5 ms·

Indian law and Indian in general do not understand the idea of law and individual liberty. Hence a lot of sensible things that you might expect from law enforce

by tn13 11y ago

Indian law and Indian in general do not understand the idea of law and individual liberty. Hence a lot of sensible things that you might expect from law enforcement in developed world does not work well in India. In India police mostly see themselves as keepers of peace and would use arbitrary force to keep things from escalating. Indian laws are complex and hence cops can do whatever they want without impunity. Check what happened to this Australian [1]. Not only he was harassed by people but the police made him write an apology letter to those people who manhandled him. (All because the guy had a tattoo that offended other people.) There are some other crazy things in India for example "Right to Education" law which basically forces to shut schools down if they do not comply with arbitrary clauses but only if the school is run by a Hindu. If the school is run by a Christian or Muslim the school need not comply with the law. [1] http://bit.ly/1HiJdRo http://bit.ly/1HiJdRo

nindalf 11y ago
I'd love to see a citation on that last line.
- tn13 11y ago
  Citation is provided by the comment above. You can check this activists blog which may cover other doubts you have https://realitycheck.wordpress.com/ https://realitycheck.wordpress.com/.
abhishivsaxena 11y ago
It doesn't matter who runs the school. However if the school identifies itself as a minority institution it doesn't have to comply with RTE guidelines as per the constitution bench of Supreme court. Here's an excerpt from a newspaper report. However, the constitution bench exempted minority schools, both aided and unaided, from the purview of the Act. It said minority schools could not be put under legal obligation to provide free and compulsory elementary education to children who were not members of the minority community which had established the school. It said, "In our view, if the Act is made applicable to minority schools, aided or unaided, the right of the minorities under Article 30(1) of the Constitution will be abrogated. Therefore, the (provision of the) 2009 Act, which made it applicable to minority schools is unconstitutional." [1] So it's more about minority rights, than about religious discrimination which your post seemed to suggest. Quite mischievously too if I might add. And so far as schools being shut for not complying with some "arbitrary clause", it is actually more about private schools refusing to fulfil 25% reservation for children from socially backward communities. You also left that out. Jai Hind! [1] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/25-pc-reservation-for-minority-institutions-invalid-under-rte-act-sc/ http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/25-pc-re...
- data37 11y ago
  Minority rights is nothing but religious discrimination. There is no difference.
  - abhishivsaxena 11y ago
    Except that the Supreme court doesn't think so.
    - tn13 11y ago
      Supreme Court is not the final stop for application of common sense. Anything can be defined as a minority right. For example does it make sense to give exemption to a christian businessman calling it a minority right ? You can but that would be against common sense just like in the education case. The serious effects of this law is that while Hindus have to jump through the draconian provisions of RTE, a church run school need not. Guess which schools will run more efficiently and grow at a faster rate and provide better education ? I am not sure why minorities should have a different set of rights than the majority. Uniformity should be the foundation of law.
      - abhishivsaxena 11y ago
        Because these rights are necessary for minorities to be protected from majoritarian excesses in a democracy. It's really not that hard to understand if you try to think of it from a neutral standpoint. Regardless of that, as everyone in aware, religious minorities perform poorly on most social indicators - often ranking even below the scheduled caste. The Sachar committee report [1] is full of examples which illustrate this point. So it also makes pragmatic sense for state to proactively work for their upliftment. We also do it for schedule/backward caste members even thought they belong to the majority religion. Btw, I would just say that your point about draconian provisions is simply unsubstantiated. I'm proactively repeatedly countering you on unsubstantiated facts, just because I don't want such misinformation to spread around and influence other minds. [1] http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/files/LoksabnhaDoc.pdf http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/fi...

by tn13 11y ago

nindalf 11y ago

I'd love to see a citation on that last line.

tn13 11y ago
Citation is provided by the comment above. You can check this activists blog which may cover other doubts you have https://realitycheck.wordpress.com/ https://realitycheck.wordpress.com/.

abhishivsaxena 11y ago

It doesn't matter who runs the school. However if the school identifies itself as a minority institution it doesn't have to comply with RTE guidelines as per the constitution bench of Supreme court. Here's an excerpt from a newspaper report. However, the constitution bench exempted minority schools, both aided and unaided, from the purview of the Act. It said minority schools could not be put under legal obligation to provide free and compulsory elementary education to children who were not members of the minority community which had established the school. It said, "In our view, if the Act is made applicable to minority schools, aided or unaided, the right of the minorities under Article 30(1) of the Constitution will be abrogated. Therefore, the (provision of the) 2009 Act, which made it applicable to minority schools is unconstitutional." [1] So it's more about minority rights, than about religious discrimination which your post seemed to suggest. Quite mischievously too if I might add. And so far as schools being shut for not complying with some "arbitrary clause", it is actually more about private schools refusing to fulfil 25% reservation for children from socially backward communities. You also left that out. Jai Hind! [1] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/25-pc-reservation-for-minority-institutions-invalid-under-rte-act-sc/ http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/25-pc-re...

data37 11y ago
Minority rights is nothing but religious discrimination. There is no difference.
- abhishivsaxena 11y ago
  Except that the Supreme court doesn't think so.
  - tn13 11y ago
    Supreme Court is not the final stop for application of common sense. Anything can be defined as a minority right. For example does it make sense to give exemption to a christian businessman calling it a minority right ? You can but that would be against common sense just like in the education case. The serious effects of this law is that while Hindus have to jump through the draconian provisions of RTE, a church run school need not. Guess which schools will run more efficiently and grow at a faster rate and provide better education ? I am not sure why minorities should have a different set of rights than the majority. Uniformity should be the foundation of law.
    - abhishivsaxena 11y ago
      Because these rights are necessary for minorities to be protected from majoritarian excesses in a democracy. It's really not that hard to understand if you try to think of it from a neutral standpoint. Regardless of that, as everyone in aware, religious minorities perform poorly on most social indicators - often ranking even below the scheduled caste. The Sachar committee report [1] is full of examples which illustrate this point. So it also makes pragmatic sense for state to proactively work for their upliftment. We also do it for schedule/backward caste members even thought they belong to the majority religion. Btw, I would just say that your point about draconian provisions is simply unsubstantiated. I'm proactively repeatedly countering you on unsubstantiated facts, just because I don't want such misinformation to spread around and influence other minds. [1] http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/files/LoksabnhaDoc.pdf http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/fi...