Article 30 and Religious Apartheid in Modern India

Dear All: I stumbled on this article a few weeks back and felt that it deserved wider circulation – especially in the context of the recent discussions and decision by SC on RTE.  I was vaguely aware of the discriminatory nature of Article 30 (which by the way, was the reason behind the Ramkrishna Mission to declare itself a non-Hindu “sect”) but its extent and repercussions shocked me. Below, excerpts from a richly referenced and data-rich critique of this article by Dr Moorthy Muthuswamy…Read on.

*** Excerpts from Religious Apartheid in Modern India by Moorthy Muthuswamy ***

…For any emergent or modern nation, it would indeed be downright shameful, and even outright inconceivable to blatantly discriminate against its citizens, especially its majority community. This reminds one of the white apartheid-rule in South Africa.

One may be surprised to learn that in India, of all nations, similar practices are taking place.

Recently, St. Stephen’s College, an elite Christian missionary-controlled higher education institution located in New Delhi shocked many by declaring that it was setting up a quota system that allots 50 percent of its student enrolment for the Christians.

…A stunning fact: About 95 percent of the college’s expenses are paid by the taxpayers, with the majority community contributing most of it.[4] Interestingly, according to the 2001 census figures, Christian population in New Delhi constitutes just one percent.[5] Indeed, Indian taxpayers appear to be subsidising the selective empowerment of Christians in St. Stephen’s College at the expense of deserving non-Christians.

A Supreme Court ruling based on Article 30 of the Indian Constitution was used by the St. Stephen’s management to justify these religious discriminations.[6] In 1993, the Government of India notified that the Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Zoroastrians (Parsis) are considered “minority.”[7] Article 30 of the Indian constitution allows religious minority communities regardless of their socio-economic status to allot up to 50 percent of student enrolment and employment for members of their own communities in educational institutions administered by them even if the institutions are getting aid from the government.[8] The definition of minority applies at the national level — meaning that in the Indian states of Mizoram and Punjab where Christians and Sikhs are majorities respectively, and the Hindus are a minority, Article 30 still applies to the Christians and Sikhs in these states as minorities, and the Hindus there as majority.

Christian minorities are also, not surprisingly, getting preferential employment in missionary-controlled educational institutions, again justified on the basis of Article 30. For example, the percentages of teaching staff belonging to the Christian faith in missionary-controlled, but taxpayer-funded American College, Union Christian College and St. Xavier’s College are 66, 83 and 42 respectively.[9] But the percentages of Christians in the state of Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Maharashtra, where these colleges are located are just 7, 19 and 1 respectively,[10] clearly suggesting the role of religious discriminations in hiring. It appears that these lawful discriminatory practices encompass just about all Christian denominations and cut across the nation. The temptation to discriminate is driven by the highly beneficial manner of the reservations as well as by their lawful nature.

If the percentage of missionary-controlled educational institutions is proportional to the Christian minority population percentage, these discriminations, while hardly justifiable for a nation that calls itself “secular,” are unlikely to have an adverse impact. However, here’s the gist of the problem: the 2.3 percent (2001 census figures)[11] Christian minorities control over 22 percent[12] (almost ten times their population percentage) of all educational institutions in India (i.e., over 40,000 of them[13]).
In combination with Article 30, the above statistics state the obvious: The Christians are a privileged minority in India, with the government’s resources — inadvertently, it seems — allocated for their preferred empowerment. Not surprisingly, literacy rate of the Christians in India stands at 80 percent,[14] compared to 65 percent[15] overall. With the missionaries providing nearly 30 percent of the healthcare services in India,[16] employment possibilities for those who convert to Christianity are significantly more than those of non-Christians. In addition, the minority status of missionary-controlled institutions helps them get tax, land allotment and many other benefits.[17]

…The magnitude and scale of these discriminations are staggering. If each missionary-controlled institution has on the average a total of 300 students and staff, and if it discriminates on the average against 10 non-Christian student enrolments and youth employments every year, it translates to about a quarter million discriminatory acts every year. For instance, St. Stephen’s, which has an incoming class of about 400 students every year,[19] allots nearly 200 of these seats exclusively for Christians — i.e., nearly 200 acts of discrimination every year.

…It is useful to quantify the implications of this decision. Assuming on the average a total of 300 students and staff in an institution, for the 40,000 institutions controlled by the missionaries, a grand total of 12 million seats is reached. Hence, a disturbing possibility has arisen as a result of the honoured court’s decision: It has empowered the missionaries to lawfully deny non-Christians from a few millions to about 6 million student enrolments and staff employments every year in institutions likely funded by the government.

…Post 1990s, the religious apartheid practices permitted by Article 30 of India’s constitution have played a primary role in devastating the majority community economically in the southern Indian state of Kerala by marginalising their educational opportunities. The article has given minority-controlled institutions in Kerala legal power to discriminate and to regulate educational access at the expense of the taxpayers. According to Indian academic C. Issac:

“[The] 55 per cent of Hindu population of Kerala controls 11.11 per cent of the state’s bank deposits. On the other hand, the 19 per cent Christian community commands 33.33 per cent and 25 per cent Muslim population retains 55.55 per cent…. The education is one of the major sectors where the organised strength of the minorities in Kerala is used in a covert manner. In this sector the majority [Hindu] community as well as the government together control only 11.11 percent, on the other hand, the church controls 55.55 percent and Muslim religious organisations 33.33 percent of all institutions. At present the professional education sector of Kerala is almost under the full control of the minorities. About 12,000 engineering enrolments and 300 medicine enrolments are in the minority institutions and they are fully controlling the admissions. At present 60 percent of the enrolments in paramedical courses are controlled by the organised minority religious leadership…. In this situation the successive governments are functioning as mere onlookers…. A lion’s share of these aided [government-funded] schools is under minority management.”[44]

Can a parent belonging to the majority community expect his/her sons and daughters, even if they are well-qualified, to receive college education in Kerala? Difficult as it is to get admission in a college, it is unlikely to be lost on many Hindus that they stand a much higher chance, should they convert to one of the privileged minority faiths.

…Clearly, modern and “emergent” India has to do away with Article 30 in the present form.

…This article shouldn’t be viewed as an attack on Christian minorities or a call for undermining their rights, or an effort to stop conversions altogether. The focus of this analysis is about the egregious human rights violations of the 80 percent majority community. By tracing these violations to Article 30 of the Indian constitution, this piece offers ways of addressing this issue objectively and fairly without infringing on anyone’s rights.

*** End of Excerpts ***

The original is a long piece but worth reading in full…Comments & thoughts welcome, as always…

P.S. A relevant excerpt from a recent piece in FirstPost:

The spirit of Article 30 is that it is intended to ensure that minorities are not discriminated against or denied equal treatment. But in practice, it has begun to mean that non-minority institutions can be denied the right to “establish and administer” institutions in their own way.
Article 30 and various court judgments related to it, including the recent one by the Supreme Court on exempting unaided minority institutions from the purview of the 25 percent quota for the poor prescribed under the Right to Education Act, clearly need to be rewritten or even abolished.
It can be abolished for the simple reason that the right of minorities to establish their own institutions is inherent in human rights and citizenship rights. Since any Indian citizen has the right to set up any institution under extant laws of the land, minorities can do so too.

Additional Reading: Why Did The Ramakrishna Mission Say They Are Not Hindus?

Also read: “Pseudo-secularism” at its best?