[dropcap]T[/dropcap]HE August 7, 2018 advisory (see below) by the central government requesting media houses not to refer to members of the Schedule Castes as Dalits, came once again in limelight with the Supreme Court refusing to interfere with the advisory. It is surprising that the Supreme Court chose not to interfere with the said advisory, even though, on the face of it, it denies our right to identity. Though it is disappointing to see courts not interfering in matters as provocative and historically revisionist as this, it makes no difference to those who identify themselves as Dalit.

[pdfviewer]https://cdn.theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/19100320/Compliance-with-Order-dated-06.08.2018-by-Honble-High-Court-regarding-using-the-nomenclature-Dalit..pdf[/pdfviewer]

Background of the controversy

Origin of the issue lies in a PIL (see below)  filed by an individual before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. It was the case of the petitioner therein that, the term "Dalit" is derogatory, and therefore reference to such term by government and other public bodies, including media houses be restrained. It was his case that the Supreme Court in certain judgments has held that the term Dalit is derogatory[i]. The Petitioner had further quoted from translations of Dr Ambedkar's writings and speeches, to demonstrate that word Dalit was objected to by the Babasaheb himself[ii].

[pdfviewer]https://cdn.theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/19100316/dalit.pdf[/pdfviewer]

While the case was pending, one of the scholars filed his intervention in the matter.[iii] He opposed the petition by giving detailed research on the evolution of the very term. Very importantly he had contended that Dr Ambedkar never objected to such term, and reliance has been placed on faulty translation by the petitioner himself. He had cited many pieces of literature where the term Dalit has been used in history by followers of Dr. Ambedkar and other stalwarts in earlier and contemporary times and later times.[iv]

He also brought it to the notice that careful perusal of the cited judgments does not mean that use of the term Dalit is derogatory, unless it is intended to offend. It was his contention that term Dalit rather employed with pride, is the evolution out of the lived history of generations under oppression and has been now used as a political identity.