Introduction

We have discussed principles of liberty and rights. Individuals require rights and liberties for self-realization, development of human faculties or for self-mastery and carrying out their actions rationally and freely. Rights guarantee liberties and set limits of intervention by public authorities in the actions of the individuals and groups. For example, freedom of speech also means freedom of press and this puts limits on public authorities in regulating press. Liberty and rights, however, necessarily lead to a third principle in political theory, which is of equality. Equality determines how rights are to be distributed amongst the individuals as citizens and groups, whether equally or unequally. If unequally, then what are the grounds for unequal treatment? An answer to this makes equality an important factor in distributive justice.

Principle of equality also provides a framework of how the state or public authority defines its relationship with the individuals, citizens and groups. On what grounds the State or the public authority relate with citizens, individuals and groups unequally. When we talk of equality, we imply different meanings at different times. The important aspect is that different dimensions of equality (economic, legal, social, political, natural and gender) affect each other and insistence on one dimension or the other depends upon the perspective one adopts. In the liberal perspective, legal and political equality may be emphasized more than, for example, economic equality. On the other hand, in a socialist and Marxian framework emphasis is more on economic equality. A feminist would argue that gender equality is vital while in a caste divided society like India, it could be argued that social equality is more essential, if other dimensions are to be meaningful.

Equality, which means state of being equal, is derived from the Latin word, aequus/aequalis, meaning fair. It signifies ‘having the same rights, privileges, treatments, status and opportunities’. Equality is treated as something that relates to distributive principle because of which rights, treatments and opportunities are distributed amongst the beneficiaries in a fair manner. ‘Fairness’ however does not mean all to be treated equally in all circumstances. In fact, it very well means unequal treatment for those who are unequal. Essentially, it relates to the principle of justice because justice requires fair distributive principle. However, justice also demands that those who are equal should not be treated as unequal and the unequal as equal. This means distributive justice requires a principle of equality in which unequal distribution is effected to ensure the principle of equality. For example, the state should not tax a poor and a rich equally or it should not have the same policy of entry criteria for public employment for a normal and a physically challenged person.

Equality is also at times compared with equity, which has its origin in the same Latin word, aequus meaning fair. However, equity has come to signify fairness of actions, treatments, or general conditions characterized by impartiality, fairness and justice. Generally, equality is considered as a substantive principle while equity as procedural; equality is understood in terms of result, equity in terms of process. For example, equity requires that everyone should have equal opportunity of employment or education or being represented while seeking justice or defending one’s right in the court of law. However, this in itself may not translate into equal employment or equal education or equal representation. This may happen because of the absence of or lack of conditions that otherwise would have enabled equal opportunity being translated into a substantive result. For example, as a landless poor person, I have neither adequate education nor certain employment. But as a citizen of India, I have the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and also to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India [Article 19 (d) and (e)]. I decide to exercise my right as a citizen and migrate to Delhi for employment. After all, I have to survive, as I cannot commit suicide, which is a crime in law. Imagine the fate, an uneducated, unemployed individual not entitled to commit suicide has reached the capital! Since I do not have enough money to buy a ticket, I decide to travel ticketless; since I have no place to reside I start staying under an over bridge and since I cannot feed myself but by stealing bread from a shop, I do that frequently. These are all crimes punishable by exemplary grace of the law. How, otherwise, am I suppose to exercise my right provided by the Constitution of India? What Constitution provides is procedural equality, that you will not be obstructed from exercising your right provided you have means to do that. However, if means are lacking—money to buy a ticket, place to reside in Delhi or money to buy food, equality of opportunity is mere procedural not substantive. In this context, we can say that there is no equality of right between a poor individual travelling ticketless, sleeping under a bridge and stealing bread from a shop and a rich individual who stays in a farm house, moves in a big car (though he does not pay tax because he is a farmer and we respect farmers as they are the backbone of the food security) and eats in a five or may be seven star hotel. It was this dilemma that the French novelist, Anatole France ridiculed in his The Red Lily. He ridiculed the ‘equality of the law which forbids the rich and poor alike to steal bread and to sleep under bridges.’¹

Egalitarianism, derived from French égalite or égalitaire, i.e., equal, is the belief that all people should enjoy equal social, political and economic rights and opportunities. Egalitarianism believes that equality is the primary political value and it encompasses a variety of positions that argue for equality. However, neither equality nor equity nor egalitarianism advocates uniformity. Uniformity derived from the French word uniformes, means ‘having one form’ or being the same as one another, identical or of similar quality, characteristic, etc. Equality is about distribution or apportionment of rights, opportunities or outcomes and not about sameness or uniformity. Equality as a political principle is related to distribution of political, economic and social values and is linked with the conception of justice.