SUBCOMMISSION CONTINUES DEBATE ON DISCRIMINATION BASED ON OCCUPATION OR DESCENT

Subcommission on Promotion and
Protection of Human Rights
53rd session
10 August 2001
Morning




The Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights continued this morning its discussion on discrimination based on occupation or descent, hearing differing opinions about whether the matter should be considered at the upcoming World Conference against Racism and whether an initial paper on the topic focused attention unfairly on specific countries and regions.

The report, prepared by Subcommission Expert Rajendra Kalidas Wimala Goonesekere, was introduced Thursday.

The non-governmental organization (NGO) World Federation of Trade Unions contended this morning that battling such discrimination would not be helped by debate at international conferences but by working in countries and local societies to change traditions and attitudes. By contrast, Minority Rights Group International said such discrimination had not received sufficient attention from United Nations human rights treaty bodies reviewing country reports, and that if the matter was raised at the World Conference it could lead to a more energetic response from the United Nations system.

Subcommission Experts said, among other things, that the extent of such discrimination should be surveyed and described around the world and not simply in South Asia. Expert El-Hadji Guisse remarked that efforts to combat it should focus on education; Expert Joseph Oloka-Onyango said that Mr. Goonesekere's analysis of such discrimination was the same in substance as that given in a statement Thursday by a delegate from India, with both pointing to a single broad fact -- that much had been done to address this very complex problem; and Expert Miguel Alfonso Martinez suggested that the further review of the topic be delayed to allow the Subcommission some "thinking time" on how to proceed.

Expert Soli Jehangir Sorabjee, who comes from India, described numerous measures taken by the Indian Government to combat discrimination based on caste, said a great deal of progress had been made but that such problems based on ancient traditions did not disappear quickly, and said he hoped the Subcommission would take a balanced view of the matter.

Mr. Goonesekere, responding to the debate, said among other things that when he was preparing the paper he had not considered any possible ramifications for the World Conference and that he was aware that Asia and Africa were not the only regions where discrimination based on occupation or descent occurred.

Also contributing to the debate at the morning meeting were the following NGOs: the European Union of Public Relations; the Association of World Citizens; the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues; the Art of Living Foundation International; and the Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Organization.

Subcommission Experts or Alternate Experts Fried Van Hoof, Godfrey Bayour Preware, Erica-Irene A. Daes, and Halima Embarek Warzazi spoke, as did representatives of Pakistan and Malaysia.

The Subcommission will reconvene at 3 p.m. and is expected over the course of the afternoon to take action on draft decisions and a draft resolution submitted under its agenda items on administration of justice and economic, social and cultural rights.

Statements

MILIND WAIDANDEY, of the World Federation of Trade Unions, said the cause of the Dalits was not helped by the way it was being presented before the Subcommission nor would it be helped by slapping the label of "racism" on it; the real cure lay in creation of a casteless society as called for by the Constitution of India. The results of affirmative action programmes in India were evident in his presence and that of other Dalits at this meeting, because in pre-independent India that would have been impossible. Statistics had been trotted out to show how the Dalits suffered, but no attempt had been made to present statistics showing how much progress had been made. Dalits today were active in the Indian Parliament, in state assemblies, and in local councils -- and that included participation by Dalit women. Statistics alone could not become the basis of programmes; affirmative action had to be aimed at changing attitudes, and that took a long time and great effort and persistence.

Lack of education was a major impediment to such progress. As for affirmative action, a major obstacle was the resentment the such programmes could create among others. The remedy did not lie in declarations and summits but in concerted action at home to change attitudes.

J. OLIVER, of the European Union of Public Relations, said the question of prevention of discrimination had been discussed at length at sessions of the Subcommission. The entire battle against discrimination, whatever form it took, was getting skewed by the concoction of new terminology meant to serve the limited political and economic interests of specific groups. This was becoming particularly evident in the run up to the World Conference against Racism. What was discrimination based on descent? All discrimination that segregated human beings on the basis of race, colour, origin, ethnicity, inherited faith, and religion, among others, was discrimination based on descent. Then why specify it as altogether another agenda. The answer lay in the limited interests of specific groups as opposed to what should be overarching objectives of the human rights community. That was to ensure that nation states fashioned their policies and structures to ensure that all citizens were provided equal treatment.

Discrimination based on occupation was another formulation that was difficult to digest. The Turk in Germany was discriminated against as a guest worker and was the target of violence. There were blue collar and white collar workers who would never meet in a club. Hereditary occupations, whether monarchies or dynastic rules in democracies, were by their very nature discriminatory. The Dalits chafed against the caste system that they believed denied them equality based on merit and subjected them to discrimination and violence. There were caste systems by different names in every society -- the House of Lords and the school boy network in England and the WASPS and the Ivy Leaguers in the United States of America. While India had a Dalit President, the United States had yet to elect a black president. It was futile for each group to consider that it alone was the target of discrimination. All that such an attitude achieved was even more verbose and convoluted declarations and statements and eventually more divisiveness in society. Discrimination existed today as it had for centuries because the world community had not united as one to fight it.

EL-HADJI GUISSE, Subcommission Expert, said the study on castes focused on a problem that for some time had generated great discussion. It was a basis of international law that all men were equal before the law, but the evolution of society consisted of individual and social practices that had long included powerful forms of discrimination, and that included traditional concepts of caste in many regions of the world. A study on this question was doubtless useful, but he had to say that these were ancestral practices which prevailed over centuries, and it was not rule of law, a convention, or declaration which today could eliminate these problems. To wish to act along those lines was a mistake the results of which could be to make resistance more stubborn, or even to give rise to conflict.

Such practices existed in Asia, in Europe, in Africa, and in the American hemisphere. They were everywhere, so a study of them should touch the entire planet and not just one region. Then again, a global "census" was not enough. An attempt should be made to survey the efforts made to eradicate such practices and their various successes and failures. Mr. Goonesekere's study referred especially to India, and India today was doing much to battle such discrimination, indeed was carrying out positive discrimination to combat such problems. But it was clear that such efforts were not always the best way to proceed. In setting up affirmative action efforts, did not one encourage de facto discrimination? Meanwhile the effort had been very expensive for India with a view to ensuring equality for all citizens.

In his opinion, the best way to proceed would be to emphasize education and information. It was necessary to teach children that practices were the consequences of occupation and birth, and that these were not matters of choice for those involved; to teach that in a democratic society what you could do had nothing to do with the status of your birth; to teach that such forms of discrimination held back the development of a country; and to say eyeball to eyeball to children that they could do in life whatever their achievements allowed them to do. If this concept was taught in all schools, and taught persistently, and if non-governmental organizations were able to go into the field to tell those who practised these measures, to say that such practices were out of date, that could be the best way to change mindsets. It was mindsets, beyond the rule of law, that were critical to continuing or ending such discrimination. Similarly, the police, judiciary, and other public officials had to be educated so that they could enforce provisions calling for equality.

FRIED VAN HOOF, Subcommission Expert, said a number of factors had helped make this discussion a learning experience. The material provided by India had helped tremendously, especially in formulating the background of the issue. The report of Mr. Goonesekere was also very helpful, including how he pointed out the limitations that he faced when drafting it. There was a sense from India yesterday that it was targeted in the report, and everything should be done to ensure that a country not feel targeted. But keeping the topic on the table was the best was to proceed in dealing with it.

MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ, Subcommission Expert, said debate on this issue of discrimination based on occupation or dissent had been a useful learning process for many in the room. Two statements had struck his attention -- Mr. Goonesekere's introduction of the paper and the statement in response by the Government of India. He thought the paper was a valuable summary, and one impression it gave was that the matter had a regional nature; the document focused on specific countries within the Asian region, and in one instance on India. In the corridors this report was called the "India report", and this should be avoided. Mr. Goonesekere noted in the report that the problem was not limited to Asia, but this also seemed a limited perspective, as Africa and South America were mentioned, but Europe was not mentioned as a place where the phenomenon could exist. This problem would have to be corrected. The subject had to be appreciated in its true dimensions.

It had not been clear to him at the beginning what the meaning was of "discrimination based on work and descent", Mr. Alfonso Martinez said. "Descent" meant what? There were many millionaires today who were the children of millionaires. He had the impression that the countries involved, such as India and Japan, had quite bravely faced up to the problem. He had approached these Governments for information and both had quite forthrightly provided him with information and statistics. Neither country had hidden the extent of the problem. He hoped no process of the Subcommission would overturn their current sensible approach to the problem. These difficulties would not be swept away merely by laws; that was clear. Since opinion on the Subcommission was greatly divided on the matter, it should give careful thought to its future consideration of the matter. If he had his way, the group would halt for the moment its review of the matter and allow itself some thinking time.

JOSEPH OLOKA-ONYANGO, Subcommission Expert, said it had to be confessed that he was disturbed by the turn and trend of the discussion. Mr. Goonesekere should be commended for the fairness and balance with which he had approached this subject. It was thus disconcerting that some would question if this report was appropriate under this agenda item, and whether it should be given attention at the World Conference against Racism. The analysis was the same in substance as that of the delegate from India. The analyses of the two pointed to a single broad fact -- much had been done to address this very complex problem. India was cited more than any other country in the report. The Government had tried to stamp out this problem since independence, but it still had a long way to go.

This would be the first World Conference against Racism in many years, and there would not be another one for many years. There should be no bold attempt at censorship. The Subcommission, with the reparation for slavery and colonialism matter, sent a message that it was a body to protect and promote human rights, to give a voice to the voiceless and to give protection to those without protection. The report clearly stated that this issue could not be shelved. The issue would be discussed at the World Conference, regardless of whether or not the Subcommission wished it to be discussed. Mr. Goonesekere's paper suggested that the issue be given further thought and examination. He suggested that it be expanded to cover other continents.

GODFREY BAYOUR PREWARE, Subcommission Expert, said he echoed the opinions expressed by Mr. Oloka-Onyango. Mr. Goonesekere's study was a pioneering effort focusing on a complex social issue; such populations defined by caste or occupation existed not only in Asia but on other continents. The study, if it was to be continued, should be expanded beyond one geographical region. The important thing was that there had been energetic affirmative action to correct such unfair treatment. Clearly vast efforts were being made to attack these problems. It was important to recognize such positive and continuing commitment by Governments. Mr. Goonesekere's study could benefit from a great deal of information available in affected countries, among them India. Mr. Goonesekere should be enabled to complete his study, expanding it to include all countries and continents where such discrimination existed.

He did not see why the Subcommission should recommend to the World Conference against Racism that it should or should not discuss a topic on which the Subcommission itself had not yet completed a study. The only course to follow, in his opinion, was to continue the Subcommission's own work until it had a clearer view and a better grasp of the subject.

ERICA-IRENE DAES, Subcommission Expert, said Mr. Goonesekere should be congratulated for his excellent work on a complex topic. What was stated by the delegate of India yesterday was helpful and appreciated. It was the Subcommission's role to listen to the Governments and to take note of all the materials they submit. It was hoped that in follow-up reports, Mr. Goonesekere would have a dialogue with the delegate of India.

HALIMA EMBAREK WARZAZI, Subcommission Expert, said this study had required a great deal of courage, as the topic was controversial and sensitive. It was obvious that the problem was a real one and an enormous one; the population of India was enormous; perhaps if such difficulties were occurring elsewhere they would have less impact. Also impressive was the commitment of the Government of India to ending the problem. This kind of thing could not be solved overnight -- commitment and persistence were required.

The problem affected other continents, too, it was clear. That point had been made. The future study would benefit from an expansion of scope so that the problem was reflected on a worldwide level. She felt a resolution should be tabled encouraging continued work on the topic and expansion of the scope of the study. For the time being she did not think the Subcommission should propose anything to the World Conference against Racism since the report was not finished.

EDWIN B. FIRMAGE, of the Association of World Citizens, said all nations rightly honoured beginnings -- the genesis of the life of a people, nationhood, statehood, or the birth of a new idea. The beginnings of international law and international institutions were also noted. Time did not allow for the proper amount of respect to be paid to the Chinese people and their continuity of governments, virtually from the beginning of time, for the civilization, the culture, the spiritual power that China had bequeathed to the world. But now, China seemed to be on the same tragic tack taken by the Native Americans, who were there to meet the boats when those from Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales nearly exterminated them. The United Nations was the last hope for many indigenous nations and peoples who were persecuted by allegedly superior cultures, thereby threatened with extinction by genocidal acts, so intended or done simply by ignorance, no less savage.

For now, China threatened the very survival of one of the smallest, the most fragile, brilliant beautiful people ever born. In a match-up making David and Goliath appear each other's equal, China threatened Tibetans away from their promised land. By premeditated acts of uncomprehending savagery, China imprisoned and tortured these people, causing thousands of deaths each year. At the same time, actions were incarnated into law and policy whereby thousands of documents were burned, holy books destroyed, a sacred scripture defiled. China was asked to examine once again their true identity of interest -- precisely parallel to that of the Government of the Dalai Lama. He better than anyone in the world could supply naturally, not by phoney colonial exports and imports that could not talk real root in foreign soil, the inner core of humanitarian ethics which no amount of capitalist goods could ever deliver.

CORINNE LENNOX, of the Minority Rights Group International, said the human rights violations committed against groups based on occupation or descent or caste were abhorrent and well-documented: bonded labour, debt bondage, derogatory references, public stripping, prostitution of the girl child, sexual violence, and generalized discrimination in access to public services and land. The United Nations, however, had been far from consistent in acknowledging such abuses and stating their cause; some treaty bodies had noted the matter but had failed to adopt a consistent approach. Given the disproportionate number of low caste manual scavengers and menial workers along with related restrictions on employment, it was surprising that the International Labour Office had to date understated caste vulnerability.

A report by the Minority Rights Group International on the matter listed the following countries as having this problem: Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Guinea, India, Japan, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Micronesia, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, and Sri Lanka. Many of these countries had been examined recently by treaty bodies without discrimination based on occupation or descent being discussed. The issue would benefit greatly from being raised at the World Conference against Racism.

ANTOINE MADELIN, of the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, said the Federation welcomed the Subcommission's resolution recognizing that slavery and colonization, if committed today, would be crimes against humanity. There were many contemporary forms of racism, and despite international efforts, further improvements had to be made. It was deplored that the International Convention on all Migrant Workers and their Families, 10 years after it was adopted, still had not entered force. Europe had to be held responsible for this. Only one country there had ratified it. Migrants were discriminated against everywhere in the world. The definition of racism could not be simply based on physical characteristics -- that implied only skin colour. There were many forms of racism. There could even be a problem with the use of the word race. There was also the multi-discrimination phenomenon. There was a combination of sexual and racism discrimination, racism and religious discrimination, economic and social discrimination -- there were many different combinations.

Racism based on work or descent should be addressed at the World Conference against Racism. Mr. Goonesekere should be commended for his excellent report, and it was hoped that the Subcommission would continue this work, even investigating different areas, particularly Africa. It was not known where else in the world, other than Asia, where this problem existed. Any work to combat racism could only succeed if it were conducted against a background where economic, social and cultural rights were respected. The close relations that existed between poverty and racial discrimination had to be highlighted during the Durban Conference. It was the political will of States that had to practised in Durban.

D. HARMISON, of the Art of Living Foundation, speaking on behalf of the International Association of Human Values, said he had lived a great deal in India and had observed that India, like all societies, was stratified economically and socially. He also had seen that India was grappling with these problems, among other things, by establishing laws to protect the unfortunate and poor; carrying out affirmative action programmes; enhancing educational opportunities; and carrying out technology programmes and youth training programmes. Because of India's affirmative action and student reservation programmes, many technical employees of United States companies such as Microsoft were Dalits. It was the responsibility of States to enact and enforce laws to protect and promote the well-being of all their people, not just one group. In January he had attended the Kumbhmela in northern India and had walked with 12 million people from all spiritual traditions and backgrounds; he had seen no discrimination.

All countries had far to go to eliminate discrimination, poverty and disease. It was not productive to refer to this particular issue in India as racism, nor should the Subcommission flaw its gathering by defaming one country when so many others were doing so much less and yet were not mentioned.

K. BENNET, of the Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Organization, said the question was whether discrimination based on descent and occupation was an evil that only permeated the developing non-Christian world. If indeed a study on the question of this discrimination was to provide a framework for concerted action to rid the world of this malaise, then it should have included more information on how developed countries, with high levels of literacy and awareness practised discrimination based on descent and occupation. Perhaps in highlighting the question of caste in India, for instance, a parallel should have been drawn with the treatment of the coloured, native peoples by their white colonial masters who made the practice of discrimination on the basis of colour or origin a facet of State policy.

It was not the representatives of the developed, educated and enlightened societies that ever championed the concepts of equality. In their colonial possessions, they encouraged segregation and inequality to perpetuate colonial rule. The Subcommission was compelled, when perusing the report, to ponder whether the problem of discrimination based on descent and occupation was only a Hindu issue. It should be remembered that when Gandhi was struggling to ride India of the practice of untouchability, Christian Germany was in the midst of eradicating a whole race because of its origins and faith and descent. Mr. Goonesekere should be applauded for his report, and the Subcommission was urged to examine the political, legal, institutional and social structures of all countries where there were segments of societies which were discriminated against because of their colour, descent, origin or occupation.

SOLI JEHANGIR SORABJEE, Subcommission Expert, said Mr. Goonesekere had bravely undertaken an arduous job and he attributed no motives to him other than impartiality. But a decision made by the Subcommission on this matter should be an informed decision. It was a fact that for centuries, scheduled castes and tribes now called Dalits had suffered extensive social and economic discrimination and had been the victims of irrational prejudices. The framers of the Indian Constitution had as a result included articles within the Constitution to redress such discrimination. These steps had been far-reaching. One article provided for a National Commission for the scheduled castes and tribes which had the responsibility of enquiring into specific complaints of violations committed against Dalits. Over 1,000 complaints had been received in the year 2000 and in a majority of cases official penal responses had followed.

Members of the scheduled castes received affirmative action even in terms of less-demanding standards for admission to college and to civil service, and they received special consideration in terms of promotion. India had done a great deal -- it had made such discrimination based on caste a prison offense and this was not just a matter of "paper"; eighty special courts had been set up to try such offenses and the rate of convictions was growing; in 1997, 2,017 people had been convicted. Of course there should be more convictions, but the courts had to follow standard judicial regulations for trials based on careful review of evidence and assumption of innocence.

Of course such discrimination did persist, and absence of enforcement of legal provisions was one of the problems. But India had many enormous problems and only so many resources; it had to be pointed out that many other laws were not sufficiently enforced. Meanwhile, India's very free and lively press gave vast coverage to the problems of the Dalits.

The point was, this problem was of ancient origin. Huge measures had been taken to combat it, but time also would be required. He was not suggesting that something did not need to be done, but something was being done. With continuing efforts, more progress would be made. He hoped the Subcommission would take a balanced view of the matter.

F. KHAN (Pakistan) said the report was on an extremely important issue, and it was only the beginning of a long investigative process. Pakistan was an Islamic state, and one of the basic tenets of Islam was equality among all human beings. It did not accept untouchability, and thus, the Pakistani Constitution did not allow for untouchability. It was believed that the figures concerning the extent of bonded labour could not be authenticated. Pakistan was conducting a nationwide survey, with the help of the International Labour Organization, to determine the extent of the problem. It appeared, therefore, that it was unjustified to highlight the problem in the report as discrimination without noting the efforts of the Government of Pakistan to combat the problem. A National Plan of Action was being formulated on bonded labour and the labourers. And the Government had decided to ratify ILO Convention 182 on the worst forms of child labour, and ILO Convention 100 on equal remuneration for men and women. Although there were differences of opinion on the conclusions, Pakistan was welcoming the dialogue.

N. FEENY (Malaysia) said the report on discrimination based on work and descent mentioned Indians in Malaysia. The caste system did not exist in Malaysia; the Government did not recognize such a system; Malaysians were not discriminated against based on work or descent but were given equal opportunities to employment and in society in general. Malaysians of Indian descent were well-integrated in Malaysian society and many held high-level Government positions.

This matter needed to be carefully and thoroughly studied. It was vital to be accurate in what was said on the topic to avoid creating inaccurate impressions or misconceptions.

RAJENDRA KALIDAS WIMALA GOONESEKERE, Subcommission Expert, said it was made very clear that this paper was written in a very limited amount of time, which was not enough time to address such a complex issue, and that had been forgotten by various speakers. Some of the critical comments were welcomed, as were the complimentary comments. There were deficiencies that were made clear during yesterday's presentation. When the paper was being considered, the World Conference was not in mind, and the issue was not considered as something that would be considered in Durban. What would be done with the study was a matter for the Subcommission to decide. He was aware that other areas had to be looked into -- that Asia and Africa were not the only areas in which this type of discrimination existed. Points were made that perhaps there should have been more government information. As far as India was concerned, the lack of information was not for a lack of asking. Efforts had been made to get information. There were certain areas of gross violations of human rights that might not fit into the well-drawn categories of human rights violations. They too should be considered. There were instances when it was not a matter of race, religion or gender. These were complex factors.

It was regretted that certain statements were made by the delegate of India. A response would not be made because he hoped that cordial relations with India would continue.



* *** *