|
|
Ssc SOCIAL STUDY CIRCLE di (ESTD
1982) www.dalitindia.com ssc@dalitindia.com *********************************************************************** |
|
May 12, 2001
"CASTE DISCRIMINATION IS RACISM AND MORE", SAY ACADEMICS, JURISTS AND
CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS AT DELHI CONFERENCE
Durban conference
must discuss Caste issue
A group of 40 academicians, jurists, and representatives
of NGOs and Civil society organisations, mostly from Dalit communities, who met
at a one day conference in the Indian Social Institute, New Delhi, on 7th May
2001 have denounced the Indian subcontinent's caste system as `worse than
racism'. The plight of the victims of the pernicious caste system demands an
international scrutiny and debate, the experts have said in their statement. It
is in this context that the meeting has taken serious exception to the
political and diplomatic stratagems employed by the Government of India in
trying to scuttle a discussion on Caste in the forthcoming World Conference
Against Racism organised by the United Nations scheduled to be held from 31st
August to 7th September 2001 in Durban, South Africa.
The Delhi meeting has also taken serious note of media
reports that the Indian government may not allow NGO and Independent groups to
go to South Africa to participate in the conference. This is a measure more
characteristic of authoritarian governments to stifle dissent and curb
democratic rights, which is utterly enemical to democratic ethos of India
The Indian government has never satisfactorily disclosed its
real political compulsions in opposing an international discussion on Caste,
which afflicts societies not just in India but also in other countries of the
subcontinent, including Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, nations
with a sizable Indian émigré population, and even social groups in countries
such as Japan. There seems to be an
abiding fear in the Indian establishment, particularly among the ruling upper
caste elite, that such international scrutiny will expose the tradition-bound
society's failure in eliminating this three thousand year old evil, and the
failure of the State in ensuring implementation of Constitutional safeguards
for victims of caste persecution and domination. There is also a fear that bringing the subject from under the
national carpet to the light of the day on the world stage will embolden, and
empower, the still stifled voices of the Dalit community, who at over 15 per
cent of the One Billion Indian population today number more than scores of the
world's important countries, and encourage them to strongly demand their share
in the fruits of development. Savitri Kunadi, India’s permanent representative
to the United Nations office, has put on record India's official position that
the caste system does not fall within the purview of racial discrimination. (Ms Kunadi's statement on
“Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and all forms of Discrimination” at the 57th session of the
Commission on Human Rights.)
The Delhi meeting has expressed its full support to Dalit Groups,
Human Rights organisations, NGOs and
Individuals who are making a concerted effort in the UN Commission on Human
Rights to get the Caste system included in the agenda for discussion in the
Durban conference. In a democratic world, the people who could best represent
their hopes and aspirations are those who are victims of the system. To deny
them their right is against all democratic norms. To characterise Caste as an
internal matter of India and to state that any discussion on it as an intrusion
on Indian sovereignty goes counter to historical facts, and militates against
evolution of contemporary philosophical, juridical and political norms and
principles of equality, enshrined both in the Indian Constitution and in the
Statutes and Special Resolutions of the United Nations. A discussion at Durban
will, we are sure, strengthen India's international reputation as a country
committed to values of pluralism, tolerance, diversity and equality which
stands firm to counter the forces that seek to destroy these values. Refusal to
allow a full international discussion on Caste will subject India to the
charges of political and social hypocrisy and will damage its reputation in the
comity of nations where it is seeking an enlarged role.
The participants in the Delhi meeting were clear that
`Caste is Race Plus'. Inflicted by birth, sanctified by religion, glorified by
tradition, Caste has had brutal repercussions for a fifth of India's population
through the generations. Social scientists (ref Prof. TK Oommen, JNU, et al)
have highlighted the Aryan conspiracy in India to subjugate the Dalit Bahujans
by attempting to construct the Indian nation on the basis of purity of blood,
language and culture. With Hindu revivalism, a fascist culture
centered on the purity of the Aryan
race, superiority of Sanskrit over other languages and brahamanic culture are
imposed on the country.
Constitution of India recognises Caste in
terms of Race :
The Indian legal system has consistently recognised and
acknowledged the existence in Indian society of discrimination based on caste
as a form of racial discrimination. In
other words, the existence of discrimination on the basis of descent and
occupation has been the subject matter of a number of Legislative measures
including Constitutional provisions and judicial decisions of the Supreme Court
of India and the High Courts of different States. The discrimination based on caste is at least equated with, or
dealt at par with discrimination based on race.
The Constitutional provisions not only juxtapose caste
with race and sex as prohibited grounds of discrimination but also equate caste
discrimination with racial discrimination.
Article 15 of the Constitution of India, which outlaws discrimination on
grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, treats caste at par
with race as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Similarly, Article 16 while declaring equality of opportunity in
matters of public employment as a fundamental right not only specifies caste as
a prohibited ground of discrimination
at par with race but also protects and declares the provision for reservation
in educational institutions, job opportunities and legislatures (a form of
affirmative action). Article 17 while
declaring the abolition of untouchability has in effect accepted the existence
of caste based discrimination and its effect of untouchability as racial discrimination. Article 23 prohibits forced labour as a form
of discrimination. Similarly in Article 29 while declaring the fundamental rights of protection of the interest of
minority rights, caste discrimination in admission into educational
institutions is prohibited at par with racial discrimination. The provisions relating to reservation of
seats for SCs/STs (Castes and Tribes listed in the Schedule appended to the
Constitution of India) in the House of People (Lok Sabha) and in the
Legislative Assemblies of the State (Article 331 and 332) do recognise the
mischief of caste discrimination and attempt to remedy the same, which is a
clear proof of the Constitution of India acknowledging caste discrimination as a form of racial
discrimination. Article 335, mandating
that the claims of SCs/STs to services and posts in connection with the affairs
of the Union of India and the States, also reflects the acknowledgement of
existence of caste discrimination as a
form of racial discrimination. Article
338 which provides for National Commission for
SCs/STs also reflects the said Constitutional acknowledgement. The provisions of Article 341 providing for
the specification of the SCs for the purpose of the Constitution clearly show
that the castes are not only equated with races but the scheduled castes
include race. It is clear therefore, that according to the Indian Constitution
the concept of SCs is inclusive of the concept of race. Thus caste based discrimination is not only
a form of racial discrimination but is more than racial discrimination. Article
341 is extracted here below:
“341. Scheduled Castes – (1) The President may with respect
to any State or Union territory, and where it is a State after consultation
with the Governor thereof, by public
notification, specify the castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups
within castes, races or tribes which shall for the purposes of this
Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State or
Union territory, as the case may be.
(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued under clause (1)
any caste, race or tribe or part of said a notification issued under the said
clause shall be varied by any subsequent notification".
Several Legislative measures relating to SCs/STs clearly
prove the existence of caste discrimination even more violent and more
dangerous than racial discrimination in Indian society but also shows the
ineffectiveness of the governmental
measures already taken. The two
particular legislations worth pointing out are (a) The Removal of
Untouchability Act, 1955 which was improved and renamed subsequently as
Protection of Civil Rights Act 1976 prescribing more stringent measures and (b)
The SCs/STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The catena of judgements relating to the caste based
discrimination against SCs and the remedies against the same shows that caste
is recognised and acknowledged by the judicial decisions as a prohibited ground
of discrimination not only at par with race but also as a form of racial discrimination. The different definitions of caste adopted
by the several decisions of the Supreme Court of India show that for the
purposes of treating caste as a prohibited ground of discrimination, caste is
race in the Indian context (K.C. Vasant Kumar vs. State of Karnataka, 1985
(Supp.)1 SCR 352). In the said decision
caste is even identified as a race or unit of race, as per the definition of
caste accepted by Justice Venkataramaiah in the said case. The 9-Judge Constitution Bench in the case
of Indira Sawhney vs. Union of India
(1992 (Supp) 3 SCC 217 at 714 defines caste in the following terms: “a caste is
nothing but a social class – a socially
homogeneous class. It is also an
occupational grouping, with this difference that its membership is
hereditary. One is born into it. Its membership is involuntary. Even if one ceases to follow that
occupation, still he remains and continues a member of that group”. Thus it is evident from the Constitutional,
Legislative and judicial history of India that caste discrimination needs to be
identified and treated as a form of racial discrimination, in fact a more
virulent form of racial discrimination than the ones found in other countries.
The position of UNO
For many years UN bodies such as International Convention
on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Convention on Social,
Economic And Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Convention Against Elimination of Racial
Discrimination (CERD), CEDAW and International Labour Organisation (ILO) had
ignored the existence of caste based discrimination in India. This omission had
serious negative repercussions on the ability of the UN to address
discrimination against Dalits. Dalits could make little use of the space
offered by human right bodies to raise the issue of caste-based discrimination.
However, the UN human rights bodies have in recent years acknowledged and
addressed the existence, prevalence and persistence of caste based
discrimination in India and the rest of South Asia.
The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination in its meeting held on August 7 and 8, 1996, considered the
question of discrimination against SCs/STs of India and made explicit reference
to caste-based discrimination. The Committee held that "the situation of
SCs/STs falls within the scope of the International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination". The 52nd UN sub-committee in
Geneva in August 2000 unanimously passed a resolution to prepare a working
paper on 'Discrimination based on caste'.
Government of India's failure in CERD
Government of India adopted the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights in 1948 and ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) in 1969. It was not until 1996 the CERD
Committee made its first explicit reference to caste discrimination, untouchability
and Scheduled Castes. In 1996 State Report to CERD, the Government of India
took the position that caste discrimination did not fall under the purview of
CERD, because the term `descent' referred exclusively to descent based on race. However, the CERD made it clear that the
term descent mentioned in Article 1 does not refer to race only and recommended
a continuing campaign aimed at eliminating the institutionalised thinking of
the high caste and low caste mentality. It also recommended that Government of
India's next periodic report, which was due on January 4, 1998 be a
comprehensive report. But, so far the
Government of India has not submitted its report to CERD. Not only that, the Government of India has
opposed all the resolutions passed in the 52nd UN sub-commission in Geneva in
August 2000.
The Position of the Civil Society Groups and
NGOs
The civil society groups and NGOs active among the Dalit Bahujans fail to understand why India
has been resolutely opposing the
inclusion of caste question, which is
the primary source of human rights violation of Dalits and the basis of
economic deprivation and social degradation. On apartheid in South Africa the
Government of India occupied the high moral ground and was in the forefront of
the campaign of sanctions and boycotts.
Several Civil Society groups and NGOs want the global community to acknowledge and condemn the
caste-based discrimination as a distinct form of racism. UN bodies will be
failing in their duty to the people of the world if they do not take this
matter at the Durban conference and devise drastic steps to eradicate the
caste-based discrimination. The failure to include caste will erode the
credibility of the United Nations and compromise its historical role.
Prof. T.K.Oommen,
President, International Sociology Association (1990,1994), Professor of
Sociology, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Dr.Ambrose Pinto,
Executive Director, Indian Social Institute, New Delhi
John Dayal,
Journalist
M.Gopinath, Bahujan Samaj Party
Dr.K.S.Chauhan,
Advocate, Supreme Court
Dr. R.M.Pal, Editor,
PUCL Bulletin
Dr.M.P.Raju,
Advocate, Supreme Court
P.L.Mimroth,
Advocate, Supreme Court
Dr. I. Thirumali,
Lecturer, Sri Venkateshwara College, Delhi
H. Venkatesh, Social
Activist
P. Muthukumar,
Lecturer, Presidency College, Chennai
Ashraf K.H., Social
Activist, Manipal, Karnataka
Zawahir Siddique,
Lecturer, HKBK College of Engineering, Bangalore
Mahi Pal Singh, PUCL,
Delhi
Het Ram Balmiki,
Advocate and Social Activist
N. Rajkumar,
Lecturer, Dayal Singh College, Delhi University
Sundara Babu,
Researcher, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Joseph Gathia, Social
Activist, New Delhi
N. Manohar Prasad,
Social Study Circle, New Delhi
Somen
Chakraborty, Indian Social Institute
Dr. Chinna Rao, Research Officer, Jawaharlal Nehru
University
Narendra Kumar, M.A., M.Phil., Motilal Nehru College,
Delhi
And others.
*****************************************************************************************