Maya tames Tikait: A victory for Dalit power?

STAR CAST(E): CNN-IBN panel debates the caste cauldron and the Maya-Tikait face-off.

            

Featured Blog

Rajdeep Sardesai

26/11: Terror comes precariously close

Featured Slideshows

But why can’t caste be an emotional matter?

Tiwari felt that the rule of law ought to have acted supreme, especially when the victim is in a position of power, instead of going in for the emotional kill.

“The basic issue today is if that consciousness has come, if that empowerment has come, it is because of a legal structure that you’ve put in place and there are laws that can be set into motion to discipline those who violate the laws so that is the basic point,” he said.

“According to me, after he made those remarks, an FIR should have been registered, the case should have been handed over for investigation – the law mandates that within 30 days a chargesheet should have been filed – and after the chargesheet was filed, if Mr Tikait was trying to evade arrest, it would have been Mr Tikait and the court,” Tiwari stated.

Prasad offered an apologia of sorts for the mind-sets of non-Dalits, and went on to explain, “There are a big number of people in India who still have not been able to psychologically adjust with a Dalit being the ruler. It is the psychology of the past – how can a Dalit order arrest of a brigand like Tikait?”

“A society where a Dalit asks the administration to act and arrest Tikait is not acceptable to a large number of Indians,” Prasad offered.

Act of power

It is felt that the kind of psychological potency involved in Mayawati’s manoeuvre could never be matched by the law taking its course.

Pai accepted that there was a rule of law. “But if Mayawati was able to arrest Tikait and do all that she has done, it is not so much of rule of law as movements within civil society, including movements she has led for identity and for respect,” she noted.

“I would definitely agree that rule of law is very important in a democratic society and it stood the test of time but this rule of law was able to actually function for a Dalit, only after identity-assertion took place in the 80s and in the 90s,” she said.

After all, the law has not shown a good record in functioning for a Dalit. It could be said that the law had not reached a Dalit earlier.

Tiwari disagreed.

“In lot of states of India, you have the law actually functioning for those people for whom those laws have been made. So therefore, to isolate a particular case and say that the law wasn’t functioning and it has started functioning because of an individual, I do not think that is the correct perspective to evaluate the situation,” he stated.

Pai did not concur with the assessment.

Acknowledging that while it could be true of UP that earlier there was no rule of law and it didn’t really apply to Dalits, Pai offered an example of Tamil Nadu, which is supposed to be more advanced, better governed and where human development levels for Dalits are much better.

“Look at what has happened at the panchayat level. In Madurai district, at least six panchayat Sarpanches were beheaded. There is, today, a memorial for them. Atrocities against Dalits, the violence against them, the extent to which the rule of law can be used is not so uncommon across the country,” she pointed out.

Getting Tikait to apologise has been a true achievement for Mayawati, though. She has achieved empowerment, assertion and a certain moral victory.

“Sometimes there are symbols and sometimes, when you hit the biggest symbol, you score a point over all the evils. Tikait has been a symbol of lawlessness,” concluded Chandrabhan Prasad.

SMS poll: Can Dalits finally look upper castes in the eye?

Yes: 58 per cent

No: 42 per cent