BR Ambhedkar’s Views on Panchayat Raj Institutions - Social Justice, Reference to 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments and Decentralization With A Critical Analysis

This Paper was Presented in the National Seminar (18th & 19th September, 2019): “Social Justice and Working of Panchayats in India: Revisiting Ambedkar School of Thought” at the Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC), Bangalore, India.

-*Dr. S. Vijay Kumar

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar believed that the village represented regressive India, a source of oppression. He argued against Panchayats as he was apprehensive about the continuation of caste Hindus hegemony. Further he opined that villages in India were caste-ridden and had little prospects of success as institutions of self-government. His Hindu code bill was an idea to bring equality and justice in society through emancipation of women by extending equal property rights to women. He held that the emancipation of Dalits in India was possible only through the three-pronged approached of education, agitation and organization. He was viewed  essentially as a egalitarian and a social reformer rather than a nationalist.With reference to 73^rd and 74^th Constitutional Amendment Acts,we can remember his view that “The remedy lay in creating an egalitarian and truly democratic panchayat raj system in the country”. He also fought for providing reservation in Panchayats to involve all depressed classes in the rural governance.Regarding Decentralization (Self Government) Ambhedkar said - “Unless I am satisfied that every self-governing institution has provisions in it which give the depressed classes special representation in order to protect their rights, and until that is done, I am afraid it will not be possible for me to assent to the first part of the Bill.” Now, the time has come for revisiting (reviewing) the concern of Ambedkar School of Thought with relevance to the present day.This paper attempts to focus on “BR Ambhedkar’s Views on Panchayat Raj Institutions - Social Justice, Reference to 73^rd and 74^th Constitutional Amendments  and Decentralization With  A Critical Analysis”.

Objectives of the Study:

1) Ambhedkar and Panchayat Raj Institutions

2) Ambhedkar – Social Justice (A Social Reformer)

3)Ambhedkar With Reference to 73^rd and 74^th Amendment Acts

4) Ambhedkar Views on Decentralization

5)Critical Analysis on BR Ambhedkar

6) Suggestions

Methodology: This research paper is based on secondary source, that is, on reference books given at the end of my paper.

*Head & Associate Professor (Retd.), Department of Economics, Kakatiya Government (UG&PG) College (NAAC “A” Grade), Hanamkonda, Warangal District (Telangana State). The author was a Member of Board of Studies, Kakatiya University, Warangal – 506 009 (India).

1). Ambhedkar and Panchayat Raj Institutions: Mahatma Gandhi advocated panchayat raj as the foundation of India's political system. It helped for the decentralized form of government, where each village would be responsible for its own governance. The term for such a vision was“Gram Swaraj - Village Self-Governance".  In contrast to this, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar believed that the village represented regressive India, a source of oppression.He argued against Panchayats as he was apprehensive about the continuation of caste Hindus hegemony. Further he opined that villages in India were caste-ridden and had little prospects of success as institutions of self-government. George Mathew puts it aptly, his (B.R.Ambedkar) stand should not be wrongly interpreted as the one against democratic decentralization or the concept of giving power to the people‟. He was only speaking from his experience of what a caste-ridden village society in India had meant to him and to millions like him. Undoubtedly, his perception about the village atmosphere that prevailed at that time was realistic. Hence, he advocated to build safeguards against such social oppression and the only way it could be done was through the adoption of the parliamentary model of politics. 

Gandhi and Ambedkar had different perspectives regarding the politics of Panchayat raj. For Gandhi, the concepts of Gramswaraj and Panchayat raj were integral part of his political vision about the future of our nation. This vision was against the mechanical modal of development that was introduced by the British in our country. So, Gandhi through his social and political initiatives made the country to realize that the power of people which could be strengthen only through effective local self-government. He thus opined “I shall work for an India in which the poorest shall feel that it is their country, in whose making they have an effective voice.” Gandhi always advocated power in the hands of people through the Panchayat Raj. He said, “The greater the power of the people, the better for the people”.

Dr. B.R. Ambhedkar’s critical view on Panchayat Raj was formed by the Indian reality of village life in his period. It was substantiated by his own personal experiences also. So Ambedkar considered Gandhian ideas of Panchayat Raj as passionate. For Ambedkar those villages were nothing “but a sink of localism, a den of ignorance and communalism”. The result was that the Constitution that was drafted under his Chairmanship did not mention a word about Panchayat Raj. During the drafting of the Constitution of India, Panchayat Raj Institutions were placed in the non-justifiable part of the Constitution, the Directive Principles of State Policy, as Article 40. The Article read 'the State shall take steps to organize village Panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government'. However, no worthwhile legislation was enacted at that time, either at the national or state level to implement it.

Jawahar Lal Nehru took a middle path on Panchayat Raj System. At last, on the recommendations of Balwantrai Mehta Committee,Nehru made a statement in 1960. Panchayat Raj was the most revolutionary development in India.In India, the Panchayat Raj generally refers to the system of local self-government in India introduced by a 73^rd constitutional amendment in 1992. Currently, the Panchayati Raj system exists in all states and in Union Territories except Delhi. Panchayati Raj now functions as a system of governance in which gram Panchayats are the basic units of local administration. The system has three levels: Gram Panchayat (Village level), Mandal Praja Parishad at Mandal level or Block Samiti or Panchayat Samiti (Block level), and Zilla Praja Parishad (District level). In today’s context Panchayat Raj has turned to be a powerful political instrument for Dalits to transform the nature of village life about which Baba Saheb had once sympathized with.

2). Ambhedkar Ideas’ on Social Justice (A Social Reformer): History produces a few people who leave an indelible mark on the society as their lives can be seen as a metaphor for liberty, as an icon for progress and change. One such person was a rare combination of immense knowledge, exceptional political prowess and an unwavering commitment to social change was Dr BR Ambedkar. He stressed on a much broader notion of stable reconstruction of our country with inclusive growth and cultural integration in the Nation without caste discrimination. His Hindu code bill was an idea to bring equality and justice in society through emancipation of women by extending equal property rights to women. He has popularly known as the pioneer who initiated the liberation movement of roughly 65 million untouchables in India. He believed in peaceful methods of social change. His vision of democracy and equality was closely related to good society, rationality and the scientific outlook. He held that the emancipation of Dalits in India was possible only through the three-pronged approached of education, agitation and organization. Ambedkar was criticized for focusing on social justice, especially in the elimination of caste system rather than not on national movement. Thus, he was viewed  essentially as a egalitarian and a social reformer rather than a nationalist. He wrote a book on "Annihilation of Caste", in which he strongly opposed caste system. He encouraged inter caste marriages to abolish cast system in our country. Some critics took objection to his opposition to caste system in India and they say that caste system in our country is the result of different professions performed by the respective people. Then, why Ambhedkar blame upper classes, especially Brahmins.He was converted to Buddhism with his followers to clearly express his disapproval to castism. Throughout his life he fought for social justice. According to him, caste system is not merely the division of labour but a division of labourers also. It is a major obstacle to economic development. It reduces mobility leading to inefficient production. Untouchability is worse than slavery and it is nothing but mere exploitation of fellow human beings.

3). B.R. Ambedkar With Reference to 73rd and 74th Constitution Amendment Acts:With reference to 73^rd and 74^th Constitutional Amendment Acts, we can remember Ambhedkar view - “The remedy lay in creating an egalitarian and truly democratic panchayat raj system in the country. He also fought for providing reservation in Panchayats to involve all depressed classes in the rural governance”.The Panchayat Raj system was first adopted by the state of Rajasthan in Nagaur district on 2 Oct 1959. During the 1950s and 60s, other state governments adopted this system as laws were passed to establish Panchayats in various states. The second state was Andhra Pradesh, while Maharashtra was the ninth state.Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Act, 1994 in conformity with 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments have provided clear cut proportional reservation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and 1/3rd for women.There have been concerted efforts since late‟ 80 to revitalize the system and to facilitate participation of all sections of the society. The result was the passing the 73rd Constitution Amendment with high hopes and expectations which B.R.Ambedkar emphasized the need to have the representation of Dalits in decision-making processes and administrative machinery to implement and monitor the policies, measures and programmes. “Representing the interests of Dalits is not just enough”, he said, “He believed the interests could be meaningfully ensured by their own representation and participation in decision-making processes at all levels”. He recommended participation of Dalits in democratic polity at all levels from legislature to execution of policies. In the central scheme of Ambedkar, representation and participation are central. He favoured a fair policy of inclusion of Dalits in democratic polity, economy and society and cultural life of society. Thus, his approach is holistic. 73rd Constitutional Amendment provides for reservation of seats and chair positions to Scheduled Castes in Panchayati Raj Institutions.Articles 243(D) of the Indian Constitution provides that seats and offices are to be reserved for Scheduled Castes (Dalits) and Scheduled Tribes (Adivasis) in proportion to the size of their population within the panchayat, subjected to one-third seats are to be reserved for women belonging to these categories. There is also an enabling clause for states to provide reservations, on similar pattern for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The allocation of reserved positions for various categories is to be by rotation in such manner as may be determined by the states. Rajiv Gandhi presented the 64th Amendment to the Constitution to the Lok Sabha on 15 May 1989.  While it did not prove possible to pass the Amendment in Rajivji’s lifetime, almost as a tribute to him, Parliament, virtually unanimously, passed a marginally amended version of that draft as the 73rd Amendment on 23 December 1992. The amendment entered into force on 24 April 1993 which, since 2008, has been celebrated as National Panchayat Raj Day. However, the obstacles have not totally waned where there was a greater need to make the panchayat more inclusive.

4). BR Ambhedkar Views on Decentralization:Dr. Ambedkar was apprehensive that in the hierarchical society with highly skewed nature of asset and power distribution, vesting more powers at the village level would only perpetuate exploitation of the dispossessed.Dr. Ambedkar on 6^th October, 1932 made a speech in the Assembly of the Bombay Presidency opposing the introduction of the Panchayats Bill in the Province. It contains his entire standpoint view regarding decentralization of power or administration through Panchayats. Ambedkar started with the following words regarding Panchayat Bill,“I find that the Bill has two parts. The first part deals with the functions of the panchayat as a body for local self-government. I should like to say at once that I have no objection in principle to the policy of devolution; if it is found that the local boards of this Presidency are overburdened by the functions which are placed upon them by the Local Board Act and if by reason of that they are unable to discharge their functions efficiently, then I say " by all means institute village Panchayats so as to disburden the local boards." Sir, if the desire is to constitute Panchayats for their own sake, then to my mind it is a reversion to a very dangerous system. Many have eulogized the ancient system of village Panchayats. Some have called them "rural republics ". Whatever be the merits of these rural republics, I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that they have been the bane of public life of India.”He then built up his argument for a special place for minorities and the depressed classes in the Panchayats. He said,“My next objection is to the constitution of the Panchayats themselves. The Bill, as the honorable member has pointed out, provides that the village Panchayats shall be elected on the basis of adult suffrage both for males and females. I may at once state that, so far as I am concerned, I say "so far so good ", but I should like to make it clear to the Honorable Minister that, speaking for the depressed classes, I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that adult suffrage is not sufficient for us. The Honorable Minister has forgotten that the depressed classes are in a minority in every village, a miserable minority, and assuming that he adopts adult suffrage, he will readily admit I am sure that adult suffrage cannot convert a minority into a majority.  Consequentially I am bound to insist that if these village Panchayats come, there shall be special representation for the minorities. At any rate, there shall be special representation for the depressed classes, and others of course will speak for themselves.”He then continued,“Speaking for the depressed classes, therefore, I can never accept the principle of self-government for India unless I am satisfied that every self-governing institution has provisions in it which give the depressed classes special representation in order to protect their rights, and until that is done, I am afraid it will not be possible for me to assent to the first part of the Bill.”Finally, Ambedkar pointed out that the idea of accepting the rights of the depressed classes to representation had already begun to gain currency. He said,In this connection, I would also like to draw the attention of the Hindu members of this honorable House to the recent events that have happened. I refer to the Poona Pact between the Caste Hindus and the Depressed Classes that was signed on the 24/09/1932. Many members, I am sure, must have read the terms of that Pact, but I should like to draw particular attention to one section of it. In that section it has been agreed that the right of the depressed classes to representation in all local bodies shall be accepted and an endeavor shall be made in order to give effect to that part of the agreement. Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Hindu members to that part of the Pact and I am sure whatever may have been the opinions before 24/09/1932, they will now loyally abide by the terms of that Pact.”It was thus clear that Ambedkar had no objection to the concept of devolution. However, he was very clear that the traditional Panchayats were not equal to the task of handling a modern and inclusive government, and that could be achieved only through a process of affirmative action – he suggested nominations - which ensured that all communities of an unequal society were represented in local governments. Thus, it is clear that Ambedkar notion on decentralization is misunderstood.

5). Critical Analysis on BR Ambhedkar: BR Ambhedkar staunch critic of caste system, led depressed classes against social discrimination. On critical side, the policy of protective discrimination through reservations has been increasingly used to gain political mileage hurting merit system. Some critically oppose Ambhedkar on caste basis reservations, while he was quite against caste system, instead they say that he would have advocated reservations on economic criteria. Every decade reservations are extended for next decade without any sort of analysis. Thus, Ambhedkar's policy has not been applied in true spirit. No political party  in India in true sense is free from gender and caste bias. His reservation policy is not reaching the really needy. In this context Prakash Ambedkar, grandson of the Babasaheb, while talking to Manu Joseph on Outlook Magazine dated: 23/08/2004 said that “Legislation doesn’t change people. That’s why B.R. Ambedkar didn’t believe that reservation of constituencies or jobs for Dalits would change the way Indian society looked at its lower castes. He reluctantly agreed to reservation in the belief that it would be discontinued 10 years after the adoption of the Constitution. But half a century later, reservation remains an issue in India”. Addressing officials and representatives of local bodies at an event on smart cities the then Speaker Sumithra Mahajan said, “Ambhedkarji had said, ‘Give reservations for 10 years and after 10 years, do a rethink. Bring them to that stage’. We have done nothing. Even I am guilty of this… We have not thought about it. We do not contemplate why this (a rethink) has not happened.” why we have not achieved the society dreamt of by Dr Ambedkar. We should ponder over the reasons for that also”.Article 334 of the Constitution had originally required the reservation to cease in 1960, but this was extended up to 2020 through 95th Amendment of the Constitution. All political parties are now using Ambhedkar for vote bank and  no one truly tries to reflect his ideology through actions. Simply, monuments and  memorials do not serve the purpose. Practicing his ideology only that makes the difference.

                  Ambedkar influenced more than Gandhi ji’s Harijan Movement. He opposed article 370, which makes Jammu and Kashmir alien to India. Thus, he had a foresight about this article and thought it may be misused. His long struggle for the betterment of Dalits and untouchable will be ever remembered in the history of India. Now, people are remembering him only for his reservation policy and all political parties are not considering his views on land reforms, failure of political reservation for SCs/STs and women empowerment. All are ignoring that he considered higher education as medium for emancipation of oppressed and believing in privatization of higher education, instead of making accessible to all citizens. He came close to Marxian and Weberian (Max Weber a German Sociologist, who emphasized the importance of cultural influences embedded in religion as a means for understanding the genesis of capitalism) conceptions and differs from them. But, Buddha and Marx’s ends remain same but means differ. Ambhedkar accepted Buddhism as an alternative to Hinduism and he wasconverted to Buddhism and influenced masses to convert . Critics say that he was never a real Buddhist. He rejected rebirth and karma, which were part of Buddha dharma. Some people criticize him because he politically opposed Gandhi and supported the British policy of separate electorates in 1927. But, they ignored his role to save Gandhi’s life who had begun a fast unto death at the Yeravadh jail of Poona, against the communal award to depressed classes, Ambedkar and other depressed class leaders agreed to modify the award. As a result, the “Poona Pact” was signed. Under this agreement instead of separate electorates, reservation of seats was provided.

Dr. B.R. Ambhedkar’s critical view on Panchayat Raj was formed by the Indian reality of village life in his period. It was substantiated by his own personal experiences also. So, Ambedkar considered Gandhian ideas of Panchayat Raj as passionate. For Ambedkar those villages were nothing “but a sink of localism, a den of ignorance and communalism”.

Regarding Decentralization (Self Government) Ambhedkar said - “Unless I am satisfied that every self-governing institution has provisions in it which give the depressed classes special representation in order to protect their rights, and until that is done, I am afraid it will not be possible for me to assent to the first part of the Bill.”

Arundhati Roy introduces extensively annotated edition of Annihilation of Caste in “The Doctor and the Saint,” examining the persistence of caste in modern India, and how the conflict between Ambedkar and Gandhi continues to resonate. Roy breathes new life into Ambhedkar’s anti-caste utopia, and says that without a Dalit revolution, India will continue to be hobbled by systemic inequality. She faults Ambedkar for his views on the Adivasis, claiming that he didn’t understood them. He saw them as backward, in a "savage state", and in need of civilizing. "Ambedkar speaks about Adivasis in the same patronizing way that Gandhi speaks about untouchables". His views on Hinduism were subjected to lot of criticism by many people. The irony is that a person who played a key role in drafting the constitution of Hindustan was a staunch opposer of Hinduism and tried at all his best level to destroy Hinduism (which for him was a Brahmanism oppressive religion).

Some people say that “If Ambedkar thought his actions will change the society, wipe out poverty, bring equality... then why so much of divide even after the decades, they argue that he did not bridge the gap, but in fact he had widened it”. About his criticism on Brahmins, they say that “There is no doubt Brahmins were scholars and they are today also, they are logical, ofcourse there are exceptions in every society”.In Arun Shourie's book “Worshipping False Gods”, the Dalit apostle, B.R. Ambedkar, is portrayed as a self-centered, unpatriotic, power-hungry anti-national, a stooge of the British. The gravamen of Shourie's charge against Ambedkar is four-fold: (1) He opposed the freedom struggle; (2) He collaborated with the British for material gains; (3) He only piloted the draft constitution and that he can in no way be called the Father of the Constitution; and (4) His conversion to Buddhism was mere opportunism. On the very first page, Shourie states: "There is not one instance, in which Ambedkar participated in any activity connected with the struggle to free the country. But, the supporters of  Ambhedkar says that this is not true, during the Quit India Movement when Ambedkar was a member of the viceroy's executive council, he had the courage to shelter underground Congress leaders like Achyut Patwardhan at his residence. They further argued that  Mr. Shourie ignored  Ambhedkar's attack on the British at the Round Table Conference.

He opposed the caste system in our country and conveyed a good message to all Hindus that if we are divided among ourselves on caste basis and fight with each other, “we will fall prey to our enemies”. That is to say, “if we are united together we stand, if divided we will fall”. Dr. Ambhedkar believed in equality. He respected freedom and liberal democracy. Amartya Sen rightly opined that; freedom is valuable for at least two different reasons.

First, More Freedom gives us more opportunity to pursue our objectives those things that we value. Dr. Ambhedkar also respected freedom and he aimed to develop human beings through this freedom.

Second, Process of Choiceitself. Dr. Ambhedkar provided such choices (Reservations) to the oppressed people through constitutional law. In the beginning Reservations were provided only to SCs and STs under the Article 15 (4) for providing admissions in the educational institutions and under the Article16 (4) for jobs. But, later on this was extended to Other Back Ward Castes (OBCs). Originally, it was stated that these reservations will continue up to 1960 that is for 10 years only and later on they will be discontinued. But, till this date they are continued to gain political advantage out of it to retain in power claiming that they are doing social justice to SCs, STs and OBCs. But, in reality this is entirely a different story. Let us forget a while, a great injustice is done to the economically weaker sections in the Forward Casts (FCs) all these years (more than 70 years) in the name of castes, which Ambhedkar was against. Now, let us suppose, a SC, ST or a BC candidate became an IAS Officer availing reservation facility. But, later on these IAS Officer’s children are also availing reservations for admissions in colleges and in jobs. Due to this system, in their communities only other people are losing chances of getting admissions in reputed institutions and good jobs of higher cadre. At last after a long time on through 124^th Amendment Bill2019, 10% Reservations to EBCs in the FCs were approved by the Indian Parliament.

Suggestions:                            

1). Social Justice - Review of Reservation Policy of BR Ambhedkar: Now, the time has come to review the “Reservation Policy of BR Ambhedkar” after 69 years of Indian Constitution came into existence, because at present the situation has been drastically changed. SCs, STs and OBc are now equally treated on par with all the forward castes in the society.

2). For More Social Justice Government should enact that “creamy layer should not be allowed for further reservations”: Government should enact a “creamy layer bill” that is, a  generation already availed reservations should not be allowed for further reservations. Because, due to this system, in their communities only other people are losing chances of getting admissions in reputed institutions and good jobs of higher cadre.

3). Stop Encashing of the Present Reservation Policy for the Sake of Votes and Stop Frustration among the Youth: In the “Present Reservation Policy” most of the bright youth are suffering a great frustration, because most of the youth those born in forward castes even after scoring more than 90% of marks in their competitive exams are not getting seats in Medicine and in other courses which has bright future for them. Even for IAS exams also reservation system is adopted, which require top most brilliant people who will decide the future of our country. SCs, STs or OBCs are selected with low marks for the courses and jobs which has bright future. Hence, “EBC Reservation System of Irrespective of Castes” is the only solution to save our country.

4). If Government is not Alert there will be Great threat to our Social Fabric: Day by day all the castes are demanding reservations irrespective of their economic status, leading to unrest among all the castes and agitations in our country are going on, there by destroying the public property like Railways, Water pipe lines etc., causing lot of inconvenience to the common public. For example, “Jats” Community fighting for reservations in Haryana State to include them in OBC quota, Recent “Kaapus” agitation in Andhra Pradesh to include them in BCs Community list, and some time back in Rajasthan “Gujjars” lead a great agitation to include them in SCs. If Government don’t put a full stop for such type of “present reservation policy” there will be no end for this and ultimately our society will be divided in to fragments and this may even lead for demanding separate regions for separate castes, thus dividing the whole nation on caste – basis, which would be a “great threat to our social fabric”.

5). To be more vibrant, more powers and funds should be given to Gram Panchayats.

6). Decentralization will be meaningful only, if oppressed and suppressed rights are protected and preference is given to them.

7).  SC, ST Atrocity  Act should not  be mis-used.

8). It is observed that  in SC & ST  Reserved Gram Panchayats, other upper class influential people are dominating, hence  Government  must  take  action against these people.

9).  Similarly, in Women Reserved Gram Panchayats also, either husband or in – laws are dominating , hence this should be stopped.

10). It must be observed that  funds  which are earmarked for  particular purpose should be utilized for that purpose only.

Conclusion: Thus, Ambedkarism is the great relevance to the Indian society to achieve social justice, removal of untouchability in establishing equality and true democracy, but with utmost care and periodical review of his various polices. Ambhedkar rose up from dust, from being treated worse than an animal to becoming the father of the Indian Constitution. Dr. Ambhedkar was truly a multi-faceted personality. A Social reformer, a veritable emancipator of Dalits, a great national leader and a patriot, a great author, a great educationalist, a great political philosopher, economist, a great religious guide and above all a great humanist without any parallel among his contemporary.

References:

1). B.R. Ambedkar, What Congress and Gandhi have done to the Untouchables?

2). B. R. Ambedkar, Annihilation of Caste, an undelivered speech written in 1936 by B. R. Ambedkar

3). S. Anand (Ed.), Annihilation of Caste: The annotated critical edition – B.R. Ambedkar – Introduced with the essay ‘The Doctor and the Saint’ by Arundhati Roy, Navayana Publishers, New Delhi, (2014)

4). Outlook Magazine 23/08/2004

5). Jadhav Narendra, Ambedkar: Awakening India’s social conscience, Konark Publishers, New Delhi (2014)

6). Badal Sarkar, Dr. B. R. Ambhedkar’s theory of State Socialism International Research Journal of Social

Sciences, 2, (2013)

7). Lokhande. G. S., B.R. Ambedkar: A study in social democracy. Constituent Assembly Debates, (25-11-1949) vol. xi

8). The 13^th Memorial Lecture on Dr. Ambhedkar Lecture, By Paramjit Singh, Judge, Professor of Sociology & Dean, Academic Affairs, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab

9). Arun Shourie -  “Worshipping False Gods” ASA Publications

10). Wikipedia Articles on BR Ambhedkar  life and Reservation System in India