Sahariyas and their Vulnerabilities

Source: Action Aid India

Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan together have more than 2.45 crore tribal population divided into 46 and 12 groups respectively. Seven tribal groups in Madhya Pradesh and one in Rajasthan what is termed as Particularly Vulnerable Tribal groups or PVTGs (earlier called Primitive Tribal Groups or PTGs). Sahariya is one among these PVTGs inhabits   eight districts of Madhya Pradesh and few places in Rajasthan. According to Census 2011, Sahariya is the largest community in the list of 75 PTGs with a population of more than seven lakh. Around 85 per cent of Sahariyas live in Gwalior, Guna, Shipuri, Vidhisha, Datia, Bhind, Sagar and Tikamgarh districts of Madhya Pradesh. The government of India recognized the vulnerability of Sahariyas in 1975-76 by including them in PTGs but in the late end of the 20th Century, the enforcement of environmental laws, insensitive displacement, schemes for mainstreaming and ignorance of their vulnerabilities as PTG marginalized them further.

Livelihood of Sahariyas:

Traditionally Sahariyas are forest dwellers. They practiced shifting cultivation, hunting gathering, pastoralism, and a quiet nomadic life. Similar to many other PTGs, Sahariyas had also close link with forest and forest product for their livelihood. They practiced agriculture in mountains and during non-agricultural season, they collected forest products. According to a study conducted by Vikas Samvad, Bhopal in 2007, Sahariyas used to barter forest product like Gums and Chironji with that of cereals and also used to prepare baskets out of ‘Siari’ wood to store their half yearly requirement. Sahariya’s economy before the enforcing of environmental laws was self-sufficient and was in harmony with the local ecology.

After government took over the control of forest, Sahariyas lost their main source of livelihood. Vikas Samvad in its study of Madhya Pradesh argues that the government policy on forest wiped them from forest and forest products. According to the Census 2001 data, more than 70 per cent of Sahariyas are non-cultivators. Most of them are agricultural labourers. A study by the Centre for Tribal Development in 2002 reported that the annual per capita income among Sahariyas was Rs. 2,691, or about Rs 7 a day, less than one-third of the national poverty line figure of Rs. 26 a day in rural areas. Curtailing forest rights of Sahariyays, through environmental policies, what they were inheriting since ages destroyed their existence. On the other hands government’s un-planned, insensitive and shortsighted rehabilitation and development plan for Sahariyas pushed them to further deprivation.

Major Visible Vulnerabilities

Modern development initiatives in India in last few decades undermined socio-cultural diversities of PTGs such as Sahariya. Despite recognizing the vulnerabilities of PTGs in 1970s their voices remain unheard in developmental programs targeted to them. It seems that in last few decades their vulnerability increased instead of decreasing. Some of these vulnerabilities are discussed here in brief.

Starvation:

After losing control over production of grains and accessing food item through their traditional barter system in last few decades, Sahariyas are now facing starvation situation on every day basis. Due to scarcity of food, they rely on ‘tubers’ and ‘leaves’ collected from nearby forests. When drought hits and there is nothing to eat, Sahariyas depend on bread made of ‘Sama’ (a locally grown wild grass) and soup made from its seeds. Very often even this grass is not fit for consumption as it doesn’t ripen due to lack of water , which make them difficult to digest.

High Malnutrition:

Insufficient food has led to wide spread malnutrition amongst every age group of Sahariays. Action Aid India reported that the malnutrition level among Sahariya children under three is as high as 66.3%, which is much higher the national average of 47%. Many such other studies of Sahariyas revealed high level of undernourishment and hunger deaths. According to a paper inquiring status of women and children of Sahariyas of Madhya Pradesh published in Indian Medical Journal in 2013 found that Chronic Energy Deficiency (CED) affected 42.4 percent women whereas 90.1 percent women were anemic. In their study, Kapoor et al (2009) noted that CED amongst males was about 48.8 percent. As per World Health Organization a CED of 40 percent exhibits a critical health problem.

Poor Health:

Curative health care is not an option for most. In most cases, health centers are very far away from Sahariya villages. Moreover, many report being callously treated at the health centers by the staff. Many times Sahariyas are not aware about what they are being prescribed. Therefore, most times,’ quacks are preferred. Empirical studies have found that major causes of death include pneumonia, malaria, tuberculosis, gastric problems and diarrhea. Low standard of living, poor food habits, low socio-economic conditions, lack of portable water and unfavorable environment all contribute to poor health standards. 

Low Education and Child Labour:

Sahariyas do not have access to education; Census data reveals that only 2 per cent of Sahariyas have studied until the secondary level. The literacy rate of Saharia both in Rajasthan and in Madhya Pradesh is the lowest amongst all the tribes in these states. In Rajasthan the tribal literacy rate is 52.8 whereas Sahariya literacy rate is 48 percent. Similarly, Madhya Pradesh has a tribal literacy rate of 50.6 whereas the Sahariya literacy is recorded at 42.1 percent. Women literacy amongst the Sahariyas is much less with Madhya Pradesh at 32 and Rajasthan at 33.7 percent respectively.

Hindustan Times recently reported that children, instead of being sent to school are working to sustain their families. Increasing debt due to crop failure and food insecurity forces families to send their children  to work for wages ranging between INR 2000-6000. The children are employed to herd sheep and other animals in the jungles of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

Conclusion:

Even after being identified as a PTG group, policies dealing with Sahariyas have not kept in mind the features that make them an especially primitive group. However, continuous ignorance of their culture continuous to feature in the way government is formulating response to them. As mentioned earlier, they are frequently ill treated, which marginalizes them further. Moreover, when they access government services, the nourishment provided is not suited to their dietary practices. Children cannot digest or do not prefer panjeeri and soya buffs. The reason a special category of tribes was created was so that policies are customized to their lifestyle. Thus, the developmental approach of Saharaiyas must emphasize an effort to understand their social, cultural and economic conditions that make them a Primitive Tribal Group.

Jeet Singh and Shriyam Gupta 

Is Abrogating Article 370 a Mistake?



Source: rediff.com

India is a country which embraced Federalism at the time of independence from Colonial rule with many nations existing within its ambit. A noteworthy instance in acknowledging the Federal polity in India is that of Jammu and Kashmir and Article 370 of the constitution which grants the state an autonomous status. Since the BJP-led government assumed office at the Centre in May 2014, the idea of abrogation of this article has been gaining steam. However, this move may jeopardize India’s already fragile relations with the state of Jammu and Kashmir and may lead to a forced Balkanisation of the state and defeat the idea of Cooperative Federalism with which article 370 was enacted.

On July 11, 2014, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition challenging the constitutional validity of Article 370. A bench of Chief Justice RM Lodha, Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman dismissed the plea by Kumari Vijayalakshmi Jha, who argued that the article was a temporary provision that lapsed with the dissolution of the state's constituent assembly in 1957.

However, the impact that this proposed move would have on the Indian Federal structure are lost in the din of political rhetoric. Why has this article been the most debated one among all the provisions of the Indian constitution? What is the BJP’s interest in abrogating it and what impact would this action have on not only the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but also India as a whole? These are some of the aspects explored in this essay.

Brief History

At the time of independence, J&K was a Muslim majority state with a Hindu ruler, Raja Hari Singh. The state was a bone of contention between then newly formed Pakistan and India. Being a Muslim state, Pakistan demanded that the state be a part of that country while upholding the ideals of secularism, India staked claim at it.

There was no provision in the British approved partition plan which stated upfront that the Hindu Princely state must accede to India and the Muslim states to Pakistan. The accession of Junagadh was an example of the ambiguity consequent to this. Jinnah accepted the accession of Junagadh to Pakistan in 1947 despite it being predominantly a Hindu province and later a people’s movement revoked that decision and Junagadh became a part of India.

Article 370 was a result of a refusal by the Hindu King Raja Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir to join either India or Pakistan after partition. In order to retain sovereignty of the state, despite Pakistan’s claim over it owing to a Muslim majority in line with the two-nation theory, led to the state’s monarch siding with the Indian side under special circumstances.  All the other princely states had chosen sides among the two countries, however, owing to a political movement under the leadership of Sheikh Abdullah (Father of Farooque Abdullah; later formed the National Conference), who was opposed to merging with Pakistan, J&K was granted a special status. In 1947, coming under attack from NWFP tribes, an Instrument of Accession was signed between Hari Singh and India which agreed upon maintaining the state’s sovereignty unlike other princely states. What this meant in effect was that other than specific matters including defence, communications and foreign policy, the Indian Parliament would have to seek permission from J&K State Assembly before implementing any laws in the state. The article was accepted in the Constituent Assembly in 1947 and was adopted in the Constitution in October 1949.

In 1949, PM Nehru asked Abdullah, who was appointed as the PM of J&K to prepare a draft of the article (then called Draft Article 306-A) to be appended to the Constitution in consultation with Dr. Ambedkar.  The then Law Minister Dr. Ambedkar had refused to draft the article on the grounds that while Abdullah wanted India to defend and develop Kashmir and that Kashmiris have equal rights all over India, the same rights must not apply to citizens from other parts of the country in Kashmir. He felt that it was a betrayal of the national interest. On his refusal, the article was eventually drafted by Gopalaswami Ayengar who was a minister without a portfolio in the first Cabinet of India and a former Diwan of Hari Singh. After being introduced in the Constituent Assembly, the draft Article 306-A faced extensive opposition, with only Mualana Azad standing in its favour. However, with Pandit Nehru’s backing, it was adopted and implemented, initially as a temporary arrangement, with hopes of a full integration in time to come.

The idea of a Plebiscite in J&K to uphold the people’s voice of the state in framing the state’s constitution was taken up briefly in the beginning, being discarded eventually in 1949. The Constituent Assembly of J&K which was to be consulted for any Central Law to be implemented in the state was constituted in 1951 and dissolved in 1957 and in the absence of such a body, abrogation of the article 370 is simply unconstitutional.

Government’s interest in revoking article 370

The BJP has indicated in the past that once in power, it would work on abrogating Article 370. Now that they have a government at the Centre, this seems like an impending reality. A junior Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, Jitendra Singh recently said in a statement “We are in the process of repealing Article 370 and are in talks with the stakeholders,” starting fresh speculations on the issue. Also veteran BJP leader L K Advani, in his blog, called for the same in order to facilitate Kashmir’s further integration into the country.  This blog was a tribute to the founder of Jan Sangh, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee who died in a jail in J&K in 1953 while leading agitation against the article.

The reason for BJP to want the article gone is rooted in the history of how it came about. Being a Right-wing Hindu Nationalist Party, the BJP maintains that after the implementation of Article 370 in J&K, Sheikh Abdullah was appointed the Prime Minister of the state. He brought about reforms in the state, especially pertaining to land which adversely affected the Kashmiri Hindus (especially the upper caste Pandits) and led to them being relegated in their social standing. The land-owning Hindu community, as a consequence to the law limiting maximum land individual holding of 22.75 acres, lost their land during the redistribution process where any surplus land holdings was distributed among the peasants who worked on it, mostly Kashmiri Muslims. This led to the idea of land redistribution mistaken for communalism.

Moreover, since 1950, on several occasions, various provisions of Article 370 have been overruled by Constitutional orders. As it stands now, out of 395 total articles in the Indian Constitution, 135 are alm0st identical to that of the J&K Constitution and 260 articles have been applied to J&K making the article virtually irrelevant. Although, officially, J&K still enjoys an autonomous status, in reality, the state is farther away from autonomy now than it was at the time of independence. 

Unfortunately, the larger implications of scrapping this legislation would impact India’s relations with J&K, a state which agreed to be a part of the country on the sole condition of retaining its autonomy. Any attempts at abrogating this article, would therefore, fuel the already-existent mass resentment against the Centre. The article, as it is, hasn’t been followed through in entirety, however, scrapping it completely would lead to a further trust deficit in the people of the sate towards the Union. For the BJP too, to move past the labels of being a majority-appeasing, radical Hindu party, it is important to drop this issue. Moreover, PM Modi, in his Republic Day message this year as the Chief Minister of Gujarat had emphasized on the critical importance of a vibrant and functional federal structure in India as the Centre may not always be able to do justice to the potential and needs of various states. Repealing article 370 wouldn’t uphold the same vibrant and functional federal structure he spoke about.   

Abrogating the article a mistake

There is a widespread opposition in the state against speculations of the Centre abrogating article 370 with the current government being politically opposed by both, the separatists and the NC.

Article 370 grants the state of J&K special provisions with regards to its political structure. This article, according to the constitution, can only be abrogated or modified by the President with the nod from the state government and an approval by the state’s constituent assembly. By this definition, constitutionally, the article cannot be abrogated because J&K’s constituent assembly was dissolved in 1957 after the accession of the state was deemed complete and ceases to exist now.

Since 1956, when the Indian constitution was amended at Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad’s insistence, J&K has slowly but steadily been losing the powers it was guaranteed under section 370. In 1957, the Delhi Amendment was applied to the state, abolishing the Sadr-e-Riyasat and PM position in J&K, replacing them with Governor and CM. There started the complete dilution of autonomy.

The provisions of the article have time and again been ignored by respective central governments in India and consequently, it has already been diluted to an extent of only remaining as a symbolic right to the people of J&K. However, abrogating it completely would send out a message to the Kashmiri population that the Centre has failed to recognize the state’s autonomy which was the essential condition at the time of accession. In an environment of an already high level of distrust in Kashmiris towards the Indian state, this move could be seen as an attempt to completely disregard their voice in the constitutional process, that they have no right over their own political fate.

Essentially, the problem is in the perception of how the article is seen by the central government and the state. The state sees it as a constitutional right to autonomy and self governance while the Centre sees it as an extended temporary provision which has run its course.

In 1949, India had taken the matter to the UN and thereafter, several resolutions were passed relating to it, most of which concluded that bilateral negotiations between India and Pakistan would be the only way to solve this conundrum. Despite that, there hasn’t been much said about the issue by either of the countries openly in the recent times, although, tensions remain on the surface.

There have been attempts within India to solve the tensions between the Centre and the state leadership, Beg-Parthasarthy Accord of 1975 being one of them. In 2010 also, a special group headed by Justice Saghir was sent by then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to negotiate the terms of article 370 with the state. However, none of the efforts by any of the governments has yielded any concrete positive results.

If this article is abrogated, the next step would be the Balkanisation of the state into Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh regions at the behest of the Centre. History proves that such a move can have only a detrimental impact on the people of such states. States emerging from erstwhile Yugoslavia serve as a reminder to this grim reality.

Conclusion

The call for abrogation is also indicative of a complete misunderstanding of Indian federalism which is founded in the theory of unequal federalism. The constitution has abundant provisions providing special status to various other states too. Then there are the Fifth and the Sixth Schedule for the Tribal and Northeastern states. Would these be revoked too in time to come?  How then would the centre protect the rights of those who have neither sufficient representation nor, adequate opportunities for progress? This unequal but special provision guarantee these protections to the most marginalized and neglected communities in India, revoking their rights would result in a sure descent into a similar undemocratic structure which our founding fathers opposed and fought against. 

 

Medha Chaturvedi

Railways in Northeast India: Local Resistance to Policy Initiatives

Photo source: IBN Live

Northeast India’s connectivity to rest of the country and to its five neighbouring countries has remained a most challenging policy concern in post-colonial India. The scanty connectivity network has heavily constrained the inflow of India’s development outcomes in the region, has denied the entry of many modern institutions, and thus kept the region at the periphery of India’s modernity. Railway for example which was established in this far flung region by the colonial rulers solely for their own economic interest has hardly seen any further expansion in post-colonial period. For almost four decades after independence, the issues of internal conflicts and security have largely dominated Northeast policy frame. The reshaping of such policy domain catering to the needs of development started only in 1990s with India’s Look East Policy. Thus at policy level building and improving all kinds of connectivity became the most important agenda for establishing intra-state, inter-state and cross-border accessibilities. This policy initiative later found a concrete base in the year 2008, when India’s outgoing Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh had visited the region and promised development with extensive infrastructure base. In the same year the historic vision document of North Eastern Region 2020 was formulated by incorporating the voices of mammoth 40,000 people of the region to bring a policy roadmap for region’s development. Connectivity was placed as foremost policy issue, and expansion of railway net was promised by the government to facilitate economic boost through the movement and mobility of people and product.

Three key railway projects were identified by UPA II as ‘critical’ for the region. Such projects also include the first rail connectivity in two most remote Northeastern states, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh with new broad gauge lines in Dudhnoi-Mendipathar and Harmuti-Naharlagun. Both these projects were actually initiated long ago in 1990s with emergence of Look East Policy, but were heavily disrupted for various issues like law and order problems and more importantly for strong local resistance. Dudhnoi-Mendipathar and Harmati-Naharlagun, each 20-km lines in the Garo Hills of Meghalaya and in Arunachal Pradesh initiated with the costs of about Rs 180 crore and Rs 407 crores respectively, which were later revised.

Finally one such visionary project has been completed and with Harmati-Naharlagun rail line being open, far eastern landlocked Arunachal Pradesh is placed in the railway map of India. Such railway line at last makes Arunachal accessible to rest of India and opens up multiple avenues and opportunities for the state, primarily in terms of economic development. The people of Arunachal so far have been struggling to survive through various dangerous means and through both legal and illegal cross-border economic activities, as it was cut-off from rest of India. But before all such expectations are being met, the local youths of the state have resisted vehemently to stop this railway service. It is interesting that at macro level, people of Northeast deeply feel that connectivity is seential to make the region vibrant and self-reliant, and the voices of 40,000 people reflecting in the vision document endorse it firmly. But when such vision is translated into reality, the local xenophobia resurfaces with all forces and vehement protests by the youth population not to make such connectivity functional. The youths are apprehensive of large scale infiltration and influx from rest of India and illegal immigration from neighbouring nations. Thus they demand for proper implementation of Inner Line Pass. The same is the situation in Meghalaya. The issue of Inner Line Pass has also created internal conflicts and violence, and destabilized Meghalaya once again in the year 2013. Such reaction and resistance to such positive policy initiative show that the region is still stuck to the dual issues of identity and migration.

Does such inward looking mindset reiterate that people of Northeast are not yet ready for embracing the idea of development? Can issue of xenophobia any longer delay the solution for of human poverty, livelihood opportunities and economic growth in the region? Even if the region has to tap its unexplored potentials for indigenous growth of economy, the support of modern institutions are essential as economy cannot grow in isolation. Unless its regional economy becomes prosperous enough to provide opportunities to its youths, they would continue to migrate to rest of India and the irony of the situation continues. At regional level Northeasterns are intolerant against the outsiders and migrants, and at national level, many of the innocent Northeasterns become victims of violence and racism.

Connectivity and people-to-people contacts can bridge such cultural gaps, lack of understanding and intolerance. An open Northeast frontier through such policy ventures will allow to create space for interaction and tolerance and will be beneficial for all the stakeholders in the long run for peace and stability. In today’s global inter-connected world, no place can grow in pristine isolation, rather a cooperative and integrated development is need of the hour. Let North-East Frontier Railway and state governments have dialogues with local youths to find solution and make such huge investment on railway connectivity justifiable both economically and strategically.   

 
Rakhee Bhattacharya

 

India’s Development Outcomes through Right-Based Policy Initiatives : Case of MGNREGA

Photo Source: Ministry of Rural Development, GOI

There has been a paradigm shift in the development outcomes of Indian states in post 2005-06 period with many of the backward states performing better than earlier. Thus Bihar, Odisha, Assam, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and to some extent Uttar Pradesh, have demonstrated improvement in socio-economic performance. This was largely possible due to various right-based and redistributive policy initiatives of UPA government to reduce the gaps between the rich and poor, rural and urban, backward and advance regions, and to achieve a better development outcome with an inclusive agenda. Bharat Niram Yogona, Indira Awas Yojna, Prime Minister’s Gram Sadak Yojna, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, National Rural Health Mission are some such remarkable policies that India has undertaken in the period of last 10 years to attain development outcomes in infrastructure, poverty alleviation, education and health in a more balanced manner.

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) is another such historic anti-poverty policy step that India has laid down in the year 2005, which came in force in 2006. It addresses the issue of India’s massive rural unemployment challenge by creating a right-based framework and guaranteeing 100 days of wage-employment to a rural household, whose adult members volunteer for unskilled manual work. It makes government accountable for providing employment to those who ask for it and guarantees right to employment. In the larger context, it aims at enhancing livelihood security, social protection and capital asset creation to develop long term sustainable model for local and rural economy of India.

MGNREGA began its journey with 200 most distressed districts of India, and within this short span of 7 years time till 2013, it has covered all the 644 districts with a massive expansion across 6576 blocks and 778134 villages. The average wage per day per person is Rs 132.6. The All India minimum average daily wage rates in different occupation in both agricultural and non-agricultural sectors also have gone high substantially. But MGNREGA has ensured to give equal wage to both men and women, which so far was unimaginable in rural India. Such increase in wage rates has helped to boost the consumption pattern in rural India. Thus according to NSSO estimates the rural MPCE has gone high from Rs 579.17 in 2004-05 to Rs 953.05 in 2009-10 and then to Rs 1287.17 in 2011-12. The food expenditure share has gone down to 53%, with 10%, 8%, 6% and 8% in cereal, milk & milk products, vegetables and beverages & processed food. While in non-food category, the share is almost equal for major items like clothing (8%), medical (7%) and education (7%). This is an encouraging scenario reflecting better living standard in rural India. The rural poverty ratio in India has also gone down to 25.70% (2166.58 lakhs persons) in 2011-12 from 33.8% (2782.1 lakhs) in 2009-10 and 42% (3258.1 lakhs) in 2004-05. MGNREGA is the first ever act globally which guarantees employment at an unprecedented scale, touching to 732 lakhs rural population by the year 2013-14. It targets the most vulnerable and marginalized sections where women share almost 50% (351 lakhs), SCs share 23% (167 lakhs) and STs share 18% (129 lakhs) of total employment.

With such scale and coverage, MGNREGA certainly has penetrated the challenge of unemployment in rural India. But while critiquing many are of the opinion that MGNREGA has failed utterly in asset creation and has not optimally achieved the objective to strengthen natural resource management through works that address cases of chronic poverty like drought, deforestation, soil erosion, and to have a long term sustainable development frame. The total sanctioned work under MGNREGA in 2012-13 was 70.50 lakhs, of which only 10.21 lakhs (15%) projects are completed; where works like water conservation constitutes 60%, irrigation 12%, rural connection 17%, land development 8% and rural sanitation 0.22%. It is also being argued that as the scheme targets the unskilled workers, who henceforth do not develop any skill for their future workforce participation. Therefore to make it more useful, the workforce can be exposed to certain skill development programme, which later can be used at least for self-employment opportunities. In terms of financial leakages, it is being argued and verified by CAG reports that there is large scale of misappropriation of MGNREGA funds across some states in India. The states therefore need to be highly vigilant and pro-active as the expenditure of the scheme is incremental. For example in 2012-13, the total fund allocation has gone high to Rs 39735.4 crores from Rs 37072.7 crores in 2011-12 (7% rise by an year) with wage expenditure alone sharing around 75%. There are also serious problems of state-level delivery in wage and employment days, and there exists huge inter-state variation in the performance outcome of MGNREGA. Thus household employment in the year 2012-13 was highest in Tamil Nadu with 64.8 lakhs and lowest in Punjab with 1.7 lakhs. The women share in employment in the same year was 94% in Kerala and 19% in Uttar Pradesh with national average of 53%. Thus both social and financial audits need to be more rigorous and regular along with the role of states at implementation level. Finally to attain optimum development outcome from MGNREGA as one of the most successful right-based employment policies in the world, it may need certain revision at structural level by incorporating more voices of rural India.

Rakhee Bhattacharya

 Data Sources

·         Annual Reports, Ministry of Rural Development, GOI

·         NSSO reports, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, GOI

·         Annual Reports, Ministry of labour, GOI

·         Press Notes, Planning Commission, GOI

 

The Idea of Process of Public Policy Making in India

Three years after independence India became a Republic in 1950 by adopting a Constitution which emphasise worldly principles for civilised society. According to economists Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen “India was the first non-Western country – and also the first poor country in the world – to commit itself to a resolutely democratic way of governance.”

It has been over 66 years after Independence yet the core structure of ways and means which attributes to the process of public policy making has not been fixed despite the fact that the Constitution of India lays-down broad framework for such processes. This is true both at Union government level as well as State/UT government level. In India, the key decision makers involved directly in the process of public policy making are: (i) political representatives/elected representatives; (ii) bureaucrats and technocrats; and (iii) the constitutional bodies/agencies. At functional level, all these three are at silos as far as the public policy decision making is concerned! But constitutionally they are not.

Unlike the factor of Time which dynamically unfolds almost constantly among the forces, the process to make public policy have not been changed in the last six decades at least,  for two reasons: the understanding and commitment of the political and elected representatives about the constitutional process of public policy making has been by and large unmoved from the time of colonial rule. Secondly, the chaotic structure of the  executives/bureaucratic set ups for administrative power to engage with the core business of public policy making has been moved away from what is emphasized in the Indian Constitution and continues to practice the wild of its own course to make policies which produce outcomes that are neither here nor there.

In other words, the voices of people have been suppressed by these two groups and thus, the twin objective of true democratic governance system embedded in transparency and accountability has been undermined in the process of public policy decision making. However, it has been rightly seen that the performance of the constitutional bodies/agencies performed relatively better than the two other functionaries of the governance system. However, the supply side problems in the constitutional bodies/agencies are yet to be fixed to further its constitutional commitments for effectiveness.

What constitutes the present structure of process of public policy making in India at Union government level? The idea of change proposal comes from top leadership. Typically two types of people are engaged in it. The first one is the bureaucrats who along with few technocrats devise the broad framework for public policy making in a given area. Though, there are Official Guidelines (prepared and approved by bureaucrats themselves with the help of elected representatives!) issued by the Cabinet Secretariat for preparing a public policy in the Union government. Once the bureaucrats do their role as administrative process in terms of conceptualising the idea for policy change proposed and prepare the material in a particular format and share it with other line government agencies which include the Union/State government Ministries/Departments for their comments/views, if any, and once received modify them into a structure which suits both or find middle path! Thereafter, the draft policy is send to the elected representatives for consideration, debate and approval. The matter ends there, and often the draft policy goes back and forth between the bureaucrats and the elected representatives for all kinds of reasons which are unknown to the people of the country because it’s “Secret”.

Any country which has adopted strong committed liberal democratic form of governance unlikely to follow these shoddy systems for public policy making. Moreover, why liberal democracy like India not embarrassing the democratisation of public policy decision making? Being a vibrant liberal democracy why only it relies on consensus building method alone? Why not take the process of public policy making to the people at large? These are the vital questions which need to be emphasised for improving the quality of public policy making. Given the massive policy paralysis that took badly on the functions of Parliament in recent years, some perceptive foundation is being made in India to think-through seriously about the democratisation of process of public policy decision making. There are two interesting analyses which are pertinent and noteworthy:

·         Quite interestingly, Shishir Priyadarshi had studied the Indian agriculture sector in view of WTO negotiations on various aspects of trade policies. Her main tool for analysis was how far the Democratization of Decision-Making Process involved in the negotiations. She examined the manner in which the negotiating proposal was finalized, the consultations that were undertaken and the actual decision-making process that led to the submission of the proposal. In her study she carefully studied the key stakeholders involved/not involved in the process: (farmer, civil society, academic institutions & think tanks, state governments, industry, etc. This would be a classic case for taking the idea of public policy process of decision making further in India.

·         According to Arun Maira “Obtaining consensus is a big challenge in all democracies, as the US's recent experience attests. It is even more difficult in India. However, the challenge cannot be avoided. Therefore, participants in policymaking in India must learn and apply techniques of faster, consultative decision-making.” He further, argues rightly so that in the case of India, “Policy reform… requires more attention to the building of the process by which the ongoing involvement of stakeholders, mobilisation of resources and actions, and monitoring of process is done, than to the content of a single policy announcement.”

These are all very insightful debate and needs to be carried forward with more constructive focus as far as the democratization of public policy decision making is concerned.

B.Chandrasekaran

Gender Knowledge as important as General Knowledge

The Academic Congress on Understanding Gender held at Lady Shri Ram College for Women from March 5-7, 2014 proved that in today’s age “gender knowledge” is as important as general knowledge. The three day event probed into Questions of Justice and Freedom and gave a gendered analysis of the present context. The Congress brought together experts and activist in an attempt to have an enriching discussion around women’s issues and included the interconnected themes of law, media, voice, marginalization, sexuality and the rise of the free-spirited woman in an era of backlash and conflicting choices. What set the LSR event apart from the norm was that gender was located within the larger context of rights and freedom for all aimed at humanizing women. The following snippets give a glimpse of Day 2 (March 6) of the event:

The morning session included a panel discussion on Gender and Marginalized Voices supported by UN Women. Gopal Guru, Anand Patwardhan and Vimal Thorat led a discussion on the intersection between gender, caste and religion. The question of dalit politics and caste were discussed. The speakers clarified that while gender is linked to caste, the women’s movement has not contributed substantially to the caste debates in India that emerged in the post-Mandal era. It was also pointed out that in the current scenario; violence against women (VAW) in rural India and violence against dalit/ Northeastern women tends to get less attention as compared to VAW in urban India. In this context the role of media and selective reporting was debated.

The panel discussion was followed by a conversation with women who exemplify empowerment and breaking the glass ceiling.  

The first speaker was Baby Haldar who narrated her inspiring life story. Baby works as a domestic worker and is an author, whose autobiography Aalo Aandhari describes her harsh life growing up and as a domestic worker and has been translated into several languages.

Baby’s struggle began at a very young age. She was raised by an abusive father: an ex-serviceman and driver and her step-mother in West Bengal and was only 12, when her father married her off to a man 14 years older than her. Finally in 1999, at the age of 25, after years of domestic violence, she left her husband and came to Delhi with her children. Urvashi Butalia, who Baby considers to be her mentor, told the audience that when a woman like Baby decides to speak up, her story will invariably give many others courage and start a revolution of courage and strength.

Sunita, India’s first female auto driver and the two cab drivers from Sakha (Saroj, Lalita) shared how a woman driving on the streets reassures people- women, children, families, whereas, a man doing the same would give rise to fear in certain circumstances and yet women do not take up similar occupations. They hope that their work will inspire more women to challenge the norm and step out of their homes. Meenu Vadhera, Director of Sakha cabs shared how mobility is a very important tool in the struggle for women’s empowerment.

The afternoon session began with a Lecture by Mary E. John from CWDS. Ms. John spoke on ‘Gendering Violence: Rethinking Sexuality and Violence’. She traced the discourse on gender violence and outlined how while the movement on VAW began in the 1970s, it wasn’t till the 1990s that the language of sexuality emerged. She said that the 2000’s saw a very rapid shift as women now articulated sexuality through means such as the ‘pink chaddi campaign’ and ‘slut walk’ which not only challenged gender stereotypes but also led to a backlash.

She said that the gang rape of Nirbhaya was a ‘genuine event’ that marked another shift in the gender discourse. Although, several cases in the past like Mathura rape case, Ramiza B. case, Bhanwari Devi case had also led to protest and outrage, what was different about Nirbhaya was that the protests didn’t originate only from the women’s group and were not restricted to only women. The rape also changed the direction of the discourse as the ire of the public turned towards the state and ‘demanded’ better laws and safer cities. She said that the placards she read during the protest had slogans such as ‘Meri skirt se uchi meri awaaz’, ‘my dress is not a yes’ carried by both men and women and was an indication of the change being brought on by the event.

What she found discomforting about the December rape is that the incident has reinforced the false stereotype of the danger lying outside the house. She showed with the help of NCRB data that in more than 97% of the cases, the victim is known to the accused. She said that it was in this context that the backlash of violence against women was disturbing and needs to be challenged. The advancing of women’s hostel deadlines, canceling night shifts for female employees, parents refusing to let their daughters to go out after dark are just some of the obvious ways in which the backlash works. More subtle ways exist and impact our daily life, making women fearful, breeding mistrust and straining relationships between the sexes.

The discussion led to a debate about gender roles and how while women are now juggling work within and outside the house, the roles of men continue to be static. The rising expectations from women often lead to them having to make a choice between two worlds and the need to challenge this stereotype.

The session also included the screening of ‘Safe City Dialogues’ by Shikha Trivedi from NDTV. Safe City Dialogues is a short documentary which captures the urgent need for city plans to have a gendered perspective. It looked at the lives of young women in slums of Mumbai and how they struggle for access to basic sanitation. The slums are poorly lit, suffer due to a shortage of public washrooms and other amenities and the streets are congested along with poor garbage and human/ animal waste disposal. The documentary explored how women become victims of both, poor planning and violence against women. The documentary recorded lives of young women living in these slums and questioned whether their voice was ever taken into consideration while planning cities? It raised questions such as ‘are technological and safety measures the solution to build a safe society or do we need to initiate a dialogue to heighten gender sensitivity’? 

The day concluded with an interaction with Bhanwari Devi from Rajasthan. Bhanwari Devi worked as a ‘Sathin’ in Rajasthan and was part of the Women's Development Project (WDP) run by the Government of Rajasthan. She belongs to the ‘kumhar’ (potter) caste and her village is dominated by the upper caste Gujjar community. Her training as a Sathin enabled her to raise her voice and take a stand against child marriage happening in a rich Gujjar family in her village in the early 1990s.

Bhanwari narrated how despite her protest, the marriage of the two girl children did take place, with the police attending the wedding celebrations.  Yet, the men from the Gujjar community felt insulted and in a bid to take ‘revenge’, gang raped her. Bhanwari then had to struggle to get herself examined medically in order to register a FIR. Yet, Bhanwari refused to give up. She fought for her justice and continues to do so. Her case at the moment is pending with the High Court.

Ms. Kavita Srivastava translated Bhanwri’s narrative for the audience. Speaking of Bhanwari’s struggle, she said that the reason why Bhanwari’s initial FIR was not entertained initially was because of patriarchy. She said that the police, medical examiners, Magistrate and all others in authority did not believe Bhanwari because they bought into the patriarchal stereotypes of:

1)       Old woman are not raped
2)       Old men do not rape
3)       Upper caste men would not want to have physical relations with a low caste woman

It is this thinking that got challenged when Bhanwari refused to stay quiet about her rape. She decided to persist for justice and continues to do so, despite all the obstacles that have come her way. While the accused were released on bail, Bhanwari’s struggle led to the Vishakha Judgement which became the foundation for the Sexual Harassment Act passed in 2013.

Bhanwari’s struggle, according to Ms. Srivastava shows that people need to stop looking at women’s bodies in the framework of shame and honour. If women continue to think that way, they will feel victimized, but if they decide to step out of the mould they will identify themselves, as Bhanwari does, as a survivor. This concluded the final session of the second day of the Gender Congress.

The overall theme of the “Genderknowledge” held at LSR made the audience pause and reflect upon why gender is so important today. It highlighted that gender doesn’t only concern women; rather questions of women’s safety, greater mobility, freedom of occupation, the struggle for rights are reflection of our society and therefore concern us all. As the day concluded, questions regarding what is and what is not acceptable to women today, gender roles, family as a unit of safety and many others sprang up, leading to an internal debate and change of thought, both for the audience and the participants.

Divashri Mathur

Defining India’s NRMB

Calling Indian democracy as a simply vote making drama does not serve enough beyond a point and it’s too naïve if any one does it more than twice in an unprecedented situation like where India is now! For mulling over an idea that will set a new paradigm shift for constructive public discourse, it is necessary to define a new phrase for developmental polity which will encompass sentiments of crores of fellow citizens. In the past, the defining moment has never been taken as granted and there is no exception either now especially when the general elections are due. In a vast country like India-whether you like it or not-the dynamic transitions of various phrases of developmental polity is an extremely interesting phenomena to understand the disjunctions that exist between people and polity and social, economic and cultural narratives in between them.

The fountainhead of any new phrase of polity has to encompass the realities of the living conditions of citizens and common man of that country. The new phrase has to deal with the three pillars: political, economic and social dimensions of the citizens and common man’s life and aspirations which have dynamically shifted upwards most recently and first time since the independence. How far the new phrase of polity captures and reflects the hearts and minds of the citizens and common man actually helps in shaping up of the ultimate aims of another path breaking milestone in the history of developmental polity. In fact, who does it better ultimately reaps the fruits of the winning elections and transforming the country.

In the era of Jawaharlal Nehru, the hard currency of polity was to instill the faith of democratic form of governance and sent strong messages across world. During Indira Gandhi’s period, the focal point of polity was to establish social dimension of developmental polity- Garibi Hatao and nationalization of banks etc. Thereafter, the country did not see any credible trend setter in the developmental polity phrases due to the very nature of fragmented polity. The 80s and 90s had become pre- and post reform periods typically linked with connecting Indian economy to the world economy. The first decade of 21^st century did witness some new phrases of developmental polity but the phrase used in the first half of the decade (Shining India) did not gain much attraction as compared to the phrase of the second half (Inclusive Growth).  Hence, India is again at the cross road of the world to make its position debunked and pave new path.

 Against this background, it is really delighting that the time has come to see another trend setter yet excitingly new phrase of developmental polity. The Indian National Congress seems to be pondering over the possibility of coining a new phrase for developmental polity. After carefully studying the politico, economic and social dimensions of the Indian society, the party has decided to take up the term called “Not rich, not-middle class, not BPL” or NRMB as a key strategy for the upcoming elections.

India is home for nearly 122 crore people. The NRMB categories consist about 70 crore people. 70 crore estimate seems to be based on the assumption of per person per month minimum earning of Rs.1,000 as the threshold for poverty which is in line with the official poverty line which is around Rs.960 a month. Further, those who earn between Rs.1,000 to Rs.15,000 are the main junk of the population covered under 70 crore NRMB segment. The BPL population is pegged at 36 crore and the middle class, assuming Rs.1 lakh per person per month as a cut off, is around 16 crore.

The middle class benefits most of its needs directly from liberalisation and is not affected by any shocks like economic, social and political in nature at any point of time in a year. Therefore, the Congress’s key target seems to be the NRMB segments which are just above the poverty line but way below the middle class and not rich certainly. About 34 NRMB segments have been identified including daily wagers, painters, construction workers, carpenters, farm labourers, domestic workers, street vendors, railway porters, fishermen, security guards, weavers, plantation workers, dabbawalas, etc. to give attention for understanding their problems and issues and solve them in coming years.

Most of the NRMB segments are increasingly becoming more and more vulnerable in different parts of the country and nobody seems to be working with them to lift them out of their misery. In fact, most of these segments are facing varied difficulties in terms of lifting their life beyond the BPL level because their voices are not taken into consideration in public policy decision making process. Indeed, these segments are what development experts call union-less people thereby voices-less community. Thus, the time has come for this segment to raise their voice and move upward in the society to live a meaningful life.

 

B.Chandrasekaran

Functioning of Gram Sabhas in India

Photo Credit: Anand District Panchayat

As the foundation of the Panchayati Raj system in India, the Gram Sabhas were envisaged as important institution for deliberation and participation in the decision-making process by the people of rural India. To popularise its role in planning local development initiatives, the central government had declared 1999-2000 and 2009-2010 as Gram Sabha years. However, over the years it has become clear that the Gram Sabhas have failed to include local community voices in their functioning or to even represent them effectively in their decision making. No doubt, if Gram Sabhas functioned in the true spirit of the Constitution, rural India would have a vibrant, transparent and accountable local government to address its immediate needs. Therefore, it is essential to reflect on how effective is the functioning of Gram Sabhas and account for the waning public faith and participation in them.

My field experiences from across Indian villages show that Gram Sabhas are not functioning in accordance with the spirit of the 73rd Amendment Act, 1992. More often than not, their functioning is controlled by the Sarpanch and Secretary and the vested interests they represent rather than the concerns of the common people. Under the law, it is mandatory to give prior notice to members to attend the Gram Sabha meetings. But this procedure is not followed by many Gram Panchayats. In fact, this is a tool in the hands of the dominant who directly or indirectly control the Panchayats and use it to deliberately exclude the common people from participatory political processes and in the process augment their political, economic and social power. It is observed that the meeting dates are fixed by the Central/State governments either to prepare a beneficiary list for various schemes or to disseminate information on new schemes. Those whose names are not in the list do not attend these meetings. In several instances meetings  are fixed during the peak  agricultural  season and as peasant and agricultural labour households cannot afford to lose out on the agricultural wage employment, they tend to forgo Gram Sabha meetings instead.  Meetings are fixed on a popular festival day, making it inconvenient for many to attend.  In Rajasthan, one secretary is generally incharge of three to four Gram Panchayats and it may well be the case that the meetings of all the Panchayats are scheduled for the same day which would make it very difficult for the secretary to be present in all meetings. When this has happened, Gram Sabha meetings have had to be cancelled and rescheduled. But it has been seen that even then the Secretary was not present. Disillusioned, people lose interest in these meetings. It is a common practice that the Sarpanch takes the signature of the people on a blank paper on proceeding details even before the Gram Sabha meeting has been held.  In many Gram Sabhas, candidates who lost the Panchayat election or those from the opposing camp, actively disrupt the meetings. They are often drunk when they come to the meetings and use unpleasant language to abuse the Sarpanch. It is difficult for women to attend these meetings. A common experience of people is that the Sarpanch, once elected, becomes distant from the very people who elected him and moves closer to the Gram Panchayat Secretary and block level officials. He   never makes public the details of the panchayat operations, funds received from the block office etc. 

The traditional land-owning dominant castes are still strong in many villages. These rural elites dominate the discussion on Gram Sabha meetings. The marginalied and landless agricultural labourers who are dependent on dominant castes for wage employment do not oppose them in Gram Sabha meetings. Moreover, low public participation in Gram Sabhas is also due to lack of popular awareness, lack of publicity, interference of local leaders, corruption, conflict among members and the uncooperative attitude of bureaucrats.

The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) states that, “the Gram Sabhas have been, by and large, given a peripheral role in the Panchayat Acts. Consequently, common people do not find interest in attending its meetings” (B P C Bose and M V S Koteswar: 2004:154). To make Gram Sabha meetings successful, the venue and time may  be so decided that it is to the convenience of the majority.

The emphasis has to be not so much on the number of participants as on the quality of participation. Public faith can be restored only if the Gram Sabha decisions are substantively and efficiently implemented by the higher tier of Panchayats and respective State Governments. The report by Mani Shankar Aiyar also recommended “Genuine PR should be based on participative democracy by not concentrating power on a few representatives and putting in place the ultimate accountability to the people through the Gram Sabha”(Towards Holistic Panchayati Raj: 2013:551).

The decisions of the Gram Sabhas are not binding on higher tiers of Panchayats. Gram Sabhas are spending most of their time in disposing and discussing the agendas of Central/State governments. There is a need to strengthening functions of Gram Sabhas so that they may discuss local issues affecting their day to day life and make local governance more participatory, transparent and people friendly. Gram Sabhas may be given approving and sanctioning powers as well as monitoring functions to allow Panchayats to become vibrant and dynamic institutions. There is need to amend State Acts and make Gram Sabha recommendations binding on Panchayats at higher level.

 

Ramesh Nayak

Kudumbashree: Pride of Kerala

Photo Source: Hindu Business Line

Kudumbashree, an innovative mission for poverty eradication through women’s empowerment, is one of the most successful programmes being implemented by the state of Kerala.  Kerala, a tiny state lying in the south-west part of India, has been home to many development experiments. Kudumbashree is one such experiment. Its mission is empowerment of women through collectivisation i.e. organising them into self-help groups and encouraging their entrepreneurial and other activities. The purpose of the mission is to ensure the transformation of women from being passive recipients of public assistance to being active leaders in development initiatives.

Kudumbashree was the outcome of the collective experience gained from the many anti-poverty programs of the past. Most of the well intentioned but centrally planned, rigid and individual-oriented anti-poverty programs of the central and state government had failed to bring about the desired results, mainly because they did not have any scope for the involvement of the poor. They viewed the poor as "resourceless" recipients of benefits. Launched by the Government of Kerala in 1998 with a view to  wipe out absolute poverty from the state through concerted community action under the leadership of local self governments, Kudumbashree today  is one of the largest women-empowering projects in the country. The programme has 37 lakh members and covers more than 50% of the households in Kerala. The Kudumbashree initiative has succeeded in addressing the basic needs of the less privileged women and in providing them a more dignified life and a better future. The literal meaning of Kudumbashree is prosperity (shree) of family (Kudumbam). Kudumbashree differs from conventional programmes in that it perceives poverty not just as the lack of money, but also as the deprivation of basic rights. The poor need to find a collective voice to claim these rights. There are two distinguishing characteristics to Kudumbashree which set it apart from the usual SHG model of empowerment. The first one is its universality of reach. From its very inception Kudumbashree has attempted to bring every poor woman in the state within its fold, as a consequence of which today Kudumbashree is present in every village panchayat and municipality, and in nearly every ward, colony and hamlet. The sheer spread is spectacular, and it is only because the local community of women drive the system that it has managed to persevere. The second characteristic is the scope of community interface in local governance. The functioning of Kudumbashree is tied up to the development initiatives of the local government be it for social infrastructure, welfare or right based interventions or for employment generation. From food security to health insurance, from housing to enterprise development, every development experience depends on Kudumbashree to provide the community interface.

The grassroots of Kudumbashree are neighbourhood groups (NHG) that send representatives to the ward level area development societies (ADS). In turn, the ADS sends its representatives to the community development societies (CDS) which completes the unique three tier structure of Kudumbashree. Today, there are 1.94 lakhs NHGs, over 17,000 ADSs and 1061 CDSs in Kudumbashree. In contrast with the previous poverty eradication programmes, there are no specific financial and physical targets set for Kudumbashree. Kudumbashree practices a process approach and not a project approach.

As the mission reaches its 16^th year, Kudumbashree has successfully made deep inroads into various sections of Kerala’s society and today stands as a role model for other states in the country for women empowerment. Through its efforts to engage women in civil society and in development issues and opportunities, Kudumbashree, in association with the local self government units of Kerala, is charting out new meaning and possibilities for local economic development and people centric governance

Anjana John