the case of india ashok acharya PDF
Preview the case of india ashok acharya
EQUALITY, DIFFERENCE AND GROUP RIGHTS: THE CASE OF INDIA ASHOK ACHARYA A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Craduate Department of Political Science, University of Toronto @ Copyright by Ashok Acharya, 2001 National Library Biblicîhèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographii Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OItaw ON K1A ON4 M O N K tAONO Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence aiiowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distn'bute or sel reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fiim, de reproduction sur papier ou sur fonnat électronique. The author retains ownersbip of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts from it Ni kt thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. EQUALITY, DZFFERENCE AND GROUP RIGHTS: THE CASE OF INDIA by ASHOK ACHARYA A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Depariment of Political Science, University of Toronto O Copyright by Ashok Acharya, ZOO1 Abstract Recent engagements of contemporary liberalkm with questions of identity, community, and rights have Ied to an exciting array of research in political theory. Conternporary liberals and comunitarian+WaIzer, Taylor, Kymlicka, Young, Parekh, Carens and others-have, each in their own ways, challenged the traditional liberal hework of individual rights and sought to extend this fiarnework to accommodate cuItural and disadvantaged rninorities. The theoreticai prescriptions that How fiom these works have implications for re-ordering majority-minority relations in pluralist societies. However, most discussions of ttiis sort have usuaiiy involved thinking through examples fiom advanced liberai democracies. And since most couniries in the wodd today are culturally diverse, there is a need to analyze and use other, mostly non-Western, examples to illuminate our understanding of what justice requires in regard to identity conflicts and comrnunity nghts. My dissertation uses the Indian example to probe morally compelling issues pertaining to liberal justifications of rights for disadvantaged groups. It explores the challenges that cultural difference and group disadvantage pose to the ideal of equal citizenship. More specifically, it draws on caste and religjous identities to problematize the notions of cultural recognition and resource redistribution based on disadvantages that groups experience. At a concrete level, the analysis focuses on (a) cultural recognition for religious minonties, and (kt) affirmative action for disadvantaged groups. While arguing a case for broadening the referent of equai treatrnent to include fair strategies of inclusion for groups that find themseIves under the burden of unequal circumstances, the thesis also addresses the reasonable Iimits of such group-based clairns in a liberal dernocracy of India's size and diversity. A study of the indian model, it is argued, poses fiesh challenges and solutions to the theory and practice of liberal democracy in both western and non-western contexts. Acknowledgemeats First and foremost, 1w ould like to thank Prof. Joseph Carens for his guidance and patience throughout both the dissertation process and my entire graduate career. His intensive intellectual advice and fnendly demeanour have significantly conûibuted in making the exercise of writing this dissertation an extremely pleasant one. My dissertation took shape in, and grew out of the passionate and lively discussions in the graduate course, Problenls of Political Commzinity that he taught in the first year of my program. As an adviser he has motivated me to attain a level of scholarship 1 did not initially anticipate being capable of. Prof Arthur Rubinoff has been invaluable as a dissertation reader, teacher and fnend. His expertise on indian politics and the overall endorsement of the theme that 1s et upon to study in the Indian context significantly contributed to rny confidence. Prof. Melissa Williams h a been extremely forthcoming in her incisive, detailed and meticulous comrnents on much of my first draft. I have immensely profited in shhng and discussing many aspects of my research with her. My heartiest thanks to ail the three advisers for taking a keen interest in my research and writing. 1 also have the pleasure of benefiting fiom Prof. Pau1 Kingston's comments at the penuItirnate stage of my writing. 1 aIso would like to thank Prof. Fred Dallmayr, my externai examiner, for appreciating the worth of my enterprise. I am aIso gratefuI to the Canadian CommonweaIth Scholarships Program for their generous support during most of my doctoral program, to the Centre for International iv Studies For support with a prestigious one-year doctoral fellowship, to the Department of Political Science, the Centre for South Asian Studies, and the Joint Centre for Asia Pacific Studies at the University of Toronto for supporting me in crucial way-s. A special thanks is due to my Eriend and technical troubIe-shooter, Madhu Mahadevan, for his invaluable help in aiding me with his computing skills. Finally, for putting up with an absent-minded and incomgibly book-focused spouse and father, I must thank with al1 my heart Jenny, my extremely supportive wife, and Pratyasha and Prateechi, my adorable daughters, for their unbounded patience, support and forbearance. This dissertation is a gift of love to them with an added promise to make up for the odd hours and weekends spent away from home. Table of Contents .. Abstract ........................................................................................... rr Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. iv Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... vi Chapter One ...................................................................................................................... 1 ...................................................................................................................... [NTRODUCTION 1 ........................................................................... ...- Liberalisrn and Recognition of Difference 3 .................................................................................. Groups: Recognition and Disadvantage 3 ................................................................................................... Croups in the indian Context 5 ............................................................................................. Caste, Ethnicity and Religion 1 0 ..................................... Territorial Claims and the Mixed Record of institutional Design 12 ........................................................... Non-territorial Croup Claims: Caste and Religion 13 ......................................................................................................... Group Rights in lndia 1 7 ........................................................ Cultural Pluralism and Composite Nationalism 1 8 .. ............................... ..... .. .................................... Caste, Religion and Libetal Values 20 .......................................................................................... Rights Of Disadvantaged Groups 27 ............................................................................................................... Summary Of Thesis 30 Chapter Two. .................................................................................................................. 35 ...................................................................... TEE CONSTITüTION AND TEE CROUPS 35 ............................................................................................................. Colonial Background 36 .................................................................. The terms ofreference: Cabinet Mission Plan 36 .......................................................................................................... Ordenng Difference 37 ......................................................................................................... The Colonial Pattern 46 ................................................................................................. Constitutional Deliberations -47 ......................................................... The Constituent Assembly: Representing Diversity 47 .................................................................... Constituent AssembIy: Minority Protections 48 ................................................................................................................. Cultural Rights -59 ....................................................................... Identity and Rights in the Indian Constitution 70 ............................................................................................. Multicultunl ConstitutionaIism 79 Chapter Bree ................................................................................................................... 85 .......................... CULTüRAL RECOGMTION AND RELIGIOUS PERSOW LAWS 85 ......................................................................................................... Persona1 Laws in India 38 .................................................................................................. Aspects of Muslim Identity -93 Are Muslirns a disadvantaged group? ..................................... .. ........................................ 95 .............................................................................................................. The Shah Bano Case 97 .................................................. Cultural Recognition and Justifications of Personal Laws 105 Religious Rights vs .W omen's Ri&& .............................................................................. .1 11 Equal CitizenshÏp and Uniform Civit Code. ........................... .... ..............*...**.**.................. 118 ............................................................................ A Qualified Defence of Personal Laws 122 Chapter Four .................................................................................................................. 125 vi ........................................... CASTE DISADVANTAGE AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION 125 .......................................................................................... Addressing Caste Disadvantage 126 .......................................................................................... Defining Affirmative Action 1 2 9 ................................................................................................. Affirnilitive Action in India 132 ...................................................................... Liberal Justifications for Affirmative Action 135 .................................................................................. The Nondiscrimination Argument 136 ................................................................................... The Equal Opportunity Argument 140 .............................................................................. The Group Disadvantage Argument 147 ......................................................................... Political Fairness and the Lirnits of Quotas 151 ................................................................................................................... Chaprer Five 158 ...................................................................................................................... CONCLUSION 158 ........................................................................ Group Rights and Contextualist Arguments 158 .......................................................................................................... The Argument So Far 160 ........................................... Moral Relevance of Group Disadvantage: Caste and Religion 168 ............................... Justice Toward Groups: BivaIence of Recognition and Redismiution 170 vii Chapter One INTRODUCTION The 1990s was a tuniing point in liberal theory. in the span of a decade the focus of conternporary IiberaI theory convcrged on issues of multiculturalism, ethnic accommodation, group recognition, rights of minorities, and so on. The interest in these areas grew out of the realization that a) both the state and the majority in nearly every multiethnic society have neglected Iegitimate interests surrounding the identity of minority cornmunities, and b) the üaditionai liberal perspective of recognizing the interests of individuals has largely worked in the interests of the majority or the more powerfil group(s) and to the detriment of those excluded or disadvantaged. EmpWcally, most Iiberal democracies are today stilI caught in the dilernrna of re- envisioning the contours of nation-building and waking up to new challenges of re- conceiving citizenship. On the other hand, however, realities of cultural difference and pluralisrn in most multiethnic societies today have injected a new impetus to Liberai theory as it makes Fresh attempts to redefine citizenship by being both more inclusive and multicultural. Liberaiism and Recognition of DILference Under such circurnstances, a new vigour has marked the rebirth of liberalism, or to those who chart the course today, a 'renaissance' of liberdism. Contemporary liberalism now, more than ever, seeks to normatively accommodate claims of difference. As reflected in the works of Charles Taylor, Mictiael Walzer, Will Kymlicka, iris Marion Young, Bhikhu Pruekh, Nancy Fraser, Joseph W. Carens, and others in recent times, there has been a growing concern to map issues of cultural difference, justice toward excluded groups, and citizenship in multiethnic societies. Although these theorists focus on contexts that largely prevail in North America and Europe, their work has theoretical resonance and possible application in non-western contexts, too. However, the important task of identifjing the nght mix of theory and contextual realities ofdifference remains to be worked out in each context. In other words, much of the conceptual apparatus that goes by the name of 'multiculturalism' today needs to be thought through by examining particular contexts and examples. A quick-fix theoretical resolution does not appiy anywhere, aithough a broad recognition of the need to address group concems regarding exclusion fiom the political sphere rnatters almost everyivhere. The idea of group rights has acquired a new normative and political salience in most multiethnic societies. In contrast to the traditional liberal conception that only individuals cm have nghts and Liberties and that politics be neutral between competing conceptions of good, multicultural Iiberals and advocates of group nghts, despite some differences in their theoretical approaches, commody agree that some forms of
Description:The list of books you might like
