Snigdha Ghose and Mohak Chaudhary
Introduction
Language and culture are two interrelated concepts which are found in society. India is known to be the home to diverse cultures and religions. Languages do not fare any different in the diversity of India. An analysis of the data collected in the decennial census reveals that in excess of 19,500 languages or dialects in India are considered as mother tongues by people and more than 100 languages have 10,000 or more speakers. In the recent past, the advent of globalization and domination by a few majority languages in society has subjugated languages towards extermination and the people who speak them towards marginalization.
Languages of linguistic minorities in India are on the verge of disappearing. It is seen that many tribal schools are abruptly switching to English language as a medium of teaching, which is causing difficulties for students from native linguistic minorities since they cannot comprehend the curriculum properly. Linguistic minorities in India are facing the brunt of time and backwardness together as they have to deal with two challenges, one, is to keep up with the modernization such as the shift to English in schools and secondly, suffer from the loss of their native languages.
India’s Constitution provides cultural and educational rights in Part III along with other fundamental rights, solidified by landmark judgments, which form the bedrock of minority safeguards. These rights were formed by the Sub–Committee on Minorities under the auspices of the Advisory Committee on Fundamental Rights and Minorities headed by Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. The Constitution of India has made provisions for minorities, linguistic, religious, and other minorities in Articles 29, 30, 350A, and 350B. Linguistic minorities in India are protected in principle under the umbrella of cultural and educational rights in the Constitution. However, they recurrently face an insufficiency of safeguards required for their effective conservation.
Majority of students from such indigenous linguistic minorities do not avail the advantage of the benefits of the provisions granted in the constitution and statutes. The problem arises not only from the lack of safeguards but also from the limitation faced by their communities in availing recognition for the languages.
Decoding Erroneous Commissions
Essentially, the Commissions, which are meant to protect minority rights, have not done much to safeguard the rights of linguistic minorities. The National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities Report states that a linguistic minority status of a community is ascertained by its numerical disadvantage, non-dominant position in a state, and possession of a unique identity. According to the Report, “exclusive adherence to a minority language is a leading factor that contributes to socio-economic backwardness, and that this backwardness can be addressed only by teaching the majority language.”
Focusing on the need to create institutional structures and mechanisms to accommodate linguistic minorities, the Commission ought to have emphasized the necessity of doing so in order to prevent linguistic minorities from becoming socio-economically backward simply because of the language they use. The Commission, in their Report, recommends that individuals from such communities learn the dominant tongue in order to survive, as opposed to addressing the flaws in the educational system that make the languages of linguistic minorities invisible. This is a blatant admission of systematic language discrimination by the state against individuals and communities. Such an anomaly is too severe to ignore.
Moreover, it is crucial to emphasize that linguistic minorities are unable to overcome their linguistic backwardness merely by learning the dominant language; they must also be taught in their own languages. Students who belong to linguistic minorities will learn more easily as a result, and it will help to preserve those languages as well as the associated knowledge systems. Various recommendations, to that effect were given in a workshop conducted in 2006 by the Commission, stipulating that teachers in institutions with sizable linguistic minorities must be conversant in those languages. However, it makes no recommendations regarding mechanisms that are meant to ensure that the minority language serves as the instructional medium for students from that particular linguistic minority. By not giving linguistic minorities enough support to incorporate their language into the educational system, the state is only attempting to impose absorption on them.
Agony of Tribal Educational Rights
The specialized agency of The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stipulates the definition of linguistic minorities as follows, “Basically, any language of a community which is not learned any more by children, or at least by a large part of the children of that community (say at least 30 per cent) should be regarded as ‘endangered’ or at least potentially endangered’. If a large portion of the children switch to another language, it will mean that more and more children will do this until there are no children speakers left, and the language will therefore eventually disappear with the death of its last speakers.”
Among linguistic minorities, tribal people are the most at risk. There are very few government initiatives or mechanisms that attempt to incorporate these languages into the educational system in spite of the susceptibility of their languages. Indigenous groups form the majority of India’s linguistic minorities, which makes them eligible for reservation in higher education institutions under the Scheduled Tribe (ST) classification. Inherently, forcing linguistic assimilation on students belonging to backward classes by way of primary and secondary education through teaching and conversing with them in a majority language amounts to linguistic discrimination. It even facilitates the extinction of those languages because members of linguistic minorities are forced to adopt the language and culture of the majority at the expense of their own. The Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups have extremely low literacy rates. It is appropriately noted by “The High-Level Committee on Socio-economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities in India” that this is due to a lack of adequate infrastructure in education, unavailability of well-trained teachers, a lack of instruction in tribal languages, and a curriculum that is wholly unrelated to the needs of these groups.
There is a clear conflict between maintaining one’s native tongue and advancing socially, particularly in cases of active encouragement of assimilation into the regional language spoken by the majority or English by the government. The majority of students from linguistic minorities stop their studies because they find the medium of instruction to be alien, and those who do continue do so at the expense of their native tongue. This creates an unpropitious situation.
Recommendations
Knowing the plight of linguistic minorities, it becomes essential to produce specific recommendations to protect and preserve their evanesce languages; some are given as follows:
1. There needs to be a proper definition of ‘linguistic minorities’ which is essential for carving out the concerned section of society needing representation. From a legal standpoint, a definition forms the foundation for any policy measures since it allows the authorities to adequately categorise any group or individual. In the absence of the same, the legal ambiguity persists creating an obstruction in fulfilling the rights of the hampered groups.
2. It should be stipulated that all primary schools shall consider applications from parents belonging to linguistic minority groups for the admission of their children to schools providing primary and secondary level education in their mother tongues.
3. The proposal of the Indian Government to inform State Governments that affiliations of schools, colleges, and other educational institutions belonging to linguistic minorities should be easily permitted to work with organizations outside of the State in which they are located.
4. Minority languages on the verge of dissipating shall be utilized for official administrative government purposes, especially during the documentation of government files. This was recommended previously by the State Reorganization Commission of 1955-56.
5. Minority languages should also be considered as a medium of writing the examinations, like UPSC during the enrolment of officials in Public Services. This ensures proper representation of linguistic minorities at a national level.
6. Since the “Ministry of Welfare Resolution, 1988” was passed, linguistic minorities are not subject to the “National Commission for Minorities’” jurisdiction. Thus, proper steps must be taken to include them within the jurisdiction of the Commission.
7. The special officer appointed by the constitution to safeguard the rights of linguistic minorities should be accompanied by an agency or committee that works at the zonal level to detect localized problems with high efficiency.
8. It is clear from the plethora of cases with varying judgments in regard to minority educational rights that the constitutional position on minority educational institutions is lacking clarity. Therefore, application and interpretation are major concerns that need to be addressed by both the courts and the parliament.
9. Lack of proficiency in the majority language should not be used as additional evidence of linguistic minority group backwardness. The issue should be the specific language’s susceptibility to extinction and the absence of institutional support for its development, maintenance, and promotion.
10. Furthermore, generating awareness among the masses can promote the development of such languages in addition to the inclusion of a positive duty for the conservation of ‘Endangered Languages’ as a Directive Principle for State Policy.
11. Appointment of judges belonging to linguistic minorities can indeed increase the threshold of their representation.
12. The current reservation or affirmative action in linguistic minority institutions can be exhausted by minorities only if they are primarily taught in their first language. The provision for teaching minorities in English or any other important majority language should be given second preference. This will allow minorities to get equipped with the majority language without compromising on their own culture and roots.
13. Accordance should be given to the Draft National Policy on Tribal Groups, which acknowledges that the evolving educational scenario can push the extermination of minority languages. Therefore, the usage of minority languages at the primary educational level needs to be promoted for effective protection.
14. It is recognized that minority language-speaking communities need to be given effective recognition in the Census with tabulated data collected on them. This shall be helpful for the government in making minority and region-specific policies for effective conservation of languages.
15. It is recognized that certain languages are distinct in spoken form and are spoken by a large diaspora of people, however, they are not given their due recognition and are merged into a majority language, major example being merging of script-less languages under the umbrella of Hindi. It is recommended that they should be identified distinctly through conduction of a thorough exercise of expert identification of languages. The exercise is of utmost importance for recognition of population whose languages are distinct and not mere dialect of a majority language.
Conclusion
The blatant lacunae existing in the conservation efforts make it an issue of utmost importance requiring legal consideration. The linguistic minorities in India cannot avail themselves of their existing rights of opening and administrating educational institutions unless strict efforts are made for recognizing their existence. A thorough exercise in the formulation of data and efforts for the recognition of minorities is imperative for the effective application of minority provisions and conserving linguistic diversity.
The Authors are third-year students at Gujarat National Law University
Image Credit: Adobe Stock
Constitutional Law Society 
Leave a comment