recourse to justice

Why do Indian policies land in court so often? For an answer, consider the three ‘R’s of policy classification: reactive, reactive, and reactionary. Our free food scheme for the poor was a response to the Covid crisis. It was kind and clearly responsive. In contrast, India’s expanded reservation policy was reactive. While it was projected as a deterrent to economic weakness, an objective upheld by our apex court, its eligibility criteria and exclusion of people with access to other quotas shows that it is partly in favor of castes. Affirmative action in the U.S. was motivated by a political backlash. have been facing discrimination for a long time. Even more controversial was the recent amendment to our citizenship law. Presented as a way for asylum seekers from nearby countries to become Indian citizens, a worthy goal, the exclusion of Muslims faces a legal challenge. In a country full of poor people who have the best documents, an oft-proposed roll-call asking residents to confirm their citizenship, followers of Islam run the risk of being classified as stateless. because Indian law will refuse to recourse to them. It sounds both reactionary and unconstitutional, but the apex court is yet to take note of it.