|
Link to UNCHR
E/CN.4/2001/NGO/61)
COMMISSION
ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Fifty-seventh
Session
Item
6 of the Provisional Agenda
RACISM,
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, XENOPHOBIA
AND
ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION
Written
statement submitted by the Asian Legal Resource Centre
a
non-governmental organization with general consultative status
Caste-based Discrimination in South Asia
1.
Caste is an entrenched form of discrimination still practiced
widely throughout South Asia. From an Indian progenitor, caste
systems spread and perpetuated a form of human degradation with
few parallels. In essence, caste discrimination limits one’s
employment to ancestral calling and prohibits inter-marriage,
permanently and absolutely dividing social strata. In practice,
discrimination is extended to all aspects of life; its physical
and psychological effects on “untouchables” and “lower”
castes constitute gross human rights abuse. Caste discrimination
is absolute, as it nullifies social mobility. It is also a
political ideology; a means of violently oppressive social
control by which the largest sections of society are denied their
basic rights to free speech, assembly and participation. It not
merely denies equality but considers inequality ideal. Caste
discrimination violates all human rights norms on which United
Nations instruments are founded, as enshrined in the preamble to
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that “recognition
of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights
of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom,
justice and peace in the world”. Under the influence of
caste, humane treatment of all people is impossible.
2.Though
in many respects caste discrimination is worse than slavery and
apartheid, the international community has not taken any
significant position against it. The Commission is obliged to
address caste via the World Conference Against Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, just as
previous international fora have addressed apartheid and slavery.
For many millions suffering in South Asia, the Conference will be
a failure if the caste system is not adequately held to account.
3.
The Asian Legal Resource Centre appreciates the comments on caste
made by the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism in
his January 1999 report (E/CN.4/1999/15); the recommendations on
themes of the World Conference outlined in the Bellagio
Consultation document (A/CONF.189/PC.1/10); and the recent
written statement submitted by the World Council of Churches
(E/CN.4/2000/NGO/102) on the current situation of Indian Dalits.
The Asian Legal Resource Centre also welcomes the resolution on
“Elimination of Racial Discrimination” at the 52nd
session of the Sub-commission on the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights, held from 31 July to 18 August 2000, which declared
that discrimination based on work and descent is prohibited by
international human rights law. As caste discrimination is based
on work and descent it is therefore prohibited by international
human rights law.
4.Inhuman
treatment of a vast South Asian population, including people in
Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh, has been justified on the basis
of caste. But by far the largest number of people suffering its
extremes are in India. Presently, India’s Dalits and other
so-called “untouchables” constitute around 17% of the
population. Along with other “minority” groups,
including tribal peoples, Sikhs and Muslims, they constitute
roughly 85% of Indians. To this day, the level of violence
against Dalits and other lower castes is atrocious.
5.
In 1936 the foremost Dalit leader, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar said, “My
quarrel with Hindus and Hinduism is not over the imperfections of
their social conduct. It is much more fundamental. It is over
their ideals.” Under the caste system, an ideal society is
unequal. In every respect, caste rejects the notion of human
equality and justifies discrimination on the basis of graded
inequality. Principles of common good exist only within each
caste group. The question of balancing interests between groups
does not exist, for the simple reason that each caste is a world
unto itself. Caste prevents the possibility of associated living
among people; it is the most extreme division of social and
political power. Its enclosure is complete, to the extent that
direct contact between castes is prohibited, in order to avoid
“pollution”. It means total segregation, whether in
temples, at wells, on roads, in schools and in marriage. Thus,
while caste discrimination bears some similarity to that of
slavery, it is in many respects more dehumanizing. The very term
“untouchable” means one with whom no social contact of
any sort should be held, under threat of punishment. It degrades
beyond all comparison.
6.
In this century, some constitutional and legal provisions have
been enacted in several countries to negate the influence of
caste, however these legal measures have failed to significantly
impact the caste structure and influence social dynamics. Some
laws, such as those prohibiting atrocities against Dalits, have
not been implemented. Claims that these legal provisions are
evidence of the eradication of caste are untrue, as extreme forms
of discrimination are perpetrated on hundreds of millions of
people every day. The Constitution of India, for example, accepts
the principles of equality, fraternity and liberty; it outlawed
all enclosed units by implication. However between this legal
position and reality lies a vast gap. Despite legal safe guards,
official Indian figures show that caste crimes against ‘untouchables’
average over 10,000 a year; the world’s largest democracy
has failed to develop beyond a mere formal democracy. No amount
of criticism about the conflict between constitutional principles
and practice can be of any impact on ethical principles and
practices based on the opposite ideal. Ethically, there is unity
of theory and practice, as inequality is accepted both as ideal
and is practiced. Legal confusions have no bearing on the ethical
foundation of caste-based societies. Constitutional declarations
of equality or acceptance of international covenants founded on
the principle of equality may create legal obligations,
nonetheless they do not change the ethical foundations of a given
society.
7.
Caste lies behind many social crises in South Asia. Caste society
does not recognize the right to dissent as a valid ethical
principle. The right to expression is based on recognition of
human equality. To deny the right to dissent is to deny the right
to freedom of expression, and further, to regard expression of
opinion as futile activity. Caste boundaries are fixed; no change
can be brought about by any expression of opinion.
8.Caste
society has no absolute prohibition of torture. The caste system
can be maintained only through indifference to cruelty. Cruel
treatment of lower castes, such as in preventing them from
drinking water out of the same wells as upper castes, is
normalized. Under the rules of pollution and purification, those
breaking with such unjust practices commit a wrong.
9.
The lack of agreement on ethical principles against cruelty has a
direct bearing on such practices as extra-judicial killings,
disappearances, forced confessions and other human rights abuses.
In South Asia these are now regarded as legally wrong, however
morally they are not widely condemned. An underlying culture of
impunity remains fundamentally unchallenged; there is little
outrage.
10.
The number of persons who to some degree have broken
intellectually from the grip of caste has increased to millions.
The consciousness of vast masses has begun to change. Modern
pressures, such as increased interaction through travel and
communications, make many practices of pollution and purification
hard to maintain; open and conscious defiance more difficult to
prevent. The conflict of inner rejection and outer compliance
gives rise to many forms of hypocrisy and cynicism. Thus,
willingness to accept equality as the ethical foundation of
society has grown among many. In response, upper castes try to
re-invent themselves in new forms, and develop many more subtle
ways to keep their system alive. Repression of those who reject
caste is much more intense and violent. There are even movements
working towards withdrawal of constitutional guarantees of
equality and the various kinds of affirmative action provided to
improve conditions for Dalits and lower castes.
11.
However these days, when democratic jargon is widely used,
sometimes there is no way that discrimination can be openly
justified. That caste hierarchy is no longer easily legitimised
has in itself contributed to the emergence of a broadly
acceptable public discourse about caste status coded as cultural
difference. Because people cannot readily speak of castes as
unequal, they describe them as “different”. In this
case, difference is another name for inequality. Thus, when for
the sake of international relations the proponents of caste enter
into dialogue accepting equality as the basis of discussion, they
engage in such discourse only artificially. Their real position
remains outside the discourse.
12.
Claims to a “special religiosity” are also often made
internationally by the South Asian caste elite in defence of
their system. Yet what have passed as religious views in India
are often mundane theories and rules of social control that have
been deemed sacred by controlling agents. When caste
discrimination was developed, religious and judicial notions
followed to justify it. To make this purported special
religiosity “Indian”, the views of Dalits and lower
caste Indians were excluded, and have been since.
13.
Elitist claims that Dalit concerns are merely historical matters
of backwardness and society’s functional bases are equally
fabrications that aim to perpetuate their subjugation of lower
castes. The Special Rapporteur recognised caste as falling within
the scope of Racial Discrimination and Related Intolerance in his
January 1999 report (para. 100) and cited articles from the
Indian Constitution and views of the Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination in reaching this conclusion. The
Bellagio Consultation likewise recognised caste as a form of
racial discrimination and intolerance. Thus caste is
categorically a concern for the World Conference.
14.
Yet in terms of what the international community must do to
eradicate discrimination, caste presents a difficult problem. The
caste system is one in which doors to other castes are closed. To
open the doors cannot be a decision of just one caste. It has to
be a decision by consensus, because the breaking of caste
boundaries involves an exit as well an entrance. While one caste
may make a decision to exit from its boundaries, entering into
boundaries held by others requires their consent. When the most
socially and politically powerful castes want to remain enclosed,
lower castes’ decisions to break open can have little
effect. Emancipation lies in destroying caste enclosure from all
sides. The international community must help to achieve this by
examination and exposure of the ethical foundations underpinning
caste-based societies.
15.
The Asian Legal Resource Centre therefore urges the Commission
to:
a.
Reaffirm Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
that all persons are born free and equal in dignity and rights,
and deplore all principles and practices rejecting the basic
notion of universal human equality;
b.
Recognise all forms of caste discrimination as falling with the
scope of the Conference, and explicitly equate caste with slavery
and apartheid;
c.
Pursue the recommendations of the Bellagio Consultation,
particularly for the formulation of national plans of action
against racism, which in the South Asian context must include
elimination of caste; establishment of a United Nations
inter-agency task force on racism and a semi-autonomous body to
promote research and training on related issues; with assistance
from the High Commissioner for Human Rights, creation of
operational units within regional bodies to focus on combatting
racism, which pertains specifically to the South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC); and the
establishment of a United Nations voluntary trust fund to give a
platform to Dalits and lower castes;
d.
Examine in particular the issue of Dalit women and children, who
suffer the most extreme forms of caste discrimination and have
the fewest avenues available for social advancement; and,
e.
Establish specific indicators to monitor measures for the
advancement of not only civil and political rights but also
social, economic and cultural rights, targetting the elimination
of caste-based discrimination. The existence of mere legal
provisions should not be taken as a guarantee of protection for
victims of caste systems. All areas of administrative practice
and implementation need to be regularly reviewed.
f.
Implement a set of standards, norms and guidelines must be
developed to abolish existing discriminatory practices based on
work and descent under international human rights law. The states
concerned must be held responsible under international law for
these violations in these countries.
16.
The elimination of caste is a much-belated human rights concern.
After a few thousand years of practice, gigantic efforts to break
the system open have as yet failed. That discrimination so gross
as caste has survived to this day is not only an indictment
against the countries where the practice exists but also against
the international community itself. Fifty years of United Nations’
instruments are of no significance to the millions continuing to
suffer this most perverse form of intolerance. In South Asia,
little regard will be paid to the outcome of the World Conference
Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance if it does not effectively address caste. The
solution to caste discrimination does not lie in tolerance among
castes; it demands nothing less than the elimination of caste
itself. The Commission must facilitate effective international
action towards that end.
Posted on 2001-01-30
remarks:1 |
