<div>The report of a judicial commission set up by the HRD ministry to enquire into the circumstances of the suicide of Rohith Vemula, who was a student of University of Hyderabad, has evaded the main issues involved in the incident and given wrong answers to the questions raised by it. The one-man commission of A K Roopanwal, a retired judge of the Allahabad High Court, has submitted its report now. It has concluded that Rohith Vemula’s mother Radhika, and therefore he too, were not Dalits and that the student committed suicide not because of any discrimination he experienced in the university but because of personal frustration. The report also blames the mother for “branding” herself as a Dalit to get caste benefits, and says that the university’s decision to expel the student from the hostel, which led to his suicide, was “most reasonable.” It has given a clean chit to the university authorities and Union ministers Smriti Irani and Bandaru Dattatreya who, it says, were only discharging their responsibilities as public servants. <br /><br />The report does not provide any proof for its finding that the student’s mother was not a Dalit. She was an adopted child. The report says it was “unbelievable” that she did not know the names of her biological parents who, as told to her by her foster parents, were Dalits. Can a conclusion be based on an “unbelievable” statement, without a proof to support it? It then becomes a personal judgement. The foster mother has herself said that Radhika’s parents were Dalits. The district administration, which conducted an enquiry after Vemula’s death, also certified that he was a Dalit. Vemula had maintained that he was born and brought up as Dalit. He was an activist of the Ambedkar Students’ Association. Not only Vemula but his friends, critics, the university and society in which he lived also considered him a Dalit. What was relevant for the chain of events that happened to him were this perception and his public identity as a Dalit. In this context, it does not matter whether he was actually a Dalit or not, and the commission could only have laboured that point for extraneous reasons.<br /><br />By shifting the blame to the victim and exonerating all others whose actions, in one way or the other, led to Vemula’s suicide, the commission has done a major disservice to itself. It has made a shoddy attempt to whitewash the authorities, including ministers, who are liable to face charges under the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is surprising that the commission staked its own credibility with such absurd conclusions.</div>
<div>The report of a judicial commission set up by the HRD ministry to enquire into the circumstances of the suicide of Rohith Vemula, who was a student of University of Hyderabad, has evaded the main issues involved in the incident and given wrong answers to the questions raised by it. The one-man commission of A K Roopanwal, a retired judge of the Allahabad High Court, has submitted its report now. It has concluded that Rohith Vemula’s mother Radhika, and therefore he too, were not Dalits and that the student committed suicide not because of any discrimination he experienced in the university but because of personal frustration. The report also blames the mother for “branding” herself as a Dalit to get caste benefits, and says that the university’s decision to expel the student from the hostel, which led to his suicide, was “most reasonable.” It has given a clean chit to the university authorities and Union ministers Smriti Irani and Bandaru Dattatreya who, it says, were only discharging their responsibilities as public servants. <br /><br />The report does not provide any proof for its finding that the student’s mother was not a Dalit. She was an adopted child. The report says it was “unbelievable” that she did not know the names of her biological parents who, as told to her by her foster parents, were Dalits. Can a conclusion be based on an “unbelievable” statement, without a proof to support it? It then becomes a personal judgement. The foster mother has herself said that Radhika’s parents were Dalits. The district administration, which conducted an enquiry after Vemula’s death, also certified that he was a Dalit. Vemula had maintained that he was born and brought up as Dalit. He was an activist of the Ambedkar Students’ Association. Not only Vemula but his friends, critics, the university and society in which he lived also considered him a Dalit. What was relevant for the chain of events that happened to him were this perception and his public identity as a Dalit. In this context, it does not matter whether he was actually a Dalit or not, and the commission could only have laboured that point for extraneous reasons.<br /><br />By shifting the blame to the victim and exonerating all others whose actions, in one way or the other, led to Vemula’s suicide, the commission has done a major disservice to itself. It has made a shoddy attempt to whitewash the authorities, including ministers, who are liable to face charges under the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is surprising that the commission staked its own credibility with such absurd conclusions.</div>
