It’s Affirmative Action, Not a Political Tug-of-War

Newsreel Asia Insight #49
Nov. 20, 2023

Maharashtra is currently in news for both the advocacy for and opposition to the inclusion of the Maratha community in the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category for reservations. But news coverage on the issue focuses predominantly on electoral politics, overshadowing the fundamental objective of uplifting marginalised communities.

The Maratha community’s demand for reservation is primarily based on their social and educational backwardness, despite their historical prominence and influence in Maharashtra, as suggested by a 2018 report by the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission, headed by retired Justice N.G. Gaikwad. They argue that a significant portion of their community, especially those in rural and less developed areas, has not benefited from economic progress and lacks access to educational and employment opportunities.

The Marathas are about 33% of the state’s population and traditionally seen as a warrior and agrarian caste. Sections of the community have faced challenges due to the changing economic landscape, where agriculture is no longer as viable and profitable. However, the complexity of their demand lies in the diverse socio-economic status within the Maratha community itself, ranging from affluent and influential to economically disadvantaged groups.

The past governments’ attempts to give Marathas this reservation have not been easy. After a major protest in 2016, which was in response to the rape and murder of a 15-year-old Maratha girl by three men from a Dalit community in Kopardi village in Ahmednagar district, the government of the time tried to calm things down by offering reservations to the Marathas. However, the Supreme Court of India invalidated it.

Most recently, on Nov. 17, a significant rally brought together 374 OBC communities in the state, featuring various political figures, including Maharashtra Civil Supplies Minister Chhagan Bhujbal, to oppose the inclusion of the Marathas in the OBC category.

The media coverage of the rally predominantly highlighted the roles, interests and strategies of the political players involved – for instance, the future political standing of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) if it alienates the OBCs.

The current government – a coalition of the BJP, the Shiv Sena (led by Eknath Shinde) and a Nationalist Congress Party faction (led by Ajit Pawar) – proposed that Marathas could use the 10% Economically Weaker Sections quota, but this was declined by the community.

If the Maratha community is allocated a 16% reservation as a distinct category, the total reservation in Maharashtra would rise to 68%, presenting a legal challenge. The Supreme Court, in its prior judgments, has stated that reservations should ideally not surpass the 50% threshold, as reservation is an exception, and the exception cannot exceed the rule. And the OBCs are opposed to the inclusion of Marathas in their category. The government’s problem is figuring out something that would keep both the Marathas and the OBCs happy.

The reporting, primarily focused on the statements and strategies of political and community leaders, has provided limited insight into the wider consequences of the rally for the communities it intended to represent.

A past issue of the Economic & Political Weekly magazine noted, “Although the Maratha caste comprises roughly 38% of the population in our sample, they fill 63% of the unreserved gram pradhan positions. Likewise, when a gram pradhan position is reserved for a woman, they fill 62% of those positions,” as quoted by The Wire, which observed that since 1960, out of 18 chief ministers in Maharashtra, 10 have belonged to the Maratha community.

Political parties frequently exploit caste and class identities for electoral gains, as is often expected. Similarly, the media tends to concentrate on political narratives. The issue, perhaps, lies in our inundation with such narratives about affirmative action, leading us to perceive related news reports as mere spectacles of conflict rather than as matters of significant societal impact.

The fundamental purpose of affirmative action is to attain equity for communities historically subjected to discrimination and disadvantage. Therefore, the crucial factors to consider are whether the community in question has endured long-standing discrimination and disadvantage, and what constitutes a fair level of reservation for them. This issue should be viewed beyond the scope of a political tug-of-war.