The central government’s opposition to Dalit Christians and Muslims getting the benefits of reservation enjoyed by their Hindu counterparts is in line with the Hindutva ideology which discriminates between Hindus on one hand and Muslims with Christians on the other. What is appalling is that Islam and Christianity have been called “foreign religions” because they have their origins outside ancient India and purportedly never discriminated against the oppressed castes which had to do scavenging work and were forced to live outside their villages where the upper castes lived.
This stand of the government came to the fore when it filed an affidavit to oppose a Public Interest Litigation seeking the benefits of scheduled castes and tribes be extended to both Dalit Christians and Muslims. Proffering reservations and other benefits only to the Dalit Hindus and not to the Dalit Christians and Muslims is against the ethos of the Constitution and specifically violates Article 14 which declares the law will apply equally to all Indian citizens irrespective of their religion or caste.
The fact that the central government is misinformed about there being no discrimination between the oppressed castes in Islam and Christianity becomes evident in tiny Goa where casteism was practised for centuries before and during Portuguese rule from 1510 to 1961. Goans are very caste-conscious so that Brahmins and Kshatriyas who converted to Christianity in Goa during the 1500s and 1600s refused to intermarry with the lower castes.
At least a few Churches had separate burial grounds in their graveyards for the Bamonns (Catholic Brahmins) and their lower caste converts. In the 1700s and 1800s, the Bamonns sat separately even while hearing Mass with some seats reserved for the fidalgos or Portuguese noblemen. It is true the Bible does not mention the lower castes because Holy Scripture was written in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Aramaic in regions where the concept of caste did not exist as it did within the Indian sub-continent. Nevertheless, groups such as the Pharisees and their ilk or even the Jews did not intermarry with the others who were looked down upon.
It is also an indisputable fact that the Portuguese brought their priests such as the Jesuits, Dominicans Capuchins and others. It was not until centuries passed that the local Goans were allowed to enter the major seminaries in Rachol or the minor seminary in Saligao. Those who studied for the priesthood were either Bamonns or Chardos (Catholic Kshatriya). The lower castes such as the shudras and others did not enrol in the seminaries where Latin was the mode of instruction and after being ordained, the priests said the Mass in Latin up to the second Vatican Council.
Catholicism incorporates the traditions of the church which is another expression for the culture of the ancient people. With centuries of caste discrimination existing before 1510, it was unthinkable to do away with caste discrimination only after conversion to Catholicism. The priests and bishops appointed by the Padroado or the Portuguese monarchy belonged to religious orders and often had elite family backgrounds. Only after the passage of time, were locals such as Padre Agnelo allowed to join the seminary.
The affidavit filed by the government in the Supreme Court rejects the Justice Ranganath Misra Commission Report which recommended extending reservations to Dalit Christians and Muslims. This pernicious move of the government to deprive the religious minorities of any benefits because those who convert to these “foreign religions” lose their caste is a spurious argument. Neither Christianity nor Islam are homogenous religions because there are sub-groups within them.
By calling Islam and Christianity as “foreign religions,” the central government is blatantly flouting Constitutional morality. The Supreme Court has iterated that religion is a personal choice of the citizen which should not be used as a parameter for selection in government jobs.
What should alarm us is that a Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay Oka had recently declared the government was not appointing those who were recommended for elevation as judges by the apex court collegium. Ten such names are still pending with the government despite the collegium having reiterated these names. This has sinister implications because it implies the government wants to pick-and-choose those who join the higher judiciary to ensure these putative judges share the ideology of the government.
By not appointing those cleared for judgeship even after their names have been reiterated a second time by the collegium, the government is forcing these lawyers to withdraw their consent to be appointed as judges, according to Justices Kaul and Oka. Hence, when PILs such as those seeking reservations for Dalit Christians and Muslims are heard, the outcome is predictable.
The former CJI Ranjan Gogoi admitted in his autobiography that the government has the final say in who becomes a judge. Merit apart, if a lawyer from a minority community does not subscribe to the majoritarian ideology, the government will delay his appointment. To force the wannabe judge to withdraw his consent for elevation.
Judges approved by the government may not be as zealous of their independence as those appointed by the CJI which is why the government wants to revive the debate over resuscitating a modified National Judicial Appointments Commission for selection of judges. Whether the 50th Chief Justice of India Dhananjay Chandrachud will resist these pressures on him remains to be seen. He will be appointing judges who will stay in office till the mid-2030s.
(Dr Olav Albuquerque is a senior journalist-cum-advocate of the Bombay High Court)