Most of the tributes on Justice Sachar missed one aspect of his personality — he was a visionary, a man beyond his times.
He understood the issues of the economically, socially and deprived classes of India including the minorities. That "the Indian Constitution is committed to the equality of citizens and the responsibility of the State to preserve, protect and assure the rights of minorities in matters of language, religion and culture. That is why our national leaders while framing the Constitution, emphasized the doctrine of unity in diversity".
Justice Sachar highlighted the problems faced by a minority broadly relate to issues of identity, security and equity. He understood that the social, cultural and public interactive spaces in India can be very daunting for Indian Muslims. That they carry a double burden of being labelled as “anti-national” and as being “appeased” at the same time.
While Muslims need to prove on a daily basis that they are not “anti-national” and “terrorists”, it goes unrecognised that the alleged “appeasement” has not resulted in the desired level of socio-economic development of the community.
Muslim identity affects everyday living in a variety of ways, ranging from being unable to rent/buy a house to accessing good schools for their children. Buying or renting property in localities of one’s choice is becoming increasingly difficult for Muslims. Apart from the reluctance of owners to rent/sell property to Muslims, several housing societies in “non-Muslim” localities ‘dissuade’ Muslims from locating there.
There is a lacking sense of security among Muslims and a discriminatory attitude towards them. Communal tensions or any untoward incident in any part of the country is enough to make Muslims fear for their safety and security. The lackadaisical attitude of the government and the political mileage sought whenever riots occur has been very painful for the community.
On the other hand, the police, along with the media, overplay the involvement of Muslims in violent activities and underplay the involvement of other groups, organisations. Sachar report had therefore recommended that state governments and UTs be requested to consider the recommendation of posting Muslim officers in police stations, Muslim health personnel and teachers in Muslim concentration areas.
A High Level Committee set up to study the social, economic and educational status of the Muslim community of India, under the chairpersonship of Justice Sachar, had recommended the setting up of an Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC), National Data Bank, Assessment & Monitoring Authority to address the grievances of deprived groups, including the Muslim community. Another unique recommendation was to institute a diversity index — a transparent and acceptable index to measure diversity in the areas of education, government and private employment and housing.
The need for an Equal Opportunity Commission has been aptly summarised in the report. “Equality is a foundational value of our Republic. This is secured by the Constitution through Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy and is widely shared in public life. Yet, stark inequalities mark our social reality for the present generation and prospects of the future generations. Worse, these inequalities often coincide with boundaries of social groups and communities making inter-group inequalities more visible than before. Hence, there is a need to address inequalities and supplement the existing policies of reservations by fine-tuning the definition of the beneficiaries, expanding the range of modalities and evolving a forward-looking and integral approach to affirmative action.”
Equality of opportunity may or may not lead to equality of outcomes; the concept suggests a level playing field and a fair race at the end of which some participants get rewards, some do not. Equality of opportunity is in principle compatible with inequality of outcomes – it offers an equal chance to be unequal.
The Sachar report highlighted the fact that though the government has been implementing a range of schemes and programmes targeting deprived sections, these efforts need to be evaluated to ascertain how they could be made more effective in delivering the intended benefits. This is necessary to reduce inequalities which persist covering the entire spectrum of material life and basic survival needs like food, water and shelter to higher order goods or benefits like technical education or representation amongst the privileged segments of society. NSSO data confirms this.
Today, the awareness of significant enclaves with unprecedented wealth and privilege heightens sensitivity to disproportionately distributed poverty and deprivation. Although the programmes of the government are targeted at particular social groups and sectors, these efforts need to be re-visited and expanded if they are to meet the challenges of the present.
Lessons from the functioning of Equal Opportunity Commissions and similar organisations in other countries demonstrate the utility of such an institution if it is tailored to the specific socio-economic, judicial and institutional context of the country. The proposed equality commission needs to be autonomous and follow an evidence-based approach.
One of the Sachar Committee’s recommendation was setting up of a National Data Bank to collect data relating to government schemes and programmes for socio-religious communities. The data collected was to be analysed and assessed by the autonomous Assessment & Monitoring Authority. Both these critical inputs would be available to the proposed EOC, apart from data of the Census, NSSO and other sources.
The role envisaged for EOC is to ensure equal opportunity and non-discriminatory practices in the areas of employment and education, specifically for deprived groups. The EOC is expected to be a watch-dog institution that serves as a mechanism to evolve and evaluate measures for promotion of equal opportunities, following an evidence-based approach.
The jurisdiction of Equal Opportunity Commission would extend to all “deprived groups”, who have been denied or who claim to have been denied equal opportunities by government, public and private bodies in education and employment. EOC was to assist the deprived groups in securing equal opportunity through suitable schemes or measures from the Central or State Government, and public and private enterprises and institutions. It is to work towards ensuring the elimination of all forms of discrimination and denial of equal opportunity. The EOC would investigate practices of inequality of opportunity in education, employment and such other areas as may be notified by the Central Government and recommend remedial measures. It will evaluate the attainment of equal opportunity and the obstacles to such attainment for different groups of people.
The recommendation of the Sachar Committee was revolutionary for addressing the problems of shared spaces.
"The idea of providing certain incentives to a 'diversity index' should be explored. Admittedly, this is a complex proposition but if a transparent and acceptable method to measure diversity can be developed, a wide variety of incentives can be linked to this index. The diversity principle which entails equity is to be applied not only between the majority and minorities but also between minorities so that the truly disadvantaged can and should benefit. Given an acceptable diversity index, policies can provide for incentives in the form of larger grants to those educational institutions that have higher diversity and are able to sustain it."
"These incentives can apply to both colleges and universities, while also to private sector companies encouraging diversity in the work force. While such initiatives should be part of the corporate social responsibility, some affirmative action may help initiate this process. Incentives should also apply to builders for housing complexes that have more 'diverse' resident populations to promote 'composite living spaces."
(Ashish Joshi, is a civil servant. He was the nodal officer for implementation for the recommendation for Sachar Committee Report and PM's new 15 Point Programme for welfare of the Minorities, Ministry of Minority Affairs (2006-2011). He is a post-graduate from St Stephen’s College and an alumnus of Indian Institute of Public Administration and National Institute of Financial Management. Views are personal.)
By: Vidya Bhushan Rawat, Radical Humanist, political analyst and human rights activist
One does not remember Justice Rajinder Sachar when he was the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court in 1985 but it is a fact that a forthright person like him was never to the liking of those in power. As a judge in Delhi... moreAnother article on Justice Sachar - Thanks to Peoples Voice:
By: Vidya Bhushan Rawat, Radical Humanist, political analyst and human rights activist
One does not remember Justice Rajinder Sachar when he was the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court in 1985 but it is a fact that a forthright person like him was never to the liking of those in power. As a judge in Delhi High Court, he was deeply disturbed and upset with the lack of seriousness and justification of brutal massacres of the Sikhs in the aftermath of the assassination of Mrs Indira Gandhi. He spoke against it, passed orders but an interference from the then prime minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi, who had a massive mandate in Parliament, Justice Sachar was denied hearing the cases related to 1984 pogrom in Delhi. He had been openly critical of the emergency in 1975 and was transferred from Delhi high court. That a chief justice of Delhi high court could not make it to the Supreme Court then we should understand that the loss was of judiciary and not the other way round. The rest is history. His ‘punishment’ became a boon for the civil liberty movement in India. Perhaps the period post-retirement were more fruitful for him and for all those who got associated with him and engaged with him on issues of public concern. It is a reality that anyone who challenged those in power became victim of the power politics.
The fact is that Justice Sachar’s name would come among the top three jurists of India for their remarkable contribution for the rule of law and standing upright to the power as well as defending civil liberties and human rights after they got retired from their ‘official’ work. In fact, they never got retired because all these legends did extraordinary work of service to public life after they demitted their office. They are Justice V R Krishna Iyer, Justice V M Tarkunde and Justice Rajinder Sachar. Interestingly, all the three might not be called the best in the legal profession yet their concern for human rights, human values and social inclusion put them at very high pedestal than those who might be called ‘constitutional experts’. All the three were actually political personalities and participated in political movements and hence the pro-people thoughts were part of their basic DNA. Justice Krishna Iyer was a Minister in the first left government in Kerala while Justice Tarkunde played a very important role during the emergency and was close associate of Jai Prakash Narain, though prior to that Tarkunde was part of the Radical Humanist party formed by M N Roy and Justice Rajinder Sachar came from a very illustrious family background as his father was Bhim Sen Sachar was the chief minister of Punjab and an important leader of the Congress Party yet in thoughts and practice Justice Sachar was deeply influenced by Ram Manohar Lohia and his socialist thoughts in his very young age. In fact, he associated with various socialist political thoughts and talked about an alternative to both the Congress and the BJP.
One of the pioneers of civil liberties movements in India, Justice Rajinder Sachar was a very humble person and easy to access. Unlike many other luminaries, Justice Sachar was more comfortable in sitting and talking with activists of the grassroots. He would stand in solidarity with all the secular liberal forces seeking justice and fair implementation of law. When the human rights organisations were putting pressure for a National Human Rights Commission, he was among very few involved in supporting initiative for it. He was well versed with International affairs and was appointed the UN rapporteur for the Housing Rights but his main concern was the issues of minorities in India and the growing hatred being spread by the Hindu right in India.
Justice Sachar became a household name after the famous Sachar Commission Report that he submitted to the Union government in the year 2006 on the Social, Economic and Educational status of Muslim community in India. Nobody was expecting a miracle from this report. Many were sceptical about the ‘Lahore’ club as upper caste upper elite ‘seculars because Sachar Saheb and others who migrated from Pakistan actually never really bothered too much about the caste discrimination. They were thoroughly secular and would go to any extent to defend the rights of minorities but would rarely speak about the caste discrimination as an issue but the Sachar report surprised many because it did admit unambiguously that Muslims are not a monolith group as being made out and caste system exists among the Muslims in India. Though the issue of the Pasmanda Muslims were already gaining momentum but after the open admittance by the Sachar Committee that there are backward Muslims and they need to be identified and provided protection, the movement gained ground. Till date, a large number of Muslim elite institutions too avoided speaking about the caste discrimination among the Muslims terming it a lie and suggesting that Islam does not permit it but now they have realized that conversion to other religion does not actually remove our caste identity and prejudices remain the same.
Justice Sachar was one of the most active members of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties and was very pragmatic person. People would go to him to seek advice whenever there was a crisis and his words were like final for many. While human rights were his primary concern yet he was an active political activist whose concerns about growing isolation of minorities particularly Muslims in India was shared by many. Not many among his profession were that forthright as Justice Sachar when he spoke about the politics of intimidation and marginalization of Muslims. It takes a lot of courage of conviction when a man of his stature spoke as why djd not government act against those Hindu dealers who are owners of the slaughterhouses and export beef. At the time when beef and Muslims were made synonymous, Justice Sachar openly spoke how a majority of the beef exporters in India are Hindus which infuriated many in the Hindutva camp.
Very few people know that Justice Rajinder Sachar had actually suggested a change in our electoral system and switch to proportionate electorate system. He submitted this to Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission suggesting that vote percentage and seat one must be the same. He was worried about the low voting percentage. When Campaign for Electoral Reforms in India actually organized a National Conference in Delhi in 2012, I had gone to invite Justice Rajinder Sachar for the meeting as I had found out that he had given a written submission to Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission. To my surprise, Justice Sachar said that he does not hold the same view now because now the Dalits and OBCs are coming in fair number in our parliament and no one party has the monopoly in our polity. Justice Sachar came to the programme and so did Justice D.S.Tewatia, former Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court, who he recommended. Ofcourse, that day, both of them disappointed.
I was disappointed with the turn of event on part of Justice Sachar for not supporting the cause of proportionate electorate system. Like many others, he too felt it was a bit complicated. He wanted to focus on the other issues of electoral reforms such as corruption, criminalization of the polity and the most important part was that voting percentage must be above 50% if any candidate has to win. I feared that most of the ‘libertarians’ were afraid that the proportionate Electorate System would open a Pandora box and divide the already divided society and hence they wanted to keep it in cold storage.
One thing remarkable about him was his enthusiasm and friendly approach to people. He was much in demand in the conferences, Dharanas and seminars and gave his subjects utter importance. I have observed him on many occasions where he would have spoken extempore but he came with notes and full presentation. He was very comfortable speaking on the issues of Muslims and minorities in India and was fairly popular among them. Hailing from Punjab, he knew the Islamic culture and was well versed with Urdu language. This was the reason he felt at-home with the Muslim intellectuals and youths.
Partition created psychological scars in both the Hindus and Muslims. Punjab and Bengal were the most affected regions. The world saw the biggest migration of people, unthinkable hitherto from one place to other. Millions were killed. People saw brutalities of worst kind. The Hindu Right worked among these communities in India and the Muslim rights in Pakistan feeding them with all kind of rumours about Muslims and Hindus relatively. That resulted in the large number of refugees in both the countries developed virtual hatred against each other. Their narrative would give worst kind of picture of their ‘enemy’. The ruling elite also encouraged such and got strengthened on the fear psychosis of the people. As a young person he Rajinder Sachar must have seen and felt this and yet he did not succumb to all these narratives and stories that was being regularly fed to people. It needs strong conviction and courage to stand up and challenge these popular narratives when the atmosphere was thoroughly polarized. Perhaps, this was his biggest strength to stand up with the people suffering because of their identity. He has seen Pakistan and the failure of it because of the religious right dictated political system and therefore failed it. In India, thankfully, the first generation of the political leaders despite their differences, were secular and liberal Democrats and hence we survived as a democracy and gave minorities equal rights unlike Pakistan. Therefore, it need big courage to stand up against the popular narrative and speak for the rights of all which he did all his life. Right from the issue of Kashmir to those dying in communal violence whether against Sikhs in 1984 or Gujarat in 2002 or Mumbai in 1993, he was always there standing with the communities marginalized by the bureaucratic and administrative structure because of pure communal polarization. He had seen it in pre-partition days, the division and hatred it created and that is why he knew the repercussion of it which made him a person championing the cause of minorities and their rights.
Justice Rajinder Sachar lived every moment of his life. There was never a dull moment for him. In fact he was very serious about socialist party and has been speaking to various people about its vision. At the age of 94 when most of his contemporaries avoided going to political protests, seminars and conferences, Justice Sachar was exception. The last time, we were at one platform was the huge public programme at the Talkatora Stadium organized by All India Milli Council where he spoke and defended the rights of the Muslims a citizen of India. His was the voice of sanity and for much authenticity too. At the moment when our judiciary is facing slumber and conspiracy theories are roaming around as the highest court of the land is under scrutiny, Justice Sachar’s voice would have been very sane and useful for all of us who believe in constitutionalism and rule of law. His death is a big blow to the civil liberties movement in India as well as to all the secular forces who looked upon him as a guardian. The country’s secular liberal democratic space will definitely miss him in these moments of national crisis when his solidarity and presence encouraged activists to fight their battle more vigorously.
It is often difficult to write about a person with whom you were close for several decades. So many thoughts come to your mind, some are chronological, bound by time and events, but many are those, which are eternal, which constituted that person..........
Former Delhi high court chief justice Rajinder Sachar died on Friday in the national Capital at a private hospital, family members said.
“He was admitted in Fortis Hospital two weeks ago. He passed away at around 12 pm,” a family member told IANS.
Sachar, who was born on December 22, 1923, chaired the Sachar Committee, constituted by then Congress-led central government, which submitted a report on the social, economic and educational status of Muslims in India.
A noted human rights activist, Sachar was the chief justice of Delhi high court from August 6, 1985, to December 22, 1985.
Since his retirement, he had been associated with the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, a rights group.
He was a legend in his own lifetime. Highly respected in life and deeply mourned in death, Rajinder Sachar was a household name. Son of a Congress veteran, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and inherited his grandfather’s legal acumen. On returning from Europe after completing my higher education in early... moreAn article about Justice Sachar (Thanks to Indian Express):
He was a legend in his own lifetime. Highly respected in life and deeply mourned in death, Rajinder Sachar was a household name. Son of a Congress veteran, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and inherited his grandfather’s legal acumen. On returning from Europe after completing my higher education in early 1970s, I had befriended in Delhi some great law brains much senior to me and drew inspiration from them till the end of their lives. Among them were Kerala High Court judge V R Krishna Iyer, then a member of the Law Commission, and Delhi High Court judge Rajinder Sachar. Both were destined to leave deep imprints on the development of human rights jurisprudence in the country. Their judgments, extrajudicial writings and seminar speeches were parts of my early lessons in human rights education.
I was an eye witness to the stance Sachar took with exceptional grace on the indignities inflicted on him as a judge during the dark days of Emergency, and to the celebratory mood in legal circles when following the end of that ghastly spell in India’s history his rightful place in the capital’s high court was restored. During the devilish dance of anti-Sikh brutalities on Delhi roads in 1984, he part-heard a challenge to police atrocities and did the utmost that a human rights-conscious judge could have done. But he was deprived of the chance to finally decide the matter. The bitter memory of the unfortunate episode remained his lifelong haunt.
As the Chair of National Minorities Commission, I was a member ex officio of the National Human Rights Commission when its chairman Justice M N Venkatachaiah constituted a review committee for the Human Rights Protection Act 1993. Former Chief Justice A M Ahmadi had agreed to chair the committee, but Sachar was the leading light on it and the imprint of his thoughts was well writ in its report. How I wish the report had been accepted and implemented in toto by the powers that be, but 18 years later the report is totally forgotten and the NHRC remains a toothless tiger as at its inception. With its reportedly 10 notices to the UP government in the last few months on incidents of human rights violations, the state remains what it has been all these months.
Sachar was denied a seat on the Supreme Court Bench. It was sheer injustice not as much to him as to the nation at large. He, however, turned this denial into a blessing in disguise by arguing before the apex court as a counsel on many human rights matters. In his 81\st\ year, he forcefully pleaded in the court for a forthright repeal of the draconian law called the Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act put on the statute book in the preceding year. Its blatant misuse in certain parts of the country had stirred his conscience and he put his heart into the NCPUL’s brief seeking its abolition. The devil was soon killed but soon took rebirth in the form of another Act; and he remained a restless soul all his life.
On returning to power in 2004, the Congress thought of initiating action on some tall promises it had habitually made in its election manifesto — among these being measures for examining the minorities’ long-pending demand for reservation in educational institutions and government jobs and for eliminating socio-economic backwardness of Muslims. The apolitical prime minister of the day wanted to get the vulnerable jobs handled by judges and academics. Two independent bodies were set up soon, one for minorities in general and the other for Muslims, which media nicknamed as Ranganath Misra Commission and Sachar Committee respectively. Ranganath Misra became brand name for the report written by me as the commission’s member, and Rajinder Sachar for that prepared by the committee’s member-secretary Abusaleh Sherrif. While Misra signed my report on the dotted lines, Sachar read every word of his learned colleague’s report and owned it up from the core of his heart. Misra remained tight-lipped about his report till his end in 2013, Sachar was vocal in its support till a few days ago. Both the noble souls are now resting in peace, and both the abortive reports in national archives.
The author is professor of law and former Chair, National Minorities Commission
Mandatory : Bring your working wifi-enabled Laptop
Partcipation certificate will be issued by : ICAR & Best Book Buddies
Once you have filled-in and submitted this form, you will get an OTP by email to your mail id (filled in the form). That mail may go to your spam-folder. Please open that mail and click on the OTP link to complete your registration.
Thank you so much
All seats are filled up and registration is close.