Take the positive side first.

Although Haryana’s previous governments had also contributed to the state’s development, the Bhupinder Singh Hooda-led government’s efforts have transformed the state into one of India’s top industrialized states. If Bansi Lal had laid the foundation of modern Haryana by giving it sound infrastructure including rural roads, 100 percent rural electrification and lift irrigation network. Hooda‘s contribution has been in taking the developmental process to higher levels. Besides, his genial demeanour and his not resorting to vindictive and vendetta politics have also won Hooda many admirers.

On the negative side, unsavoury controversies have arisen which have dimmed the Hooda government’s sheen. First, it was acquisition and release of acquisitioned lands to builders and realtors. Now it is the caste-related controversies, khap panhayats unlawful actions and honour killings which are making media headlines. Both controversies invited Supreme Court and High Court’s indictments.

Jats dominate Haryana’s politics. Incidents of Jats atrocities on Dalits which had tarnished INLD government’s image continue unabated and are alienating the Dalits, Congress’s traditional support base, from the ruling party. The latest phase of caste controversies was triggered by Jats demand for their inclusion in the OBC list for reservations in Central and state government services. Jat groups blocked rail and road traffic causing hardships to commuters and adversely affecting Haryana economy.

The blockades were severely criticized by the Courts. The government, however, remained a mute spectator arguing that strong police action against the agitators might create serious law and order problem. But the main reason behind the government’s inaction perhaps was that it feared that any police action would alienate the Jats.

To neutralize the Jats demand for reservations, the government should have come out with data about the community’s existing percentage in state government services. Experts believe that Jats already have disproportionate share in government services. Even some ministers in private talk bemoan that non-Jats hardly get recruited to government posts.

Instead of confronting the Jats with the Jats-in-service data, the government chose to announce its decision to set up a Haryana backward classes commission for inclusion of Jats and other castes in the list of OBCs for reservation in government services and educational institutions. Ideally, the government should treat the economic status instead of caste as the criteria for reservations.

Every action has its reaction. So is the case with the Jats agitation. All these developments are not only alienating the non-Jats who are also an important support base of the Congress but have also opened a Pandora’s Box. A Backward Classes organisation has threatened to launch an agitation in case the state government gave OBC status to Jats. Other castes including Bishnois, Brahmins and Banias have also now demanded reservations for their communities.

The more serious than the reservations issue are the Jat-dominated khap panchayats unlawful activities and the growing incidence of honour killings. Acting as unconstitutional bodies having medieval mindset, khap panchayats issue barbaric fatwas like banning same-gotra and same-village marriages, declaring a married couple as siblings, ostracizing families and ordering killing of couples. All this is done in the name of traditions.

Honour killings have also invited Supreme Court’s condemnation. Last week, the apex court declared “illegal” the khap panchayats support to atrocities on couples going for inter-caste or inter-religion marriages. Declaring that honour killings were “acts of murder committed by brutal, feudal-minded persons who deserve harsh punishment”, the Supreme Court said that inter-caste marriages were in national interest as they would result in destroying the caste system which “is a curse on the nation and the sooner it is destroyed the better.”

But the main political parties including the Congress, the INLD and the BJP have different views on the issue. The Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda has in a recent response to the Centre’s letter about the Haryana government‘s stand on proposed law on honour killings has defended the role of the khap panchayats. His communication says “The panchayats are age-old institutions, embedded in cultural traditions and social customs of rural India. Over a period of time, they have evolved themselves as an alternate dispute redressal mechanism and have been traditionally helpful in maintaining social cohesion”.

The view of Capt. Abhimanyu, BJP national secretary and joint in charge of its Punjab affairs is that khaps which have been in existence for centuries have played a significant role in the maintenance of public order in society even during times when there was no rule of law or an instrument of state power to ensure law and order.

Representing the contrary view held by the forward-looking and progressive sections of the society, D.R. Chaudhery, a former member of the Haryana Administrative Reforms Commission and an expert on khap affairs says: “khap panchayat is a medieval institution when people were divided into clans. Its primary aim was to provide security to its members in an age marked by lawlessness and to settle dispute among its members. “Khaps have outlived their utility. It is historically dead but physically present. It is being kept alive by dominant landed elements in rural society who want to perpetuate their hegemony by using it as a cover”, he says.

It is a testing time for Hooda whose family has been known to be an adherent of Arya Samaj’s social reform movement of which Haryana was an important centre. It may be politically crucial for Hooda to retain Jats support which the Congress had snatched from the INLD in the 2005 Assembly and later Lok Sabha elections. But for the rulers, constitutional and governance obligations must take precedence over the outlived customs, orthodox traditions and vote politics.

Supporters of khap panchayats should not forget history’s lessons that institutions which do not change with changing times always have a dishonourable death. (IPA Service)