob, leaving them helpless and in no position to defend themselves. Even when the victims plead for their lives, the mobs are so "enraged", that they refuse to even consider hearing them out. Further, as mentioned earlier, these attacks are the result of rumours in the villages, of the victim indulging in cow slaughter or being a childlifter. Strikingly, the attacks worsen as soon as the perpetrators come to know about the religious identity of the victims (mainly Muslims) and are then forced to say ‘Jai Shri Ram.’ Usually, the perpetrators asks the names of the victims, mostly to know their religious identity, especially in cases where the physical appearance (like a beard and a cap) doesn’t reveal it. The same thing happened in the recent lynching case of Tabrez Ansari.
Another finding is that the majority of the accused are either affiliated to a right-wing Hindutva organisation or directly to the BJP. It requires no in depth investigation to understand why these accused are ready to take the law into their own hands and punish the "culprits" (who are actually the victims) for theft or other crimes. It clearly means that they enjoy impunity and backing from ‘powerful forces’ giving them a freehand to act as per their wishes for protecting one common ideology- Hindutva. Here, it is pertinent to note that in 2018, the then Union Minister Jayant Sinha had “honoured and garlanded” eight accused in the Alimuddin Ansari lynching case in Ramgarh, Jharkhand, while they were out on bail. Just recently, Sinha revealed that the BJP paid the legal fees of the accused in the same lynching case. "They (accused) came from a poor family. Their family members requested us to assist them financially in order to help them in hiring an able advocate. I, along with other members of the party (BJP) helped them in paying for the advocate's fees," Sinha was quoted as saying by the Indian Express.
Further, it is well known how the police fails to take immediate action in such cases and how these accused easily get bails. As mentioned earlier, the majority of these cases have taken place in states where BJP is in power, either independently or through coalition.
Another common factor witnessed during these incidents is that of a gruesome spectacle: a group of people gather and act as mere spectators to the happenings without bothering to call the police or to stop the accused (the latter being a rare possibility considering that there can then be a threat to their own lives.) In fact, the spectators make videos and put them on social media! One wonders why? Is it because they are really scared to intervene during the violent happenings and raise a voice? Or is it because they, by their voyeuristic presence, signal approval to the ideology and the (oft trumped up) allegations against the victims? Are these accused, through their powerful organizations, successful in spreading this Hindutva ideology and thus influencing large sections of the locals? Are the spectators also being brainwashed? Finally, are those among the populace who may be dissenters, frightened into silence?
The slogan of ‘Jai Shri Ram’, too has become an unfortunate license to kill, a signal almost, which then works also silences the crowd? Is this a tactic, to assault in the name of God?
Also, when no legal action is taken against the accused, for whatever reasons, the locals end up vending towards the culture of an all pervasive impunity: believing that whatever happened was the right thing. When politicians, media etc choose to remain silent or supports such acts, the common public gets motivated to indulge in more such acts that are finding "public sanction and approval."
While the spectators choose to or are forced to remain silent, the media has played a notorious role when it comes to such cases of communal violence. Social media, especially Facebook and Whatsapp- especially, widely used social media platforms in rural India, have been used to circulate the videos of the attacks and to spread rumours about ‘childlifters’, ‘cow slaughterers’ or robbers being present in the villages thereby instigating the locals.
Just to give a few instances, take the case of Dhule and Malegaon lynchings in 2018 where five people in each city were lynched to death over rumours circulated on Whatsapp that they were a part of a gang of childlifters. In fact, take any case of mob lynching over the years and one will find the active role of social media to either provoke the mob or to spread the videos of the attacks. Worse, these videos are shared in multiple pro-Hindutva groups, on Facebook as well as Whatsapp, spreading one same message to millions of viewers who end up believing that to be the final truth. When our politicians, including our Prime Minister, choose to remain silent on these issues or not even acknowledge their rising presence, the citizenry starts accepting it as the new normal.
Talking on the issue of misuse of social media leading to mob violence, Pratik Sinha co-founder AltNews, a fact-checking website says, “It’s unprecedented not just in India but globally. It is as serious as a breakout of an epidemic. Misinformation has been weaponized to target minorities, individuals, activists.”
Mental health experts say that people tend to believe messages sent through platforms like WhatsApp as they usually are sent by a trusted source. “As a result, doubts regarding the credibility of the source of the messages tend to get diluted. And therefore, we are inherently more likely to not think of rejecting the content of the message as being false or inauthentic," said Samir Parikh, director of the department of mental health and behavioural sciences at Fortis Healthcare.
In short, social media has increasingly become the primary catalyst for self-styled cow vigilantes, as well, to bring to book those who have reportedly been indulging in cow slaughter or any other wrongdoings.
The next aspect of this analysis relates to the profiles of the accused. Strikingly, the majority of the accused come from poor households and aren’t literate enough. Such people are easy to be brainwashed by the powerful elite who wish to impose their ideology on the masses. We have also observed that these accused belong to the lower caste, like Pappu Mandal in the Tabrez Ansari lynching case, and work under the upper caste powerful people. In short, the upper caste men are the leaders and the lower caste the footsoldiers. This explains the impunity aspect and also the submission aspect where the ‘bosses’ take advantage of the caste dynamics and hierarchy, forcing the direct perpetrators to indulge in such activities, naturally with some incentives attached.
Why the reluctance to adhere to the SC directive on mob lynching?
While the second time Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, ensured that the minorities will be protected and they should not be made to worry, right after his re-election, we yet do not have a law despite an increasing number of lynching cases and the Supreme Court directive over the same. In July, 2018, a three-judge SC, comprising of the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud, had condemned the rising incidents of mob lynching across the nation and urged the Parliament to enact a law to deal with the crime that threatens the rule of law and the country’s social fabric. In a writ petition filed by Tehseen Poonawalla, the SC gave a list of directions, including preventive, remedial and punitive steps, to deal with the crime. Some of the directives are:
- The state governments shall designate a senior police officer in each district for taking measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
- The state governments shall immediately identify districts, sub-divisions and villages where instances of lynching and mob violence have been reported in the recent past.
- The nodal officers shall bring to the notice of the DGP any inter-district co-ordination issues for devising a strategy to tackle lynching and mob violence related issues.
- It shall be the duty of every police officer to cause a mob to disperse, which, in his opinion, has a tendency to cause violence in the disguise of vigilantism or otherwise
- Central and the state governments should broadcast on radio and television and other media platforms including the official websites that lynching and mob violence shall invite serious consequence .
- Curb and stop dissemination of irresponsible and explosive messages, videos and other materials on various social media platforms. Register FIR under relevant provisions of law against persons who disseminate such messages.
- Ensure that there is no further harassment of the family members of the victims.
- State governments shall prepare a lynching/mob violence victim compensation scheme.
- Cases of lynching and mob violence shall be specifically tried by designated court/fast track courts earmarked for that purpose in each district. The trial shall preferably be concluded within six months.
- To set a stern example in cases of mob violence and lynching, the trial court must ordinarily award maximum sentence upon conviction of the accused person.
- If it is found that a police officer or an officer of the district administration has failed to fulfill his duty, it will be considered as an act of deliberate negligence.
Mr. Modi needs to immediately introduce an anti-mob lynching bill in the Parliament, if his words are to be backed by action. We wait eagerly and watch.
A timeline of lynching cases in India since 2014 can be read here.
Related Articles:
‘Jai Shri Ram’ and BJP connect, both a constant in mob lynching cases: Analysis
As reported in Sabrang India, Ansari who had come to his hometown, Jamshedpur, for a vacation, was returning back on a bike with two of his friends at night on June 18. Mid way, he was stopped by a group of men, tied to a pole and then brutally beaten up on the grounds that the bike he was travelling on was stolen by him, as it didn’t have a registration number. In the video that has gone viral on social media, it can be seen how the mob first asks his name and then forces him to say ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Jai Hanuman.’ The next day the villagers handed Ansari to the police with the allegedly stolen bike and strikingly, the police booked Ansari under the charges of theft and put him behind the bars. When his condition worsened in the jail on June 21, he was taken to the Seraikela Sadar Hospital, where he died around 10am on Saturday. The family has alleged that Ansari’s death was the result of the brutal beatings by the mob and the apathy of police who, instead of treating him and taking action against the accused, put Ansari in the jail.
While this is just another case of mob lynching, which have unfortunately now become an everyday phenomenon, our analysis of such cases in the past one year reveals that there is a similar pattern in the way these crimes take place and the profiles of the accused, while the victims are mainly Muslims and then Dalits. In short, the attack on minorities by these lawbreakers is on a constant rise.
Increasing cases of mob lynching and the RSS-BJP connect:
Acts of mob lynching were not so rampant until 2015, before which there might have been one or two odd incidents. However, within one year of Narendra Modi-led BJP coming to power, which is infamous for its ideological roots in right-wing supremacism, these barbaric incidents have been on a rapid rise. The first incident post the BJP’s rule, that shook the entire nation was the lynching of a 55-year old Muslim farm worker, Mohammad Akhlaq, in Dadri, UP, when a mob brutally thrashed Akhlaq and his son Danish following an announcement at a temple that the family had consumed and stored beef, on September 28, 2015. Akhlaq succumbed to his injuries while Danish survived. Since then, a total of 179 people, both men and women, have been the victims of mob lynching of which 96 have lost their lives. The following graph on the number of victims who have lost their lives due incidents of mob lynching clearly reveals that the cases of mob lynching have increased in the BJP era.
A look at cases of lynchings in the last one year alone (June, 2018 to June, 2019) will reveal that 84 people were severely injured in these brutal attacks of which 50 died. Of the 84 victims, the highest were witnessed in Maharashtra (12), followed by Assam (11) and then Bihar (10). It is essential to note that all of the aforementioned states are BJP-ruled! The communally sensitive state of Uttar Pradesh had 8 victims, 7 in Jharkhand and Gujarat each. The lowest number of victims were in Manipur and Karnataka, with one victim each.
| STATE | NUMBER OF VICTIMS |
| Assam | 11 |
| Maharashtra | 12 |
| Jharkhand | 7 |
| West Bengal | 6 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 8 |
| Gujarat | 7 |
| Chhattisgarh | 1 |
| Tripura | 3 |
| Tamil Nadu | 2 |
| Bihar | 10 |
| Karnataka | 1 |
| Rajasthan | 4 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 6 |
| Andhra Pradesh | 2 |
| Haryana | 3 |
| Manipur | 1 |
| TOTAL | 84 |
It is pertinent to note that of these 84 victims, 69 (i.e. 84%) were attacked by the local mob over the suspicion that they were illegally transporting cattle or beef or they had killed a cow, they were childlifters or they had robbed some commodity. The highest cases took place under the suspicion of the victims being childlifters followed by any cow-related activity (read as crime). In many of these cases, social media played a significant role in provoking the locals.
Right from the Akhlaq’s lynching to the latest case of Tabrez Ansari’s lynching, in majority of these cases the accused are a part of BJP or enjoy impunity due to BJP’s support. In the Dadri lynching case, involving 18 accused, one of the prime accused Hariom Sisodia, after being released on bail in October, 2017 had clearly said how BJP had promised to save them from any legal tussle but then failed to do so. He had said, “The BJP leaders said that we will ensure justice, we will make sure you are financially okay, and we will get you jobs. But they did nothing. I'm unemployed. The main thing was 'case wapas ho jayega', but that has not happened yet.” Further, Mahesh Sharma, a Union Minister and Lok Sabha lawmaker from Gautam Budh Nagar, attended the funeral of Ravi, Sisodia's cousin, the 18th accused, who died in police custody in October 2017. Another accused, Vishal Singh, son of a local BJP leader Sanjay Rana, was seen in a BJP rally, addressed by the UP CM, Yogi Adityanath, in Bisada village in Greater Noida on March 31, 2019. In fact, in a brazen show of support, the Dadri BJP MLA, Tejpal Singh Nagar, had promised jobs to all the accused in the National Thermal Power Corporation, Dadri on contract basis.
Take the Alwar lynching case of 2017, where a 55-year old Muslim dairy farmer, Pehlu Khan and his four sons were returning from Jaipur after purchasing a cattle and were stopped by a mob of self-appointed cow vigilantes. Despite showing relevant documents, Khan was beaten to death in Alwar, Rajasthan. The six accused were said to be affiliated to the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), the youth wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Shockingly, the then Union Minister, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, denied the reports and said, “No such incident took place as described by opposition in the house.”
In June 2018, Mohammad Qasim (38), a cattle trader, was lynched to death and Samsuddin (65) brutally assaulted in Hapur, UP over rumours of cow slaughter. The key offender, Yudhistir Singh Sisodia, claimed responsibility for this act and also warned of similar consequence to others. In a sting operation conducted by NDTV, he blatantly said "Meri fauj tayaar hai. Koi gaaye kaate, s*** mai usko katwaa denge, s*** ko khade khade. Hazaar baar jail jaana pade jaayenge (My army is ready. If anyone slaughters a cow, we will kill them and go to jail a thousand times)." One wonders how he found the courage to say all this without the fear of any legal consequences? Was he sure of getting a bail? How did he get to enjoy the sense of impunity?
Cut to the recent lynching case in Jharhand, the key accused Pappu Mandal’s Facebook profile reveals his Hindutva ideology as well as his connection with or aspiration to connect with the BJP. In a December 8, 2014 post, Mandal uploaded a photo with the BJP sash and captioned it as ‘BJP.’ Further, on March 26, 2018 he uploaded a photo with a sword and captioned it ‘Jai Shri Ram.’ Notably, Ansari was forced to chant ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Jai Hanuman’ when he was being assaulted by Mandal and his goons.
Similar Modus Operandi and profiles of the accused:
Consider any mob lynching case and one will find a similar ‘modus operandi’ in majority of these cases along with a similar profile of the accused. Our analysis has revealed that whenever such an incident takes place, the victims are in transit in relatively remote areas and are suddenly and violently attacked by an angry mob, leaving them helpless and in no position to defend themselves. Even when the victims plead for their lives, the mobs are so "enraged", that they refuse to even consider hearing them out. Further, as mentioned earlier, these attacks are the result of rumours in the villages, of the victim indulging in cow slaughter or being a childlifter. Strikingly, the attacks worsen as soon as the perpetrators come to know about the religious identity of the victims (mainly Muslims) and are then forced to say ‘Jai Shri Ram.’ Usually, the perpetrators asks the names of the victims, mostly to know their religious identity, especially in cases where the physical appearance (like a beard and a cap) doesn’t reveal it. The same thing happened in the recent lynching case of Tabrez Ansari.
Another finding is that the majority of the accused are either affiliated to a right-wing Hindutva organisation or directly to the BJP. It requires no in depth investigation to understand why these accused are ready to take the law into their own hands and punish the "culprits" (who are actually the victims) for theft or other crimes. It clearly means that they enjoy impunity and backing from ‘powerful forces’ giving them a freehand to act as per their wishes for protecting one common ideology- Hindutva. Here, it is pertinent to note that in 2018, the then Union Minister Jayant Sinha had “honoured and garlanded” eight accused in the Alimuddin Ansari lynching case in Ramgarh, Jharkhand, while they were out on bail. Just recently, Sinha revealed that the BJP paid the legal fees of the accused in the same lynching case. "They (accused) came from a poor family. Their family members requested us to assist them financially in order to help them in hiring an able advocate. I, along with other members of the party (BJP) helped them in paying for the advocate's fees," Sinha was quoted as saying by the Indian Express.
Further, it is well known how the police fails to take immediate action in such cases and how these accused easily get bails. As mentioned earlier, the majority of these cases have taken place in states where BJP is in power, either independently or through coalition.
Another common factor witnessed during these incidents is that of a gruesome spectacle: a group of people gather and act as mere spectators to the happenings without bothering to call the police or to stop the accused (the latter being a rare possibility considering that there can then be a threat to their own lives.) In fact, the spectators make videos and put them on social media! One wonders why? Is it because they are really scared to intervene during the violent happenings and raise a voice? Or is it because they, by their voyeuristic presence, signal approval to the ideology and the (oft trumped up) allegations against the victims? Are these accused, through their powerful organizations, successful in spreading this Hindutva ideology and thus influencing large sections of the locals? Are the spectators also being brainwashed? Finally, are those among the populace who may be dissenters, frightened into silence?
The slogan of ‘Jai Shri Ram’, too has become an unfortunate license to kill, a signal almost, which then works also silences the crowd? Is this a tactic, to assault in the name of God?
Also, when no legal action is taken against the accused, for whatever reasons, the locals end up vending towards the culture of an all pervasive impunity: believing that whatever happened was the right thing. When politicians, media etc choose to remain silent or supports such acts, the common public gets motivated to indulge in more such acts that are finding "public sanction and approval."
While the spectators choose to or are forced to remain silent, the media has played a notorious role when it comes to such cases of communal violence. Social media, especially Facebook and Whatsapp- especially, widely used social media platforms in rural India, have been used to circulate the videos of the attacks and to spread rumours about ‘childlifters’, ‘cow slaughterers’ or robbers being present in the villages thereby instigating the locals.
Just to give a few instances, take the case of Dhule and Malegaon lynchings in 2018 where five people in each city were lynched to death over rumours circulated on Whatsapp that they were a part of a gang of childlifters. In fact, take any case of mob lynching over the years and one will find the active role of social media to either provoke the mob or to spread the videos of the attacks. Worse, these videos are shared in multiple pro-Hindutva groups, on Facebook as well as Whatsapp, spreading one same message to millions of viewers who end up believing that to be the final truth. When our politicians, including our Prime Minister, choose to remain silent on these issues or not even acknowledge their rising presence, the citizenry starts accepting it as the new normal.
Talking on the issue of misuse of social media leading to mob violence, Pratik Sinha co-founder AltNews, a fact-checking website says, “It’s unprecedented not just in India but globally. It is as serious as a breakout of an epidemic. Misinformation has been weaponized to target minorities, individuals, activists.”
Mental health experts say that people tend to believe messages sent through platforms like WhatsApp as they usually are sent by a trusted source. “As a result, doubts regarding the credibility of the source of the messages tend to get diluted. And therefore, we are inherently more likely to not think of rejecting the content of the message as being false or inauthentic," said Samir Parikh, director of the department of mental health and behavioural sciences at Fortis Healthcare.
In short, social media has increasingly become the primary catalyst for self-styled cow vigilantes, as well, to bring to book those who have reportedly been indulging in cow slaughter or any other wrongdoings.
The next aspect of this analysis relates to the profiles of the accused. Strikingly, the majority of the accused come from poor households and aren’t literate enough. Such people are easy to be brainwashed by the powerful elite who wish to impose their ideology on the masses. We have also observed that these accused belong to the lower caste, like Pappu Mandal in the Tabrez Ansari lynching case, and work under the upper caste powerful people. In short, the upper caste men are the leaders and the lower caste the footsoldiers. This explains the impunity aspect and also the submission aspect where the ‘bosses’ take advantage of the caste dynamics and hierarchy, forcing the direct perpetrators to indulge in such activities, naturally with some incentives attached.
Why the reluctance to adhere to the SC directive on mob lynching?
While the second time Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, ensured that the minorities will be protected and they should not be made to worry, right after his re-election, we yet do not have a law despite an increasing number of lynching cases and the Supreme Court directive over the same. In July, 2018, a three-judge SC, comprising of the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud, had condemned the rising incidents of mob lynching across the nation and urged the Parliament to enact a law to deal with the crime that threatens the rule of law and the country’s social fabric. In a writ petition filed by Tehseen Poonawalla, the SC gave a list of directions, including preventive, remedial and punitive steps, to deal with the crime. Some of the directives are:
- The state governments shall designate a senior police officer in each district for taking measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
- The state governments shall immediately identify districts, sub-divisions and villages where instances of lynching and mob violence have been reported in the recent past.
- The nodal officers shall bring to the notice of the DGP any inter-district co-ordination issues for devising a strategy to tackle lynching and mob violence related issues.
- It shall be the duty of every police officer to cause a mob to disperse, which, in his opinion, has a tendency to cause violence in the disguise of vigilantism or otherwise
- Central and the state governments should broadcast on radio and television and other media platforms including the official websites that lynching and mob violence shall invite serious consequence .
- Curb and stop dissemination of irresponsible and explosive messages, videos and other materials on various social media platforms. Register FIR under relevant provisions of law against persons who disseminate such messages.
- Ensure that there is no further harassment of the family members of the victims.
- State governments shall prepare a lynching/mob violence victim compensation scheme.
- Cases of lynching and mob violence shall be specifically tried by designated court/fast track courts earmarked for that purpose in each district. The trial shall preferably be concluded within six months.
- To set a stern example in cases of mob violence and lynching, the trial court must ordinarily award maximum sentence upon conviction of the accused person.
- If it is found that a police officer or an officer of the district administration has failed to fulfill his duty, it will be considered as an act of deliberate negligence.
Mr. Modi needs to immediately introduce an anti-mob lynching bill in the Parliament, if his words are to be backed by action. We wait eagerly and watch.
A timeline of lynching cases in India since 2014 can be read here.
Related Articles:
Related Articles
Theme
Campaigns
Videos
Archives
Archives
Podcasts
Multiple, Daily instances of hateful Content, FB fails to take stringent action: Analysis
Illustration by Brayan Perry/CNN
The analysis was conducted keeping in mind the long-term impact of such hate on communities and a diverse Indian polity. Equity and non-discrimination norms are also upset through such widespread hate messaging. This is concerning especially due to the growing Indian market for Facebook with almost 300 million active users and a potential to grow by 400%.
CJP has been constantly fighting and monitoring hate on Facebook. Last year, CJP approached the NHRC and Facebook to report the hateful content posted by Hindutva activist Deepak Sharma that got his account banned.
Deepak Sharma, a Hindutva activist, who better calls himself as a “motivational speaker” speaks a communally charged language and is the founder of Rashtriya Swabhiman Dal (RSD), an organisation that works to protect the interests of Hindu dharma as well as the nation. Notably, during the election, he was seen campaigning in West Bengal and mobilizing the public through his hate speeches. Earlier, he had posted a video asking to behead non-believers and wishing for more Godhra like incidents. He even explicitly talks about his hatred for Muslims and the urgent need to persecute them. Three main pages run by Deepak Sharma are: ‘Bhagva Hind’, Deepak Sharma and ‘Deepak Sharma- Ek Vichardhara.’ Each of these pages are followed by more than 10,000 people and are replete with hateful content.
Another ‘public figure’ named Nitesh Mishra is followed by more than 25,000 people and describes himself as ‘a person committed to the Hindu religion and society’ on his Facebook page. A year back he went live on Facebook where he is seen with his group of acolytes chanting ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ in the middle of the road thereby obstructing traffic and captioned the video as ‘if Muslims can block the roads for their Namaz then even we will do the same by chanting Hanuman Chalisa.’ This communal video received 4.9 million views and 49,351 shares. On June 11, he posted another message relating to the Aligarh rape case. The message read, “Allah has permitted the Muslims to rape their own daughters and sisters, what will then be their thoughts towards non-Muslims? Islam is not a religion but merely a group of rapists born out of rape.”
A Hindutva activist and national president of ‘Sudarshan Vahini,’ Vinod Sharma, has almost 20,000 followers and keeps on posting anti-Muslim messages and videos. Notably, his cover picture is that of Savarkar! A week ago he went live on Facebook to talk about the Aligarh rape case where he made certain really shocking statements and revelations. He attacked Modi for his appeasement politics and told that the time Modi pleaded for protection of minorities, “these people did their work by raping 15 girls and murdering 25.” He even revealed that whatever money they received as charity, they used for campaigning for Modi and even convinced 650 workers from other parties to vote for Modi.
A Jain saint named Aacharya Shree SurySagarji Gurudev is a staunch Modi supporter and campaigner for Hindu Rashtra. Contrary to the principles of Jainism, which is committed to non-violence, this particular saint is highly active on Facebook with his communal content. On June 7, he went live where we appealed to his followers to become Nathuram Godse and then promised to convert Hindustan to ‘Hindu Rashtra’ with the help of many such Godse. He further says “If you want a Hindu Rashtra, then support Modi as he is the only one who is capable to do this.” He even abused the Muslims and their Maulanas.
Aryan Sinha, whose friend list is filled with Hindutva pages and profiles, is no less than an instigator. Just to give a glimpse of his ideological leaning, on June 12, he posted a message on the Kathua rape judgement stating how a Hindu Brahmin family was falsely being implicated in the case.
Raja Singh, an MLA from Telangana and a member of the BJP, is followed by more than a lakh people and repeatedly posts messages relating to a ‘Hindu Rashtra.’ Recently, he posted a video where he is appealing to the public to prepare for a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ by saying “Are you ready to fight the Muslims, Christians and Secular Hindus?..We need to make an army in every state of India, we will help you.”
There are multiple such pages and people who have become “public figures” and are mobilizing 'masses' and 'calling followers to action read violence'. It is pertinent to observe that many of these calls are clearly targeted at the Muslim minority. These pages and profiles not only have a substantial online presence but are there on the ground as well. Majority of these pages and profiles are of Hindutva supremacists.
Few of them are- IT Cell BJP Goregaon Mumbai, Dharam Bandhu Ji Gau Katha, Amar Nath Tiwari, Singh Tri Bhuwan, Avinash Hindu, Aarti Jain, Vinod Goyal, Rajeev Gupta, Rashtriya Parshuram Sena Yuva Vahini Dholpur, Jago Hindu Warriors, Dnyanesh Shandilya, Bihar Bengal ki Yahi Pukar BJP ki Aae Sarkar and the list goes on.
All in all, such Facebook profiles and posts are a landmine of abusive and hateful posts creating a breeding ground for violence and revenge.
Interestingly, when one reports such profiles or posts to Facebook, citing that it violates their own community standards and comprises of hate speech, the response is not always welcoming. To give an instance, when one of our team members reported a hateful and communal post by Dnyanesh Shandilya, where he talks about Muslims being rapists and terrorists, the response he received was appalling! Facebook replied, “Thank you for letting us know about this. We've looked at the photo, and although it doesn't go against any of our specific Community Standards, you did the right thing by letting us know about it. We understand that it may still be offensive or distasteful to you, so we want to help you see less of things such as this in the future.”
Even the Equality Labs report on Facebook India, titled “Facebook India: Towards the tipping point in violence, caste and religious hate speech,” reveals how Facebook India has become a soapbox for hate mongering, communal violence, fake news among other things. It also reveals that Islamophobia dominates Indian hate speech, 93% of reported posts remain while 100% Islamophobic hate speech gets restored.
An analysis of the entire report can be read here.
Through the primary analysis of multiple Facebook profiles and the abovementioned report, it can safely be concluded that Facebook India has become a political tool for spreading one particular majoritarian and politically dominant ideology that makes no secret of inciting mobs against the minorities, particularly the Muslims. Unfortunately, Facebook India appears to be behaving like a mere spectator!
Whether this nonchalant behaviour is a choice or submission to political pressure is yet unknown. Irrespective of the rationale, one cannot deny the probable destruction of our Constitutional values of secularism, fraternity and integrity.
Clearly this is a new tool, technology that has taken easily to allowing itself to be a promoter of hate. Clearly Hate Sells on FB. But this new digital reality that is affecting perceptions and lives then becomes the greatest threat to peace in our neihbourhoods, streets and cities. Are we prepared to face and tackle this systemic barrage of hate?
Related Articles:
Multiple, Daily instances of hateful Content, FB fails to take stringent action: Analysis
Illustration by Brayan Perry/CNN
The analysis was conducted keeping in mind the long-term impact of such hate on communities and a diverse Indian polity. Equity and non-discrimination norms are also upset through such widespread hate messaging. This is concerning especially due to the growing Indian market for Facebook with almost 300 million active users and a potential to grow by 400%.
CJP has been constantly fighting and monitoring hate on Facebook. Last year, CJP approached the NHRC and Facebook to report the hateful content posted by Hindutva activist Deepak Sharma that got his account banned.
Deepak Sharma, a Hindutva activist, who better calls himself as a “motivational speaker” speaks a communally charged language and is the founder of Rashtriya Swabhiman Dal (RSD), an organisation that works to protect the interests of Hindu dharma as well as the nation. Notably, during the election, he was seen campaigning in West Bengal and mobilizing the public through his hate speeches. Earlier, he had posted a video asking to behead non-believers and wishing for more Godhra like incidents. He even explicitly talks about his hatred for Muslims and the urgent need to persecute them. Three main pages run by Deepak Sharma are: ‘Bhagva Hind’, Deepak Sharma and ‘Deepak Sharma- Ek Vichardhara.’ Each of these pages are followed by more than 10,000 people and are replete with hateful content.
Another ‘public figure’ named Nitesh Mishra is followed by more than 25,000 people and describes himself as ‘a person committed to the Hindu religion and society’ on his Facebook page. A year back he went live on Facebook where he is seen with his group of acolytes chanting ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ in the middle of the road thereby obstructing traffic and captioned the video as ‘if Muslims can block the roads for their Namaz then even we will do the same by chanting Hanuman Chalisa.’ This communal video received 4.9 million views and 49,351 shares. On June 11, he posted another message relating to the Aligarh rape case. The message read, “Allah has permitted the Muslims to rape their own daughters and sisters, what will then be their thoughts towards non-Muslims? Islam is not a religion but merely a group of rapists born out of rape.”
A Hindutva activist and national president of ‘Sudarshan Vahini,’ Vinod Sharma, has almost 20,000 followers and keeps on posting anti-Muslim messages and videos. Notably, his cover picture is that of Savarkar! A week ago he went live on Facebook to talk about the Aligarh rape case where he made certain really shocking statements and revelations. He attacked Modi for his appeasement politics and told that the time Modi pleaded for protection of minorities, “these people did their work by raping 15 girls and murdering 25.” He even revealed that whatever money they received as charity, they used for campaigning for Modi and even convinced 650 workers from other parties to vote for Modi.
A Jain saint named Aacharya Shree SurySagarji Gurudev is a staunch Modi supporter and campaigner for Hindu Rashtra. Contrary to the principles of Jainism, which is committed to non-violence, this particular saint is highly active on Facebook with his communal content. On June 7, he went live where we appealed to his followers to become Nathuram Godse and then promised to convert Hindustan to ‘Hindu Rashtra’ with the help of many such Godse. He further says “If you want a Hindu Rashtra, then support Modi as he is the only one who is capable to do this.” He even abused the Muslims and their Maulanas.
Aryan Sinha, whose friend list is filled with Hindutva pages and profiles, is no less than an instigator. Just to give a glimpse of his ideological leaning, on June 12, he posted a message on the Kathua rape judgement stating how a Hindu Brahmin family was falsely being implicated in the case.
Raja Singh, an MLA from Telangana and a member of the BJP, is followed by more than a lakh people and repeatedly posts messages relating to a ‘Hindu Rashtra.’ Recently, he posted a video where he is appealing to the public to prepare for a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ by saying “Are you ready to fight the Muslims, Christians and Secular Hindus?..We need to make an army in every state of India, we will help you.”
There are multiple such pages and people who have become “public figures” and are mobilizing 'masses' and 'calling followers to action read violence'. It is pertinent to observe that many of these calls are clearly targeted at the Muslim minority. These pages and profiles not only have a substantial online presence but are there on the ground as well. Majority of these pages and profiles are of Hindutva supremacists.
Few of them are- IT Cell BJP Goregaon Mumbai, Dharam Bandhu Ji Gau Katha, Amar Nath Tiwari, Singh Tri Bhuwan, Avinash Hindu, Aarti Jain, Vinod Goyal, Rajeev Gupta, Rashtriya Parshuram Sena Yuva Vahini Dholpur, Jago Hindu Warriors, Dnyanesh Shandilya, Bihar Bengal ki Yahi Pukar BJP ki Aae Sarkar and the list goes on.
All in all, such Facebook profiles and posts are a landmine of abusive and hateful posts creating a breeding ground for violence and revenge.
Interestingly, when one reports such profiles or posts to Facebook, citing that it violates their own community standards and comprises of hate speech, the response is not always welcoming. To give an instance, when one of our team members reported a hateful and communal post by Dnyanesh Shandilya, where he talks about Muslims being rapists and terrorists, the response he received was appalling! Facebook replied, “Thank you for letting us know about this. We've looked at the photo, and although it doesn't go against any of our specific Community Standards, you did the right thing by letting us know about it. We understand that it may still be offensive or distasteful to you, so we want to help you see less of things such as this in the future.”
Even the Equality Labs report on Facebook India, titled “Facebook India: Towards the tipping point in violence, caste and religious hate speech,” reveals how Facebook India has become a soapbox for hate mongering, communal violence, fake news among other things. It also reveals that Islamophobia dominates Indian hate speech, 93% of reported posts remain while 100% Islamophobic hate speech gets restored.
An analysis of the entire report can be read here.
Through the primary analysis of multiple Facebook profiles and the abovementioned report, it can safely be concluded that Facebook India has become a political tool for spreading one particular majoritarian and politically dominant ideology that makes no secret of inciting mobs against the minorities, particularly the Muslims. Unfortunately, Facebook India appears to be behaving like a mere spectator!
Whether this nonchalant behaviour is a choice or submission to political pressure is yet unknown. Irrespective of the rationale, one cannot deny the probable destruction of our Constitutional values of secularism, fraternity and integrity.
Clearly this is a new tool, technology that has taken easily to allowing itself to be a promoter of hate. Clearly Hate Sells on FB. But this new digital reality that is affecting perceptions and lives then becomes the greatest threat to peace in our neihbourhoods, streets and cities. Are we prepared to face and tackle this systemic barrage of hate?
Related Articles:
Related Articles
Theme
Campaigns
Videos
Archives
Archives
Podcasts
Did the Rs. 2000 dole to the farmers help BJP win in MP and Rajasthan?
In the 2018 assembly elections, Congress had won 114 of the 230 seats in MP and 99 of 199 seats in Rajasthan, ousting the Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Vasundhara Raje’s governments respectively. BJP was just a few seats behind with 109 in MP and 73 in Rajasthan.
Cut to 2019 LS polls, Congress got just 1 of the 29 seats in MP and none in Rajasthan! All the other seats of MP and 24 of the 25 seats in Rajasthan went to Narendra Modi-led BJP. The remaining one seat of Rajasthan went to Hanuman Beniwal, founder of Rashtriya Loktantrik Party.
Barring Chhindwara, MP, that returned the sole Congress candidate Nakul Nath, Chief Minister (CM) Kamal Nath's son, the BJP swept all the seats including the Guna seat, where heavyweight Jyotiraditya Scindia lost by a big margin. Notably, it will be the first time that LS will be without a member from the Scindia family.
This has been Congress’ worst ever performance!
It is significant to note that Congress had come to power in both the states in 2018 due to the severe agrarian crisis and farmers’ distress. Rahul Gandhi’s poll promise of waiving farm loans of up to Rs two lakh within 10 days of forming the governments, including in Chhattisgarh, was a major factor behind its victory.
In MP, 16 of the 29 constituencies are farmer-dominated while agriculture has always been a crucial poll issue in Rajasthan, where about 70% of the population lives in villages.
A year before the assembly elections, both the states had witnessed massive protests by farmers with a strong anti-BJP wave. In 2017 in MP, the Mandsaur constituency had become an epicentre of agrarian protests, which even led to the death of six farmers. Consequently, the then CM Shivraj Singh Chauhan launched the Bhavanter Bhugtan Yojna, which promised to pay farmers the difference between the average sale price and the government mandated minimum support price (MSP). However, farmers alleged that the scheme only benefited the big farmers with bargaining power. Eventually, the BJP lost.
Immediately after coming to power, Kamal Nath and Ashok Gehlot, cleared a proposal for waiving farm loans, as promised, in MP and Rajasthan respectively. The entire farming community was euphoric and started applying for the waivers. However, the excitement was short lived!
Soon after the scheme kicked in, there were reports of scams by the banks with some farmers alleging that their names were included in the list of defaulters even when they hadn’t taken a loan or the loan amount was higher than the original amount. There have also been allegations that not a single farmer has benefited from this waiver as yet. This created immense resentment among the farmers and they started losing faith in the Congress.
In fact, Rajasthan farmers even threatened to launch an agitation against Ashok Gehlot’s government, alleging it has failed to waive entire farm loans and implement the Swaminathan Committee’s recommendations on declaring MSP for farm produce at 1.5 times the input cost.
“The Congress has failed to fulfil its promises; they will have to pay a price in the Lok Sabha polls,” said Amra Ram of the All India Kisan Sabha, which led the 2018 protest.
Taking advantage of this situation, BJP launched the PM-Kisan scheme on February 24, 2019, which promises to provide income support of Rs. 6000 per year in three equal instalments to small and marginal farmer families having combined land holding/ownership of upto 2 hectares. The first installment of Rs. 2000 was distributed just before the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) came into effect. This seems to have worked out for the BJP, especially in the two states where the farmers were disappointed with Congress’ failure.
“Because of the Long March and other protests, the BJP was forced to acknowledge farmers issues. Some last minute actions, like the PM-Kisan scheme and a high-pitch campaign may have helped to appease farmers. Some farmers would have also been impacted by the ultranationalist campaign of the BJP,” said Vijoo Krishnan, a leader of the All India Kisan Sabha. This has reflected in the 2019 election results.
To give a few examples, four of the highly farmer-dominated constituencies in MP, elected a BJP candidate. In Mandsaur, 61.85% went to BJP’s Sudheer Gupta, in Ratlam 49.7% votes went to Guman Singh Damor, in Ujjain, BJP’s Anil Firojiya won with a vote share of 63.21% and in Bhind, another constituency with severe farmer clashes, 54.93% vote went to BJP’s Sandhya Ray.
It seems as if Rajasthan’s farmers are highly dissatisfied with its state government and are now hopeful of some help from the BJP, mainly due to its PM-Kisan scheme, leading to the latter’s sweeping victory. Even the Congress’ NYAY scheme, promising to give Rs. 72,000 annually to the poorest 20% did not succeed in convincing the small farmers. It is nothing short of an anti-incumbency wave!
Notably, the BJP’s 2019 manifesto, promises to extend its much touted PM-Kisan scheme to all the farmers.
All in all, farmers’ distress and the consequent PM-Kisan scheme, Modi’s appeal of nationalism and Congress’ apathy towards the farmers’ concerns along with a directionless campaigning with only anti-Modi speeches and alleged corruption in Rafale deal led to a landslide victory for the BJP.
Yogendra Yadav, president of Swaraj Abhiyan and a leader of the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee, rightly said, “Until February, [farmers issues] were very much on the national agenda. But then came Pulwama and Balakot — the perfect ambush. In the end, farmers did not vote as farmers…This is a failure of the farmers’ movements, who failed to politicise the issue sufficiently, as well as of political parties. It is a major setback, a moment to introspect.”
The Rs. 2000 dole indeed worked for the BJP!
Did the Rs. 2000 dole to the farmers help BJP win in MP and Rajasthan?
In the 2018 assembly elections, Congress had won 114 of the 230 seats in MP and 99 of 199 seats in Rajasthan, ousting the Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Vasundhara Raje’s governments respectively. BJP was just a few seats behind with 109 in MP and 73 in Rajasthan.
Cut to 2019 LS polls, Congress got just 1 of the 29 seats in MP and none in Rajasthan! All the other seats of MP and 24 of the 25 seats in Rajasthan went to Narendra Modi-led BJP. The remaining one seat of Rajasthan went to Hanuman Beniwal, founder of Rashtriya Loktantrik Party.
Barring Chhindwara, MP, that returned the sole Congress candidate Nakul Nath, Chief Minister (CM) Kamal Nath's son, the BJP swept all the seats including the Guna seat, where heavyweight Jyotiraditya Scindia lost by a big margin. Notably, it will be the first time that LS will be without a member from the Scindia family.
This has been Congress’ worst ever performance!
It is significant to note that Congress had come to power in both the states in 2018 due to the severe agrarian crisis and farmers’ distress. Rahul Gandhi’s poll promise of waiving farm loans of up to Rs two lakh within 10 days of forming the governments, including in Chhattisgarh, was a major factor behind its victory.
In MP, 16 of the 29 constituencies are farmer-dominated while agriculture has always been a crucial poll issue in Rajasthan, where about 70% of the population lives in villages.
A year before the assembly elections, both the states had witnessed massive protests by farmers with a strong anti-BJP wave. In 2017 in MP, the Mandsaur constituency had become an epicentre of agrarian protests, which even led to the death of six farmers. Consequently, the then CM Shivraj Singh Chauhan launched the Bhavanter Bhugtan Yojna, which promised to pay farmers the difference between the average sale price and the government mandated minimum support price (MSP). However, farmers alleged that the scheme only benefited the big farmers with bargaining power. Eventually, the BJP lost.
Immediately after coming to power, Kamal Nath and Ashok Gehlot, cleared a proposal for waiving farm loans, as promised, in MP and Rajasthan respectively. The entire farming community was euphoric and started applying for the waivers. However, the excitement was short lived!
Soon after the scheme kicked in, there were reports of scams by the banks with some farmers alleging that their names were included in the list of defaulters even when they hadn’t taken a loan or the loan amount was higher than the original amount. There have also been allegations that not a single farmer has benefited from this waiver as yet. This created immense resentment among the farmers and they started losing faith in the Congress.
In fact, Rajasthan farmers even threatened to launch an agitation against Ashok Gehlot’s government, alleging it has failed to waive entire farm loans and implement the Swaminathan Committee’s recommendations on declaring MSP for farm produce at 1.5 times the input cost.
“The Congress has failed to fulfil its promises; they will have to pay a price in the Lok Sabha polls,” said Amra Ram of the All India Kisan Sabha, which led the 2018 protest.
Taking advantage of this situation, BJP launched the PM-Kisan scheme on February 24, 2019, which promises to provide income support of Rs. 6000 per year in three equal instalments to small and marginal farmer families having combined land holding/ownership of upto 2 hectares. The first installment of Rs. 2000 was distributed just before the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) came into effect. This seems to have worked out for the BJP, especially in the two states where the farmers were disappointed with Congress’ failure.
“Because of the Long March and other protests, the BJP was forced to acknowledge farmers issues. Some last minute actions, like the PM-Kisan scheme and a high-pitch campaign may have helped to appease farmers. Some farmers would have also been impacted by the ultranationalist campaign of the BJP,” said Vijoo Krishnan, a leader of the All India Kisan Sabha. This has reflected in the 2019 election results.
To give a few examples, four of the highly farmer-dominated constituencies in MP, elected a BJP candidate. In Mandsaur, 61.85% went to BJP’s Sudheer Gupta, in Ratlam 49.7% votes went to Guman Singh Damor, in Ujjain, BJP’s Anil Firojiya won with a vote share of 63.21% and in Bhind, another constituency with severe farmer clashes, 54.93% vote went to BJP’s Sandhya Ray.
It seems as if Rajasthan’s farmers are highly dissatisfied with its state government and are now hopeful of some help from the BJP, mainly due to its PM-Kisan scheme, leading to the latter’s sweeping victory. Even the Congress’ NYAY scheme, promising to give Rs. 72,000 annually to the poorest 20% did not succeed in convincing the small farmers. It is nothing short of an anti-incumbency wave!
Notably, the BJP’s 2019 manifesto, promises to extend its much touted PM-Kisan scheme to all the farmers.
All in all, farmers’ distress and the consequent PM-Kisan scheme, Modi’s appeal of nationalism and Congress’ apathy towards the farmers’ concerns along with a directionless campaigning with only anti-Modi speeches and alleged corruption in Rafale deal led to a landslide victory for the BJP.
Yogendra Yadav, president of Swaraj Abhiyan and a leader of the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee, rightly said, “Until February, [farmers issues] were very much on the national agenda. But then came Pulwama and Balakot — the perfect ambush. In the end, farmers did not vote as farmers…This is a failure of the farmers’ movements, who failed to politicise the issue sufficiently, as well as of political parties. It is a major setback, a moment to introspect.”
The Rs. 2000 dole indeed worked for the BJP!
Related Articles
Theme
Campaigns
Videos
Archives
Archives
Podcasts
Religious Indoctrination Through Midday Meals
The Akshaya Patra Foundation (TAPF), a sister concern of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) - a spiritual organisation, is known for its extensive work in providing midday meals (MDM) to children going to publicly-funded schools. TAPF began its journey in 2000, by serving mid-day meals to 1,500 children across five government schools in Bengaluru. Now it serves over 1.75 million children, in 14,702 schools across 12 states in India every day. In February, TAPF invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi to serve the three billionth meal to children in Vrindavan.
However, TAPF lately found itself in a major controversy after it refused to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Government of Karnataka for 2018-19 after the State Food Commission (SFC) officials visited various public schools and suggested addition of onion and garlic for improving the taste of the food served to children. Many activists, researchers, public health professionals and doctors have opposed the stand of TAPF.
The Issue:
TAPF is one of the largest providers of MDM in Karnataka. However, the entire issue began when the CEO of the Zilla Panchayat, Bangalore Urban, refused to sign the MoU with TAPF, citing that the organisation was not providing meals in accordance with the guidelines prescribed by the state government. This was in reference to the inclusion of onions and garlic in its meals, which is mandated by the state government, but not specified under the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Human Resource and Development (MHRD). The district administration also refused to sign the MoU based on the findings of the State Food Commission (SFC).
SFC, headed by Commissioner N. Krishnamurthy, had visited various public schools across the state in order to inspect the quality of MDM served to the children. The visit revealed that the quantity of food served to the children was less than the prescribed standards and the food was unpalatable.
The Commission found that the food was bland and monotonous which had led to children refusing to eat the food. “The food was not at all tasty. Akshaya Patra says that they have met the calorific value prescribed by the government. The problem is that the children are not consuming as many calories simply because the food doesn’t taste good to them,” Krishnamurthy said. Adding further, Krishnamurthy said, “Each child is supposed to be given 150 gm of food per day. But in many schools, especially in Ballari district, the quantity of food being given to the children was less than 150 gm per meal.”
The Commission also found that the milk being served to the children was cold and in some cases the milk was spoilt. This was in violation of the Ksheera Bhagya scheme that mandated distribution of hot milk to school and anganwadi children. Furthermore, eggs which are an extremely rich source of protein, were also not provided by TAPF due to its compliance with the ‘satvik’ diet- a diet based on Ayurveda and yoga literature. TAPF has been accused of flouting various guidelines relating to nutritional standards and using its programmes to propagate its religious beliefs among others.
Flouting Guidelines:
Apart from providing a lesser quantity of food and cold milk, TAPF fails to comply with various other guidelines. Firstly, the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) recommends that every children should consume at least three eggs per week. However, TAPF’s meal doesn’t include egg at all.
According to a study conducted by the Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI) in 2015, onion and garlic increase the bioaccessibility of iron and zinc. It is a known fact that iron deficiency is a huge problem in India and is present among 60-80% of children, especially girls. Dr. Sylvia Karpagam, a public health specialist and researcher in Karnataka, says, “What's happening everywhere (in India) is the pushing of iron tablets. But that can't be a long-term solution to the problem. Also, anything nutritional that can improve the absorption of iron should be given, whether it is onion and garlic — several studies have found them to help increase the absorption and bioavailability.” This shows that by providing a ‘satvik’ diet, TAPF has failed to prioritise the nutrition of the children over its religious beliefs.
Further, a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India submitted to the MHRD in 2015 found that 187 test samples of meals prepared by TAPF failed to meet the prescribed standards, with negative feedback from 75% children and teachers. TAPF had also utilised lower quantities of food grains than the prescribed 100-150 grams for one meal. Children eating these meals were, on an average, consuming only around 40 grams – far less than what is ideal for their age.
The 2017 revised guidelines for engagement of civil society organisations in the MDM scheme states that “operation of centralised kitchen should be entrusted to CSO/NGO with local presence and familiarity with the needs and culture of the State. The organisation should also make a commitment to abide by the scheme guidelines issued by MHRD, be willing to work with Panchayat Raj institutions and municipal bodies in accordance with relevant guidelines of the state government, should not discriminate in any manner on the basis of religion, caste and and creed and should not use the program for propagation of any religious practice.” By enforcing a purely vegetarian diet without onion and garlic, TAPF is evidently using the MDM program for enforcing its religious beliefs.
The committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2013 on prevention of untouchability in MDM schemes affirmed that the meal be cooked locally in the school premises, and also raised concerns about “unauthorised and illegal collection of donations or contributions by ISKCON and Akshaya Patra from public in India and abroad” for the government-sponsored scheme.
Notably, in 2017, the Chandigarh education department found food made by ISKCON without onions and garlic was unpalatable for students and the mid-day meal contract was not given to the organisation.
What Protestors Say?
A cluster of NGOs, activists, health experts and researchers have opposed the current way of execution of the MDM scheme through TAPF. They had even written letters to the state government urging it to either seek a firm commitment from TAPF that the prescribed menu including onion and garlic will be followed by the next academic year or find an alternative to TAPF.
Civil Rights organisation Jan Swasthya Abhiyan (People’s Health Movement) and Right to Food Campaign had written a letter to officials expressing their concerns over the recent controversy surrounding TAPF and its provision of MDM. Copies of the letter were submitted to several departments including the Chief Minister’s office urging them to terminate TAPF’s contract.
“Religious diktats cannot supersede the application of established principles of the right to food to mid-day meal schemes. The Akshaya Patra Foundation, which has been providing mid-day meals to 4.43 lakh school children in Karnataka, has refused to sign the memorandum for 2018-19. The State government has directed the NGO to include onion and garlic in the food, based on recommendations from the State food Commission, which the NGO is refusing to comply with.
The NGO has also not been providing eggs in the MDM as part of its ‘satvik’ diet. However, this point has not yet been raised by the government. This standoff highlights the position of rights-based campaigns that mid-day meals should be locally prepared and culturally relevant and not provided through a centralised agency, especially one that applies limits to the food on the basis of religious belief,” states the letter.
Siddharth Joshi, an independent researcher and one of the signatories said that most of the children consuming midday meals are SC/ST and their staple diet largely includes onion and garlic.
“Children require a certain amount of protein intake everyday for normal growth and development. No matter what substitutes may have been provided, eggs are a sure-fire way to ensure that those daily required intake values are met,” states Dr Keerthika V, from Mysore.
Dr Sylvia Karpagam, said, “Children should be getting hot milk, but they are getting cold milk. The food also tends to be bland and this too results in several children wasting food and not eating, which defeats the whole purpose of the scheme.”
What TAPF Says?:
Since its inception in 2000, TAPF has been providing meals that doesn’t include onion or garlic. According to their website, the foundation has their religious belief which aligns with “advocating a lacto-vegetarian diet, strictly avoiding meat, fish, and eggs" and considers onions and garlic in food as "lower modes of nature which inhibit spiritual advancement.”
Denying the allegations that their meals were flouting the MHRD guidelines, Naveena Neerada Dasa, head of strategic communications and projects at TAPF, said, “We would like to clarify that our freshly cooked meals are in compliance with the nutritional norms prescribed by the MHRD. It is our constant endeavour to contribute to the government’s efforts in promoting good health and nutrition amongst children, which is essential for their holistic growth and development.” Adding further, Dasa said, “Akshaya Patra is committed to serve quality, hygienic and nutritious food to school children everyday and implement Akshara Dasoha, the flagship midday meal programme of the Karnataka government.”
Alleging that the opposition by officials to their program was due to some ‘vested interest’, foundation trustee and former Infosys CFO, Mohandas Pai, said “Akshaya Patra Foundation has been feeding midday meals as per union government's standards. Now it is obvious that some officials under the influence of vested interests are playing mischief for reasons all known.” Saying that their meals were in line with their principles of a ‘satvik’ diet, Pai sought the intervention of Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy to resolve the issue.
Political Angle:
Predictably, this controversy has taken a political turn. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and actress Malavika Avinash slammed the government for issuing the direction to include onion and garlic, saying it was an “uncalled” intervention.
It seems that Malavika and her party have failed to check the data on the nutritional standards of the TAPF meal. Instead, it has taken this as an opportunity to appease the upper caste Brahmins, who do not eat non-vegetarian food including eggs, by extending its support to TAPF.
Latest Developments:
Putting an end to an argument that was raised earlier, the Karnataka state government signed a MoU with TAPF in March 2019 despite the foundation's refusal to use onion and garlic in MDM served to students in government schools.
“Akshaya Patra Foundation refused to include onion and garlic. We could not make alternative arrangements to provide food, and had to yield,” an official told, adding that the issue is yet to be resolved.
The decision of the state government of not terminating TAPF’s contract comes after the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) submitted a report in favour of TAPF. The report appears to be entirely biased without visiting a single school or talking to a single student. One of the claim made by NIN is, “The nutritive values of menus with ingredients used in the mentioned amounts, certainly meet and often exceed the prescribed energy (Kcal) and protein requirements prescribed by MHRD for the MDM.” However, the NIN has come to this conclusion sheerly on the basis of the menu prepared by TAPF without going to the schools and checking the ground-reality.
A point-by-point rebuttal to the NIN report can be viewed here.
The Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI) refused to comment on most of the questions regarding nutritional adequacy, taste, diversity, safety and hygiene etc of the food being supplied by TAPF in absence of a systematic empirical study.
Siddharth Joshi, an independent researcher in Bengaluru, has drafted an open letter to NIN calling for the withdrawal of its unscientific report, pending a systematic field evaluation.
The Implication:
This entire issue evidently has a religious angle which has even been acknowledged by TAPF itself. It seems nothing less than religious indoctrination!
The silent acceptance of the conditions of the TAPF without considering its implications on the already poorly-nourished children is just unacceptable. Instead of advocating for child rights, the BJP government has also refrained from demanding any action for the benefit of the children. Contrarily, it has supported the stand of TAPF and objected to the initial interventions by the SFC.
BJP’s stand is somewhere predictable, considering its own ideology that is based on the principles of Hindutva.
It is significant to note that a study by IndiaSpend found that most of the BJP-ruled states were resistant to eggs in MDM. It found that:
- Only five of the 19 states governed by BJP or their allies (15 have BJP chief ministers) give eggs to children;
- Some non-BJP states too (Punjab, Mizoram and Delhi) do not provide eggs in MDM, mainly due to lack of resources than religious or cultural sentiments. However, BJP states are most likely to resist the inclusion of eggs for reasons related to the sentiments of vegetarians.
Officials in BJP governed states interviewed by IndiaSpend said they were concerned about offending the sentiments of vegetarians. “In Gujarat, most of the population is vegetarian,” said RG Trivedi, commissioner (mid-day meal scheme) in Gujarat. “Additionally, we provide pulses daily in mid-day meals as protein-rich food, hence we don’t serve eggs.”
Though religious organisations have the right to promote or oppose certain food beliefs, this cannot be a justification while providing MDM to children, belonging to different faiths, that also in government schools. Such instances contradict a secular government’s mandate as well as nutritional guidelines by scientific bodies like the NIN and the Indian Academy of Pediatrics. It also infringes the food rights of majority of children attending government schools who are often from marginalised communities and suffer poor nutrition.
Food is a basic human need. However, the current top-down approach for what food communities should receive from supplementary programmes is both paternalistic and creates major bottlenecks in the success of these programmes.
Such religious indoctrination in the name of welfare and upliftment is not only unjustifiable but also unconstitutional.
Related Articles:
2.BJP States Most Resistant To Eggs In Mid-Day Meals, Cite Vegetarian Sentiments
3.Linking Mid-Day Meal to Aadhar is Illegal and Outrageous: Right to Food Campaign
Religious Indoctrination Through Midday Meals
The Akshaya Patra Foundation (TAPF), a sister concern of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) - a spiritual organisation, is known for its extensive work in providing midday meals (MDM) to children going to publicly-funded schools. TAPF began its journey in 2000, by serving mid-day meals to 1,500 children across five government schools in Bengaluru. Now it serves over 1.75 million children, in 14,702 schools across 12 states in India every day. In February, TAPF invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi to serve the three billionth meal to children in Vrindavan.
However, TAPF lately found itself in a major controversy after it refused to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Government of Karnataka for 2018-19 after the State Food Commission (SFC) officials visited various public schools and suggested addition of onion and garlic for improving the taste of the food served to children. Many activists, researchers, public health professionals and doctors have opposed the stand of TAPF.
The Issue:
TAPF is one of the largest providers of MDM in Karnataka. However, the entire issue began when the CEO of the Zilla Panchayat, Bangalore Urban, refused to sign the MoU with TAPF, citing that the organisation was not providing meals in accordance with the guidelines prescribed by the state government. This was in reference to the inclusion of onions and garlic in its meals, which is mandated by the state government, but not specified under the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Human Resource and Development (MHRD). The district administration also refused to sign the MoU based on the findings of the State Food Commission (SFC).
SFC, headed by Commissioner N. Krishnamurthy, had visited various public schools across the state in order to inspect the quality of MDM served to the children. The visit revealed that the quantity of food served to the children was less than the prescribed standards and the food was unpalatable.
The Commission found that the food was bland and monotonous which had led to children refusing to eat the food. “The food was not at all tasty. Akshaya Patra says that they have met the calorific value prescribed by the government. The problem is that the children are not consuming as many calories simply because the food doesn’t taste good to them,” Krishnamurthy said. Adding further, Krishnamurthy said, “Each child is supposed to be given 150 gm of food per day. But in many schools, especially in Ballari district, the quantity of food being given to the children was less than 150 gm per meal.”
The Commission also found that the milk being served to the children was cold and in some cases the milk was spoilt. This was in violation of the Ksheera Bhagya scheme that mandated distribution of hot milk to school and anganwadi children. Furthermore, eggs which are an extremely rich source of protein, were also not provided by TAPF due to its compliance with the ‘satvik’ diet- a diet based on Ayurveda and yoga literature. TAPF has been accused of flouting various guidelines relating to nutritional standards and using its programmes to propagate its religious beliefs among others.
Flouting Guidelines:
Apart from providing a lesser quantity of food and cold milk, TAPF fails to comply with various other guidelines. Firstly, the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) recommends that every children should consume at least three eggs per week. However, TAPF’s meal doesn’t include egg at all.
According to a study conducted by the Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI) in 2015, onion and garlic increase the bioaccessibility of iron and zinc. It is a known fact that iron deficiency is a huge problem in India and is present among 60-80% of children, especially girls. Dr. Sylvia Karpagam, a public health specialist and researcher in Karnataka, says, “What's happening everywhere (in India) is the pushing of iron tablets. But that can't be a long-term solution to the problem. Also, anything nutritional that can improve the absorption of iron should be given, whether it is onion and garlic — several studies have found them to help increase the absorption and bioavailability.” This shows that by providing a ‘satvik’ diet, TAPF has failed to prioritise the nutrition of the children over its religious beliefs.
Further, a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India submitted to the MHRD in 2015 found that 187 test samples of meals prepared by TAPF failed to meet the prescribed standards, with negative feedback from 75% children and teachers. TAPF had also utilised lower quantities of food grains than the prescribed 100-150 grams for one meal. Children eating these meals were, on an average, consuming only around 40 grams – far less than what is ideal for their age.
The 2017 revised guidelines for engagement of civil society organisations in the MDM scheme states that “operation of centralised kitchen should be entrusted to CSO/NGO with local presence and familiarity with the needs and culture of the State. The organisation should also make a commitment to abide by the scheme guidelines issued by MHRD, be willing to work with Panchayat Raj institutions and municipal bodies in accordance with relevant guidelines of the state government, should not discriminate in any manner on the basis of religion, caste and and creed and should not use the program for propagation of any religious practice.” By enforcing a purely vegetarian diet without onion and garlic, TAPF is evidently using the MDM program for enforcing its religious beliefs.
The committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2013 on prevention of untouchability in MDM schemes affirmed that the meal be cooked locally in the school premises, and also raised concerns about “unauthorised and illegal collection of donations or contributions by ISKCON and Akshaya Patra from public in India and abroad” for the government-sponsored scheme.
Notably, in 2017, the Chandigarh education department found food made by ISKCON without onions and garlic was unpalatable for students and the mid-day meal contract was not given to the organisation.
What Protestors Say?
A cluster of NGOs, activists, health experts and researchers have opposed the current way of execution of the MDM scheme through TAPF. They had even written letters to the state government urging it to either seek a firm commitment from TAPF that the prescribed menu including onion and garlic will be followed by the next academic year or find an alternative to TAPF.
Civil Rights organisation Jan Swasthya Abhiyan (People’s Health Movement) and Right to Food Campaign had written a letter to officials expressing their concerns over the recent controversy surrounding TAPF and its provision of MDM. Copies of the letter were submitted to several departments including the Chief Minister’s office urging them to terminate TAPF’s contract.
“Religious diktats cannot supersede the application of established principles of the right to food to mid-day meal schemes. The Akshaya Patra Foundation, which has been providing mid-day meals to 4.43 lakh school children in Karnataka, has refused to sign the memorandum for 2018-19. The State government has directed the NGO to include onion and garlic in the food, based on recommendations from the State food Commission, which the NGO is refusing to comply with.
The NGO has also not been providing eggs in the MDM as part of its ‘satvik’ diet. However, this point has not yet been raised by the government. This standoff highlights the position of rights-based campaigns that mid-day meals should be locally prepared and culturally relevant and not provided through a centralised agency, especially one that applies limits to the food on the basis of religious belief,” states the letter.
Siddharth Joshi, an independent researcher and one of the signatories said that most of the children consuming midday meals are SC/ST and their staple diet largely includes onion and garlic.
“Children require a certain amount of protein intake everyday for normal growth and development. No matter what substitutes may have been provided, eggs are a sure-fire way to ensure that those daily required intake values are met,” states Dr Keerthika V, from Mysore.
Dr Sylvia Karpagam, said, “Children should be getting hot milk, but they are getting cold milk. The food also tends to be bland and this too results in several children wasting food and not eating, which defeats the whole purpose of the scheme.”
What TAPF Says?:
Since its inception in 2000, TAPF has been providing meals that doesn’t include onion or garlic. According to their website, the foundation has their religious belief which aligns with “advocating a lacto-vegetarian diet, strictly avoiding meat, fish, and eggs" and considers onions and garlic in food as "lower modes of nature which inhibit spiritual advancement.”
Denying the allegations that their meals were flouting the MHRD guidelines, Naveena Neerada Dasa, head of strategic communications and projects at TAPF, said, “We would like to clarify that our freshly cooked meals are in compliance with the nutritional norms prescribed by the MHRD. It is our constant endeavour to contribute to the government’s efforts in promoting good health and nutrition amongst children, which is essential for their holistic growth and development.” Adding further, Dasa said, “Akshaya Patra is committed to serve quality, hygienic and nutritious food to school children everyday and implement Akshara Dasoha, the flagship midday meal programme of the Karnataka government.”
Alleging that the opposition by officials to their program was due to some ‘vested interest’, foundation trustee and former Infosys CFO, Mohandas Pai, said “Akshaya Patra Foundation has been feeding midday meals as per union government's standards. Now it is obvious that some officials under the influence of vested interests are playing mischief for reasons all known.” Saying that their meals were in line with their principles of a ‘satvik’ diet, Pai sought the intervention of Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy to resolve the issue.
Political Angle:
Predictably, this controversy has taken a political turn. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and actress Malavika Avinash slammed the government for issuing the direction to include onion and garlic, saying it was an “uncalled” intervention.
It seems that Malavika and her party have failed to check the data on the nutritional standards of the TAPF meal. Instead, it has taken this as an opportunity to appease the upper caste Brahmins, who do not eat non-vegetarian food including eggs, by extending its support to TAPF.
Latest Developments:
Putting an end to an argument that was raised earlier, the Karnataka state government signed a MoU with TAPF in March 2019 despite the foundation's refusal to use onion and garlic in MDM served to students in government schools.
“Akshaya Patra Foundation refused to include onion and garlic. We could not make alternative arrangements to provide food, and had to yield,” an official told, adding that the issue is yet to be resolved.
The decision of the state government of not terminating TAPF’s contract comes after the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) submitted a report in favour of TAPF. The report appears to be entirely biased without visiting a single school or talking to a single student. One of the claim made by NIN is, “The nutritive values of menus with ingredients used in the mentioned amounts, certainly meet and often exceed the prescribed energy (Kcal) and protein requirements prescribed by MHRD for the MDM.” However, the NIN has come to this conclusion sheerly on the basis of the menu prepared by TAPF without going to the schools and checking the ground-reality.
A point-by-point rebuttal to the NIN report can be viewed here.
The Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI) refused to comment on most of the questions regarding nutritional adequacy, taste, diversity, safety and hygiene etc of the food being supplied by TAPF in absence of a systematic empirical study.
Siddharth Joshi, an independent researcher in Bengaluru, has drafted an open letter to NIN calling for the withdrawal of its unscientific report, pending a systematic field evaluation.
The Implication:
This entire issue evidently has a religious angle which has even been acknowledged by TAPF itself. It seems nothing less than religious indoctrination!
The silent acceptance of the conditions of the TAPF without considering its implications on the already poorly-nourished children is just unacceptable. Instead of advocating for child rights, the BJP government has also refrained from demanding any action for the benefit of the children. Contrarily, it has supported the stand of TAPF and objected to the initial interventions by the SFC.
BJP’s stand is somewhere predictable, considering its own ideology that is based on the principles of Hindutva.
It is significant to note that a study by IndiaSpend found that most of the BJP-ruled states were resistant to eggs in MDM. It found that:
- Only five of the 19 states governed by BJP or their allies (15 have BJP chief ministers) give eggs to children;
- Some non-BJP states too (Punjab, Mizoram and Delhi) do not provide eggs in MDM, mainly due to lack of resources than religious or cultural sentiments. However, BJP states are most likely to resist the inclusion of eggs for reasons related to the sentiments of vegetarians.
Officials in BJP governed states interviewed by IndiaSpend said they were concerned about offending the sentiments of vegetarians. “In Gujarat, most of the population is vegetarian,” said RG Trivedi, commissioner (mid-day meal scheme) in Gujarat. “Additionally, we provide pulses daily in mid-day meals as protein-rich food, hence we don’t serve eggs.”
Though religious organisations have the right to promote or oppose certain food beliefs, this cannot be a justification while providing MDM to children, belonging to different faiths, that also in government schools. Such instances contradict a secular government’s mandate as well as nutritional guidelines by scientific bodies like the NIN and the Indian Academy of Pediatrics. It also infringes the food rights of majority of children attending government schools who are often from marginalised communities and suffer poor nutrition.
Food is a basic human need. However, the current top-down approach for what food communities should receive from supplementary programmes is both paternalistic and creates major bottlenecks in the success of these programmes.
Such religious indoctrination in the name of welfare and upliftment is not only unjustifiable but also unconstitutional.
Related Articles:
2.BJP States Most Resistant To Eggs In Mid-Day Meals, Cite Vegetarian Sentiments
3.Linking Mid-Day Meal to Aadhar is Illegal and Outrageous: Right to Food Campaign
Related Articles
Theme
Campaigns
Videos
Archives
Archives
Podcasts
Massive Loot of Poor in the Name of Bank Charges
Factors That Triggered Higher Bank Charges:
1. The Problems of NPAs:
The Indian banking sector is going through a severe crisis. Losses arising out of NPAs have just multiplied over the years making it extremely difficult for the banks to carry on their daily operations. Banks continue to remain under-capitalized with their profits falling, thereby reducing their credit capacity. This is a major cause of the jobless growth which India is facing today.
As of March 2018, bad loans amounted to over Rs. 10.35 lakh crore and around 50% of these belong to the top 100 borrowers. In fact near 75% of all bad loans are over Rs. 100 crore, indicating clearly that bad loans primarily belong to the top 1%.
It is a known fact that high NPAs are a result of easy loans given to huge corporate bodies without properly verifying the need for such a loan and considering the risks associated with the projects for which the loans have been provided. UPA I and II have often been accused of providing easy loans to its corporate friends which have now turned into NPAs either due to mismanagement of funds (as is the case of Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya) or due to the 2008 global financial crisis.
While the banks were trying to deal with the growing menace of NPAs, RBI increased the pressure by conducting an Asset Quality Review (AQR) in August, 2015 which revealed that a large number of loans given by the banks were non-performing (even upto 100%) and hidden. Consequently, the RBI made stringent rules for declaring bad loans. The RBI also placed 11 Public Sector Banks (PSBs) under prompt corrective action, restricting their ability to lend and accept deposits, or in effect function. Even the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) has not helped the banks to recover more than one-third of the lost amount.
Hence, the profits have fallen considerably forcing the banks to create other income sources in the name of bank charges.
2. Demonetization
While the banks were trying to deal with the losses and comply with the RBI guidelines, they were subjected to another blow in the form of demonetization in 2016.
A sudden delegitimization of 86% of Indian currency led to a flush of cash deposits in the banks. The employees worked overtime to ensure a smooth transition for the working class. However, the ruling government as well as the RBI failed to take cognisance of the immediate consequence on the banking sector. Apart from an increased operational cost, huge cash deposits increased the interest payments of the banks thereby worsening their already poor profitability.
3. Welfare Schemes:
Apart from the above two factors, another major reason for the reduced profits of the banks is its forceful involvement in the implementation of the welfare schemes launched by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Though the BJP has tried to ensure financial inclusion of all through welfare schemes such as the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY), it has proved to be a disaster for the depositors as well as the banks, especially the PSBs. Under the PMJDY, almost 32 crore accounts were opened but they remain non-operational till date. Furthermore, the Aadhar registration and the bank account linking process has led to a huge increase in the operational costs of the banks.
The Impact:
With so much of stress from the RBI as well as the government, the banks are being forced to lash out at the depositors.
RBI issued a guideline in July 2013, directing the banks to levy penal charges in case of non maintenance of minimum balance. Shockingly, a study conducted by Prof. Ashish Das of IIT Bombay revealed that banks were converting no-fee Jan Dhan saving accounts into fee-based regular saving accounts silently when an account holder carried out a 5th debit transaction in a month. This evidently impacts the poorest of poor who are unable to maintain even a minimum balance.
However, revenue from the penalties was insufficient for the banks to cover the huge losses. As a result, the banks have started levying charges on various other transactions since a year.
Depositors are even being charged for banking services which earlier had no charges like changes in address or mobile number, SMS alert service, update of KYC-related documents etc. They are now being charged for cash transactions in their home branches as well. Number of cash deposits and withdrawals, without charge, are limited to five or six times a month and an amount ranging from Rs 10 to Rs 150 per transaction is being charged by different banks. Added to this, there have also been limits imposed on the number of uncharged ATM transactions. The situation is worse for the migrant workers, that form a huge proportion of our labour class, who most often use non-home branches which increases their banking costs.
Even the number of onsite ATMs have reduced across banks, indicating sector wide cost cutting efforts aimed at reducing the depositors’ access to their funds.
An exhaustive list of the charges levied by certain major banks for various services can be viewed here. Apart from the already high charges, 18% GST is also levied worsening the conditions of the poor.
The assumption that the banks are taking such action in order to recover their losses is verified from the statement of State Bank of India (SBI) Managing Director in September 2017 who said that SBI was planning to raise Rs 2000 crore as a penalty for non-compliance of minimum balance in saving accounts, part of which would be used to compensate the extra costs incurred to banks due to linking of 40 crore savings accounts to Aadhaar.
As of March 2018, Rs. 11,500 crore has been collected by 21 PSBs and 3 private banks as penalties for non-maintenance of minimum balance. At the same time just the PSBs have written off Rs. 3.17 lakh crore of bad loans. Thus, the penalties would only compensate less than 4% of the losses. As a result, levying penalties is nothing but an unnecessary harassment for the poor and the working class who are paying for the mishaps of the corporates and the government alike.
The data relating to the penalties collected by few of the major PSBs and private banks for the non-maintenance of minimum balance in savings account can be viewed here.
The BJP government is not only shifting the burden of the banking crisis onto depositors but is also forcing depositors to subsidize its supposedly pro-people schemes. To squeeze and fleece depositors to compensate for the actions of the largest corporate houses in the country is regressive and unconscionable.
Financial Accountability Network (FAN) - India, that has started a ‘No Bank Charge’ campaign, has discussed this issue with various stakeholders including students, activists, economists among others. Dr Syeda Hameed, former member of the Planning Commission of India, says, “The policy on bank charges is extremely shameful as the burden of the NPA created by the rich and corporates has fallen on the poor, students, muslims, dalit women and men, and other marginalised sections.” Social activist Medha Patkar says, “Bank charges are a loot and they must be scrapped.”
Krishnakant of the Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, Gujarat says, “Bank charges are bullying by the banks. There is no discussion on the decision of the bank charges. We don’t know who decides these charges. Nobody consults people.”
Anil Kumar Yadav, a Delhi-based delivery executive, says, “If banks can charge on minimum balance then why can’t they do so on maximum balance? I earn Rs. 9,000 a month which leaves me with insufficient balance at the end of the month.”
Like Anil, there are thousands of such working class and poor people for whom banking has become like an expense rather than a saving mechanism. They are being looted for no fault of theirs. This to some extent is forcing them to again move out of the formal financial institutions and depend on the informal sources. It is a vicious cycle that they have been trapped in.
Way Forward?:
The sheer regressiveness of these anti-poor measures is the result of the inability or unwillingness of the government as well as the RBI to fix the issues surrounding the banking sector. It is high time that the government increases its expediture and recapitalize the banks instead of shifting the burden on the poor sections of the society. Stringent, transperant and accountable lending measures should be formulated. Also, efforts should be taken to initiate proceedings against the defaulters.
Only if these measures are undertaken, can the credit flow improve which in turn will improve the banks’ profits and help in the overall economic growth. Otherwise, the cyclical process of bad loans-write offs-auctions-recapitalization will happen again which will worsen the already bad situation of the poor people.
It is time that the government and the RBI own up to their blunders and pull up their socks to revitalize the Indian banking sector. These charges, fees and penalties are not only unjust but also inadequate for compensating for the huge losses. These regressive measures can in no means be a substitute for the direly needed measures like sufficient recapitalization and reforms in lending and recovery practices. This passing the burden of corporate debts to working people must urgently be stopped.
Related Articles:
Massive Loot of Poor in the Name of Bank Charges
Factors That Triggered Higher Bank Charges:
1. The Problems of NPAs:
The Indian banking sector is going through a severe crisis. Losses arising out of NPAs have just multiplied over the years making it extremely difficult for the banks to carry on their daily operations. Banks continue to remain under-capitalized with their profits falling, thereby reducing their credit capacity. This is a major cause of the jobless growth which India is facing today.
As of March 2018, bad loans amounted to over Rs. 10.35 lakh crore and around 50% of these belong to the top 100 borrowers. In fact near 75% of all bad loans are over Rs. 100 crore, indicating clearly that bad loans primarily belong to the top 1%.
It is a known fact that high NPAs are a result of easy loans given to huge corporate bodies without properly verifying the need for such a loan and considering the risks associated with the projects for which the loans have been provided. UPA I and II have often been accused of providing easy loans to its corporate friends which have now turned into NPAs either due to mismanagement of funds (as is the case of Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya) or due to the 2008 global financial crisis.
While the banks were trying to deal with the growing menace of NPAs, RBI increased the pressure by conducting an Asset Quality Review (AQR) in August, 2015 which revealed that a large number of loans given by the banks were non-performing (even upto 100%) and hidden. Consequently, the RBI made stringent rules for declaring bad loans. The RBI also placed 11 Public Sector Banks (PSBs) under prompt corrective action, restricting their ability to lend and accept deposits, or in effect function. Even the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) has not helped the banks to recover more than one-third of the lost amount.
Hence, the profits have fallen considerably forcing the banks to create other income sources in the name of bank charges.
2. Demonetization
While the banks were trying to deal with the losses and comply with the RBI guidelines, they were subjected to another blow in the form of demonetization in 2016.
A sudden delegitimization of 86% of Indian currency led to a flush of cash deposits in the banks. The employees worked overtime to ensure a smooth transition for the working class. However, the ruling government as well as the RBI failed to take cognisance of the immediate consequence on the banking sector. Apart from an increased operational cost, huge cash deposits increased the interest payments of the banks thereby worsening their already poor profitability.
3. Welfare Schemes:
Apart from the above two factors, another major reason for the reduced profits of the banks is its forceful involvement in the implementation of the welfare schemes launched by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Though the BJP has tried to ensure financial inclusion of all through welfare schemes such as the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY), it has proved to be a disaster for the depositors as well as the banks, especially the PSBs. Under the PMJDY, almost 32 crore accounts were opened but they remain non-operational till date. Furthermore, the Aadhar registration and the bank account linking process has led to a huge increase in the operational costs of the banks.
The Impact:
With so much of stress from the RBI as well as the government, the banks are being forced to lash out at the depositors.
RBI issued a guideline in July 2013, directing the banks to levy penal charges in case of non maintenance of minimum balance. Shockingly, a study conducted by Prof. Ashish Das of IIT Bombay revealed that banks were converting no-fee Jan Dhan saving accounts into fee-based regular saving accounts silently when an account holder carried out a 5th debit transaction in a month. This evidently impacts the poorest of poor who are unable to maintain even a minimum balance.
However, revenue from the penalties was insufficient for the banks to cover the huge losses. As a result, the banks have started levying charges on various other transactions since a year.
Depositors are even being charged for banking services which earlier had no charges like changes in address or mobile number, SMS alert service, update of KYC-related documents etc. They are now being charged for cash transactions in their home branches as well. Number of cash deposits and withdrawals, without charge, are limited to five or six times a month and an amount ranging from Rs 10 to Rs 150 per transaction is being charged by different banks. Added to this, there have also been limits imposed on the number of uncharged ATM transactions. The situation is worse for the migrant workers, that form a huge proportion of our labour class, who most often use non-home branches which increases their banking costs.
Even the number of onsite ATMs have reduced across banks, indicating sector wide cost cutting efforts aimed at reducing the depositors’ access to their funds.
An exhaustive list of the charges levied by certain major banks for various services can be viewed here. Apart from the already high charges, 18% GST is also levied worsening the conditions of the poor.
The assumption that the banks are taking such action in order to recover their losses is verified from the statement of State Bank of India (SBI) Managing Director in September 2017 who said that SBI was planning to raise Rs 2000 crore as a penalty for non-compliance of minimum balance in saving accounts, part of which would be used to compensate the extra costs incurred to banks due to linking of 40 crore savings accounts to Aadhaar.
As of March 2018, Rs. 11,500 crore has been collected by 21 PSBs and 3 private banks as penalties for non-maintenance of minimum balance. At the same time just the PSBs have written off Rs. 3.17 lakh crore of bad loans. Thus, the penalties would only compensate less than 4% of the losses. As a result, levying penalties is nothing but an unnecessary harassment for the poor and the working class who are paying for the mishaps of the corporates and the government alike.
The data relating to the penalties collected by few of the major PSBs and private banks for the non-maintenance of minimum balance in savings account can be viewed here.
The BJP government is not only shifting the burden of the banking crisis onto depositors but is also forcing depositors to subsidize its supposedly pro-people schemes. To squeeze and fleece depositors to compensate for the actions of the largest corporate houses in the country is regressive and unconscionable.
Financial Accountability Network (FAN) - India, that has started a ‘No Bank Charge’ campaign, has discussed this issue with various stakeholders including students, activists, economists among others. Dr Syeda Hameed, former member of the Planning Commission of India, says, “The policy on bank charges is extremely shameful as the burden of the NPA created by the rich and corporates has fallen on the poor, students, muslims, dalit women and men, and other marginalised sections.” Social activist Medha Patkar says, “Bank charges are a loot and they must be scrapped.”
Krishnakant of the Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, Gujarat says, “Bank charges are bullying by the banks. There is no discussion on the decision of the bank charges. We don’t know who decides these charges. Nobody consults people.”
Anil Kumar Yadav, a Delhi-based delivery executive, says, “If banks can charge on minimum balance then why can’t they do so on maximum balance? I earn Rs. 9,000 a month which leaves me with insufficient balance at the end of the month.”
Like Anil, there are thousands of such working class and poor people for whom banking has become like an expense rather than a saving mechanism. They are being looted for no fault of theirs. This to some extent is forcing them to again move out of the formal financial institutions and depend on the informal sources. It is a vicious cycle that they have been trapped in.
Way Forward?:
The sheer regressiveness of these anti-poor measures is the result of the inability or unwillingness of the government as well as the RBI to fix the issues surrounding the banking sector. It is high time that the government increases its expediture and recapitalize the banks instead of shifting the burden on the poor sections of the society. Stringent, transperant and accountable lending measures should be formulated. Also, efforts should be taken to initiate proceedings against the defaulters.
Only if these measures are undertaken, can the credit flow improve which in turn will improve the banks’ profits and help in the overall economic growth. Otherwise, the cyclical process of bad loans-write offs-auctions-recapitalization will happen again which will worsen the already bad situation of the poor people.
It is time that the government and the RBI own up to their blunders and pull up their socks to revitalize the Indian banking sector. These charges, fees and penalties are not only unjust but also inadequate for compensating for the huge losses. These regressive measures can in no means be a substitute for the direly needed measures like sufficient recapitalization and reforms in lending and recovery practices. This passing the burden of corporate debts to working people must urgently be stopped.
Related Articles: