By Sara Nazir

The shutting down of the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Institute of Medical Excellence in Jammu and Kashmir is much more than a government administrative issue or a regulatory mistake. It is a classic case of majoritarianism. In the current scenario within the Indian state, politics is being increasingly deployed not in the protection of minority rights but in the repression of the concerns and desires of the religious majority. A Muslim success within a secular system is considered a disturbance that needs to be set right.

The facts are these. The first group of MBBS students was inducted into the medical college by the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test, a competition-free and extremely rigorous national exam. A total of 50 students were chosen, of whom 42 were Muslims. This was on merit, pure and simple. The NEET exam was designed to be free from subjectivity and prejudice, depending entirely on the candidate’s performance in the exam. The selection of so many students from the Kashmir valley, a region so beset by strife, school closures, and communication blackouts, was an achievement in itself.

Yet this success was met instantly with a backlash. Right-wing Hindu groups were protesting not because of academic concerns or any violation of procedure, but because Muslim students had won most of the places. Their protest was based on symbolic grounds. Since the college was named after a Hindu temple, they wanted its studentry to represent the same. Muslims were not fellow citizens vying for the same slot on an equal footing. They were encroachers in a territory that belonged to the majority.

It is here that majoritarianism appears. Under a majoritarian order, democracy is all about numbers. Will, identity, and comfort for the majority trump the ideology and promise for equality enshrined in the Constitution. Minority rights are justified as long as they do not trouble the majority. When Muslims perform better than the norm, the validity of the results is challenged, not because anyone has jeopardized the rules, but because the ‘wrong’ side has won.

It was evident that such was the case due to the response of the authorities. It was reported that the National Medical Commission had withdrawn its approval for the college due to some infrastructure concerns. It is understandable that state regulation exists. However, it is quite telling that it occurred during a time when the college was not under scrutiny for any reason other than its population breakdown. It is a technical process that was instead used for political objectives.

However, majoritarianism does not always proudly declare itself through overt discrimination. This may occur through selective application of laws and principles where the law itself becomes selective—where it is commonly disregarded except where there is minority success. Institutions deemed neutral are also dismantled rather than upheld. This helps the state plead plausible deniability while achieving the will of the majoritarianism forces.

The larger context leaves nothing ambiguous about this particular pattern either. Muslims account for only about 14 percent of the Indian population; nevertheless, they are grossly underrepresented in the government services and in higher education and elite jobs too. It has been amply documented that Muslims receive less access to decent housing, weaker earning capacities, and are likely to be undertrials too. It was against this background that the achievement of Muslims in a competitive medical entrance test became a reason to fear success itself.

This is particularly evident in the case of Kashmir. In Kashmir, Muslims not only have religious minorities, but they already have the attention of intense surveillance and securitization as a population. One of the ways through which they can hope to ensure stability or dignity is through academic success. A blow came when the state closed down a medical college because Muslim students topped the list.
This is not limited to the issue of identity politics. The state and the region are confronted with severe shortages concerning the health sector and facilities. India, as a whole, is not meeting international standards regarding the ratio of doctors per population. It is an issue that not only affects the development but is detrimental to the health sector as well, and the closing down of such facilities in the name of an implied majority is not appropriate because the majority interest takes a backseat here when it comes to domination and domination alone.

Calls regarding the adoption of religious quotas in admissions by political leaders again bring to light the destruction of values within the Indian constitution. India’s constituent documents state that discrimination on any religious ground is unlawful. There are demands to readjust public institutions along lines of religious identity.

For the students and their families, the present is immediate and personal. Years of preparation were invalidated overnight. The message is brutally one-dimensional. In a majoritarian system, merit will be tolerated only if it confirms with the existing order. If it disrupts it, it will be penalized.

This is not a bureaucratic abnormality. It is a warning sign. A democracy that permits majority views to trump equal rights is, for all intents and purposes, not a democracy. Merit being a provocation and institutions bowing to community demands is an erosion of the very base of justice.

Now comes the moment of definition for the Indian nation. It can opt for its secular credentials that are etched in its constitution and protect the ideals of equality. It can continue along the trajectory where belonging depends on religions and success is conditional. The shutting down of this medical college is the point when it starts moving along the trajectory where success is conditional.