0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views

review

National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities Report, 2007: A Review of its I and II Chapters

Uploaded by

shiraz bukhari
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views

review

National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities Report, 2007: A Review of its I and II Chapters

Uploaded by

shiraz bukhari
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

Mohd.

Shiraz Bukhari
Prof. Abdul Waheed
SOMOA-101
National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities Report, 2007:
A Review of its I and II Chapters
Report on Religious and linguistic minorities was commissioned on October, 2004, under the
chairmanship the chief Justice of India Ranganth Misra to suggest the practical measures for
the upliftment of economically and socially backward sections of the minorities, both
religious and linguistic. This report was aimed at addressing the conditions of minorities as
implicated in the Sachar Committee Report which identified that the level of socio-economic
and educational backwardness of the Muslims was comparatively concerning in relation to
other so-called backward communities such Caste Dalits. The final Report, also called
Ranganath Misra Report, was submitted to the Government in May 2007 and eventually
tabled in the Parliament in 2009. The full report is quite lengthy and detailed. Here, the first
two chapters, that is, Introduction and The Constitutional and legislative provisions
regarding Minorities are being reviewed.

The first chapter provides the objectives and procedure it followed to base its report on. The
‘terms of reference’ which were supposed to guide its research and findings are given as
below:

(i) Criterion for determining socio-economic backwardness amongst religious and


linguistic minorities.
(ii) Measures of welfare for socially and economically backward sections of the
religious and linguistic minorities.
(iii) Legal and administrative modalities (mechanisms) for the implementation of the
recommended measures.

Noticeable as it is, the larger part of the objectives is concerned with empirically
establishing which sections are deserving of the upliftment due to their socio-economic
backwardness. Only then the measures and mechanism of implementation could be
correspondingly suggested. To achieve the same, the procedure it followed to collect the
data needed to be democratically oriented i.e. the data collected needed to be
representative and Inclusive. Only then a comprehensive picture could be achieved and
used to formulate criterion, measures and mechanism to the effect of addressing the issue
at hand.

The preliminary procedure of collecting a comprehensive dataset described in the


Introduction summarily involved:

• Collecting data from various Institutional sources such as NSSO, Census, NFHS,
respective Central and state agencies related to Minorities.
• Collecting data from various stakeholders constituted of Minority religious and
linguistic Outfits, Organizations, associations, boards, Councils of Minorities and
NGOs.
• Meeting representatives of Central and state-level governmental and parastatal
commissions, corporations, federations, etc.
• Inviting researchers and experts for Discussions
• Examining old and new relevant reports concerning minorities
• Sponsoring seminars and procuring special studies regarding minorities and their
issues

Based on these, the commission inferred its findings and made comparative judgments about
different sections within the minority groups and between them. It was based on these
comparative evaluations that possible causes of disparity in policy outcomes could be
located, the conditions of implementation being one of them, implying a needed change in
legal and administrative modalities.

The second chapter of the report is divided in to subsections such as ‘What are the
Minorities’, ‘Rights of the Minorities’, ‘Other Constitutional Safeguards’, ‘Legal Framework
for protection of Religious Minorities’ and ‘Linguistic Minorities’. There are three aspects to
this chapter, one is definitional, and the second one is constitutional, the third one being the
legal. The former two are more or less static in their orientation, that is, the definitions of
minorities and constitutional safeguards for them are more or less ideally given in the articles
of the constitution itself. Though, at times, certain terms of the constitutional provisions may
be further defined or clarified with addition of clauses; the latter aspect i.e. the question of
legal framework is more of a dynamic thing as with continuous social changes and changes in
material conditions, the legal provisions are rethought in light of new problems and they are
subsequently modified, changed or even chucked off. The legal provisions are always being
balanced against the changing reality of social life. This chapter, hence, alongside giving the
liberal view of constitutional safeguards points to the fact that the different set of laws for two
similarly deprived people exist, denying the legal parity which is, in fact, a democratic right.

The sources which inform the ‘expression’ and ‘connotation’ of the word Minorities in the
report are: Indian Constitution, Oxford Dictionary, UNHRC declaration, 1946, National
Commission for Minorities Act, 1992. As for the word ‘linguistic minorities’ the report
maintains that Article 29 be read in tandem with Article 350(A) and 350(B) of the Indian
Constitution , alongside the exemplary SC judgment TMA Pai foundation vs. State of
Karnataka, 2002.

The expression ‘minorities’ is implicated in the Articles 29 and 30 of the constitution,


specifically through the phrase “distinct, language, script and culture”. The constitutional
connotation is tied up with the common usage of the word minority in the Oxford dictionary
and the elements of minority included in the UNHRC declaration, 1946, specifying minority
as a “non-dominant group…who wishes to preserve it distinctness.”

The report specifies that Religious minorities in the Indian context are those who follow any
other religion besides Hinduism because of the fact that 80% of the country’s population
constitute of Hindus. Though, in certain states, religious minorities at the national level are in
majority (such as Muslims are majority in UTs of Kashmir and Lakshdweep).

The report then moves onto the right of minorities as contained in the Constitution of India.
First and foremost, the Articles 15 and 16 of the constitution are mentioned and used to
explain the distinction in the usage of the words’ caste’ and ‘class’. Though often used
interchangeably, these similar words warrant certain reservations, constitutionally. Unlike
caste, the word ‘class’ connotes a socio-economic category which pertains to the ‘the socially
educationally and backward’ and, thus, a whole community can be classified as a class and be
legible for ‘reservation’ benefits.

Driving the point home for the case of ‘socially and the educationally backward’, the
Judgment in Indra Sawhney case is reiterated that no reservation purely based on the
economic criterion will be valid under the Article 16 (1). It is, in principle, reinforced by the
Article 46 (Directive Principle of State Policy) which maintains “special care for the
educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people”.
Apart from the Articles which directly touch upon the rights of religious and linguistic
Minorities, the second chapter also enlists and explains the Articles which have bearing upon
the protection and safeguards of the Minority Rights such as Article 25, 26, 27, 28, 347, 350,
350A and 350 B.

Within the facet of other constitutional safeguards, the second chapter dwells upon the
relation and difference between the Article 29 and the Article 30. Unlike Article 30, the text
of the Article 29 doesn’t specifically refer to the term ‘minorities’, though it is quite obvious
that the article is intended to protect the cultural and linguistic ‘identity’ of the minorities.
Article 30 (1) (A) which states that the State shall not discriminate in granting aid to the
educational institutions established by minorities is very specific in its guarantee to safeguard
their educational rights is worth reckoning as it instills the confidence in minorities that their
educational rights won’t be violated. The article 30 was included despite the fact that this
right was theoretically protected by Article 19 (1) (g). The fact that Article 30 has been kept
out of the purview of Article 15(4) which empowers the state to make reservation on the basis
of ‘socio economic backwardness’ is a further illustration of the degree to which minorities
rights have been respected. As such, the report emphasizes the constitutional significance of
the minority rights which begs that they are also legally protected in spirit and letter.

The section on ‘The legal framework for protection of Religious Minorities’ is effectively a
mix of both, legal critique and a demand for legal reform. It juxtaposes the status of National
Commission for Minorities with the National Commission for SC/ST and provisions of their
respective Acts. The conclusion it draws from such juxtaposition is that National
Commission for Minorities should be modeled at par with National Commission for SC/ST.

The Commission asks for greater sensitivity from the law agencies to account for the
disparities present in the legal safeguards for minorities in relation to SCs/STs. As a matter of
Illustration, it points out the public usage of Civil Rights Act, 1955which deals with cases of
offense of untouchability regardless of the caste or religion of the victim. The Commission
cites Report on Protection of Civil Rights, 2002, pointing at the low number of cases
registered under it, the sparse and erratic distribution of cases registered across the states and
very low conviction rates. It posits that the Civil Rights Act is not being fairly applied to
protect the Right against discrimination and atrocities of the weaker sections who are Non-
SC/ST and Minorities. By extension, it asks that there should be separate act to deal with
incidents of discrimination and atrocities against Minorities. Considering the rising violence
against Muslims, especially cow-related violence, this recommendation strikes the chord for
creating legal parity for weaker sections that are socially and economically vulnerable.

Taking suit from the 103rd Amendment Bill of the Constitution which proposed for assigning
constitutional Basis to National Commission for Minorities and Bill proposing repeal of the
National Commission for Minorities Act,1992, the Commission observes that if it achieved it
would allow greater autonomy to the minority Commission to regulate its affairs.

The Commission proposes for a number of legal amendments to the National Commission for
Minorities Act, 1992. It points out that there is considerable delay in presenting the Annual
Report and MoA taken by the Central government as per the Commission’s recommendations
due to the absence of any stipulated time-frame for the same. This can likely be ensured by
incorporating a provision to the same effect in the proposed Amendment Bill. It further
suggests that Clause (9) of the Article 338 and 338 (A) should be replicated in the National
Commission for Minorities Act so as to make it mandatory for the Central and state
governments to consult the commission before taking major decisions with regards to the
minorities. This would be quite a confidence–building legal reform amongst Minorities if it is
materialized. In the context of Majoritarian BJP regime that could bring discriminatory laws
such as NRC and CAA, this reform shall help check arbitrary impositions on the minorities.
The Commission, drawing inspiration from the National Commission for SC/ST Act,1989,
argues for introducing parliamentary Committees on Minorities as well to strengthen the
monitoring and safeguarding of Minority Rights.

Commission’s emphasis on a comprehensive legal framework rests on the concern for


safeguarding Minority rights as contained in the Article 29 and Article 30. To the same
effect, keeping in view the educational needs of the weaker sections amongst minorities, it
stresses on the utility of an overriding frame of legal provisions in the light of guidelines of
Ministry of Development and Human Resources and National Commission for Minorities for
the effective realization of the Article 30(A) i.e. establishing and administering of Minority
Educational Institutions.

On the issue of legal framework for Linguistic Minorities, the Second chapter doesn’t
reiterate anything apart from the constitutional and legal safeguards already present. Defining
linguistic Minorities, it stresses that a linguistic minority is determinable only with reference
to the state as a unit because it is only through this reference one can appreciate the relative
numbers of the speakers of one language against the other and of the speakers of different
dialects within a language. It is illustrated through the Judgment of TMA Pai vs. Union of
India, 2002.

The Articles contained in the Part XVII of the constitution are discussed, delineating the
difference between the official and regional language and how Article 345 that has to do with
regional languages, in tandem with Articles 346 and 347, establishes the right to choose a
regional language as official language at the state-level. Strengthening the bid for use of
regional Language, the article 350-A is significant. It provides for the facilities of instruction
in the mother tongue at the primary level of education. The state is directed to ensure this.
President may intervene to direct the facilitation of provisions to the same effect. While 350-
B provides for the appointment of a special officer for linguistic minorities by the President.
These articles need be read in conjunction with Articles 29 and 30 as these make it clear that
it is the Right of the minorities to preserve their language, script and culture along with the
maintenance of their educational institutions. These set of rights are well protected in that no
government can even impose minority language as compulsory in the minority Institutions.

These two chapters of the report provide the required framework of understanding to delve
into the forthcoming chapters which encase findings, measures and recommended modalities
for the implementation. By illustrating the constitutional relevance and legal contingency of
Minority Rights, these chapters make sure the readers of the report may be able to appreciate
the practical measures forwarded by the Commission.

You might also like