SUBCOMMISSION ON PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS DISCUSSES DISCRIMINATION ON BASIS OF WORK AND DESCENT

Subcommission on Promotion and
Protection of Human Rights
53rd session
9 August 2001
Afternoon



Expert Introduces Study on Caste Systems


The Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights this afternoon opened a discussion about discrimination on the basis of work and descent with an Expert presenting a study which described problems within caste systems in Asia.

Presenting the working paper on discrimination on the basis of work and descent, Subcommission Expert Rajendra Kalidas Wimala Goonesekere said such discrimination had a long history and had serious consequences for individuals belonging to various groups and communities. Noting that the study concentrated on countries mainly in Asia, he said these individuals were not recognized as having equal status with others, and were placed at the lower end of a hierarchical order. In some countries, such discrimination could be serious. Enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights could very definitely be affected, and because of that such discriminatory distinctions should have no place.

Referencing the caste system in India, he said India had taken steps to improve the plight of the Dalits, including through affirmative action programmes that were first undertaken more than 50 years ago. Yet these efforts had had little effect, and he had been shaken by some of the details of discrimination against Dalits. A week or so before he had come to Geneva, Indian newspapers had given much coverage to the assassination of the famous Indian "bandit queen". What had led to her life of crime was that she had killed 20 high class men who had taken advantage of her Dalit status and raped her. After serving a prison term, she had been elected to Parliament. Her death had been mourned by many, but there also, it seemed, had been celebrations in some high-caste neighbourhoods.

Mr. Goonesekere also noted caste discrimination in Nepal, Sri Lanka, Japan and Pakistan, but said discrimination based on descent or work took place in many parts of the world.

Commending the study, the representative of Human Rights Watch said that many Governments had enacted progressive legislation to combat abuses against lower-caste communities. But, she said, despite formal protections in law, discriminatory treatment remained endemic and discriminatory societal norms continued to be reinforced, in some cases through violent means. Quoting from the working paper, she said that despite the fact that laws were there, there was a clear lack of will on the part of law enforcement officers to take action owing to caste prejudice on their part or deference shown to higher-caste perpetrators.

Ambassador Savitri Kunadi of India disputed some of the findings in the working paper. It overlooked recent constitutional amendments, she said, and it failed to take note of the progress that India had made with the castes in question, including one of the most far-reaching affirmative action programmes in the world. Further, she took issue with a quote in the report from a non-governmental organization (NGO) member equating the caste system with apartheid. While apartheid had been a State-sponsored policy, she said, India was trying to end the system.

Subcommission Experts also participating in the debate were Louis Joinet, Francoise Jane Hampson, Asbjorn Eide, Vladimir Kartashkin, Fan Guoxiang, Soo Gil Park, Y.K.J. Yeung Sik Yuen, and Paulo Sergio Pinheiro.

Also speaking during the meeting were representatives of the following non-governmental organizations (NGOs): the International Council of Women, the Society for Threatened Peoples, the Asian Centre for Organization Research and Development, and the International Institute for Peace.

The Subcommission will meet at 10 a.m. on Friday, 10 August to continue its discussion on the prevention of discrimination.

Prevention of Discrimination

A working paper submitted by Subcommission Expert Rajendra Kalidas Wimala Goonesekere (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/16) on discrimination based on work and descent concludes that there were 250 million persons discriminated against in this regard. It lists communities where discrimination based on work and descent is experienced in India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Japan and Pakistan, with a special chapter on violations against women and children. It was the responsibility, the report reads, of the respective States to endeavour, not merely the passing of remedial laws, but by positive State action, to ensure that violations did not go unpunished.

Statements

B. POLONOVSKI, of the International Council of Women, said in 1914, the First World War had just began, and the International Council of Women had protested against rape and the impunity of the perpetrators. After the Second World War, the Council had favoured the Convention against the Crime of Genocide. In a report to the Commission on Human Rights, the High Commissioner had reiterated the conditions of genocide. Systematic rape, with a view to altering the ethnic makeup of a group, was included in that. The adoption of measures to control birth within a group also had to be recognized as a crime. The Council had received numerous alarming reports from all parts of the world. Unwanted pregnancy that resulted from rape in war conditions made situations even worse. The Subcommission was asked to continue defending women's causes, and to look especially into the cases of groups of women who were under threat.

ADELARD BLACKMAN of the Society for Threatened Peoples, said he was a member of the Dene Sulene nation of north-central Canada; there had been oppressive practices and policies perpetrated by colonial and commercial expansion on his nation’s ancestral lands, including repeated evictions. First the British and then the Canadian Governments, in the supposed interest of progress, had dispossessed the Dene Sulene of their resources and had committed ecocide. The abuse of the First Nations trapped inside Canadian borders must be brought before the international community. Canada claimed that all was well with its indigenous populations, but that was not true. Lives could well be at stake as the Dene Sulene carried out civil disobedience to protect their lands.

An air-weapons range had been established on Dene Sulene land, as well as a provincial park. A non-negotiable offer of 25.5 million Canadian dollars had been made by the Government for the land, but this was far from acceptable. The lands contained vast amounts of oil and gas. No compensation of this expropriation for commercial gain had ever been paid. Now there were proposals for mineral mining. Dene Sulene "peace camps" had been surrounded by snipers. Human rights violations anywhere were violations everywhere. Canada must address the situation of indigenous peoples in the country and grant them their true right to self-determination, including power over their natural resources.

GEORGE KORETH, of the Asian Centre for Organization Research and Development, said India, with such a great diversity of socio-religious communities, was a good example of how the rights of minorities were tackled. Its Constitution was the best guarantor of the rights of minorities. Article 15 of the Constitution prohibited discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Other articles guaranteed many other protections from discrimination. The Constitution in many way reflected the collective psyche of the people of India, which was based on tolerance, peace and co-existence developed over the centuries. In 1984, unfortunately, there were attacks on the Sikh community in the aftermath of the assassination of the then Prime Minister. During occasional communal riots, both Hindu and Muslim families protected each other. In Jammu and Kashmir, Muslim families tried to protect the Pandits from terrorist attacks and pleaded with them not to migrate from the valley.

The term minorities was a relatively modern concept as traditionally in India, there had never been such a distinction in the Indian culture. There was a social stratification in the form of caste among Hindus based on their occupations, but no discrimination on the basis of religion or creed. Even Muslims, Christians and other religious groups observed occupational group stratification. But to call the issue racism was far from the truth, and the international community should see it in proper perspective. Racism was exploitation or discrimination based on racial or genetic differences. People of various castes in each region in India had the same genetic characteristics in terms of colour, type of hair, eyes or height. No one was barred from access to any public places, including ritual bathing in the holy rivers. The traditional Indian social ethos of tolerance and non-violence ensured protection of the rights of minorities and other socially-weaker sections. Some of the contradictions and frictions that occurred occasionally were not so much related to the minority status of communities, but because of various other disputes, such as property ownership or personal rivalries.

RAJENDRA KALIDAS WIMALA GOONESEKERE, Subcommission Expert, presenting a working paper on discrimination based on work and descent, said he came from a country where a caste system existed, yet he had quickly found that his knowledge was far from adequate to encompass the topic. One had to understand history, culture, and many other things, yet he was only a lawyer. Portions of the paper had been contributed by Alternate Expert Barbara Frey, to whom he was much indebted. He was also grateful to many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which had supplied information on situations in various countries.

Discrimination based on work or descent was based on a long history and had serious consequences for individuals belonging to various groups and communities, Mr. Goonesekere said; they were not recognized as having equal status with others; they were placed at the lower end of a hierarchical order. In some countries, such discrimination could be serious. Enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights could very definitely be affected, and because of that such discriminatory distinctions should have no place. He wished to apologize if the study focused to a great extent on India; he had had a short time to write the report, there was much already written on the Indian caste system that he could consult, and in the end it was natural that he should turn to India first. In addition, many NGOs had taken up the cause of the Dalits in India.

India had taken steps, it had to be noted, to improve the plight of the Dalits, including through affirmative action programmes first undertaken more than 50 years ago, Mr. Goonesekere said. Yet these efforts had had little effect, and he had been shaken by some of the details of discrimination against Dalits he had come across. A week or so before he had come to Geneva, Indian newspapers had given much coverage to the assassination of the famous Indian "bandit queen". What had led to her life of crime was that she had killed 20 high class men who had taken advantage of her Dalit status and raped her. After serving a prison term, she had been elected to Parliament. Her death had been mourned by many, but there also, it seemed, had been celebrations in some high-caste neighbourhoods.

There were Dalits facing difficulties in Nepal, Mr. Goonesekere said; in Sri Lanka a caste system existed that was important for such matters as marriage alliances and even legislative representation. Among the Tamils there was a strong bias against persons of low caste who suffered poverty as a result. In Japan there was discrimination against a minority caste group that was surprising in a nation so developed, and the Government had taken measures that had had significant effect. In Pakistan there was discrimination through which the main sufferers were Dalits from India and Sunni Muslims in the northern part of the country. There also appeared to be discrimination of the caste type in several African countries, and discrimination against the Indian diaspora in various nations, including the United Kingdom. Women and children of such caste groups were subjected to double discrimination, which made it that much more urgent to confront the problem.

SMITA NARULLA, of Human Rights Watch, said for the last four years, the organization had investigated abuses against lower-caste communities in Asia. Inhuman treatment of a vast global population had been justified on the basis of caste. In much of Asia and parts of Africa, caste was the basis of the definition and exclusion of distinct population groups by reason of their descent. For hundreds of millions of people worldwide, caste imposed enormous obstacles to the full attainment of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. The report had commendably explored these very complex and ingrained issues in Asian countries, most notably India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Japan and Pakistan. Mr. Goonesekere make clear, however, that the report was introductory in nature and that further study, in cooperation with the Governments concerned, was necessary. He also noted that observations on countries outside of Asia were not possible due to time and other constraints.

In several countries, Governments had enacted progressive legislation to combat abuses against lower-caste communities. Despite formal protections in law, however, discriminatory treatment remained endemic and discriminatory societal norms continued to be reinforced, in some cases through violent means. The report noted that laws were there, but there was a clear lack of will on the part of law enforcement officers to take action owing to caste prejudice on their part or deference shown to higher-caste perpetrators. Internationally and immediately the world community should ensure that this important and vast global issue was addressed at the upcoming World Conference against Racism.

TATIANA SHAUMIAN, of the International Institute for Peace, said that in ancient times Hindu society was divided into four sections for purposes of occupation, and the Sudras, the lowest caste, had served the higher castes; they became an oppressed class and hence poor, and now they were known as the Dalits or "oppressed people". Caste was not a racial but a social evil whose remedy lay in organized social action. The Indian media devoted front-page attention to Dalit problems and the Indian Constitution had a number of articles aimed at eliminating caste discrimination, but many Dalits continued to suffer social ostracism and economic deprivation. India had a democracy, an independent judiciary and an alert press, but it also had problems of illiteracy, overpopulation and poverty. Only when all Indian people were educated and had an improved quality of life would they discard old stereotypes and notions of prejudice. Such an attitudinal change would not come in a short time.

Caste or Dalit discrimination could not be equated in any manner with racial discrimination and should not be covered by the upcoming World Conference against Racism. It needed to be addressed at the local and regional levels by dedicated and committed social activists.

NOZOMI BANDO, of the International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, said it was encouraged by the Subcommission's decision last year to launch a study on the question of descent- and work-based discrimination. The acknowledgement that discrimination on the basis of work and descent was a form of discrimination prohibited by international human rights law marked an important watershed in the history of international human rights. It was a long overdue recognition by the international community, in particular the United Nations, as this discrimination affected hundreds of millions of people around the world, notably in Asia and Africa. The report of Mr. Goonesekere on this topic described a number of affected groups, including the Buraku people in Japan. The Japanese Government had enacted a series of special laws since 1969 to eradicate discrimination against the Buraku. However, even though the Buraku people continued to face discrimination and prejudice today, in particular in the fields of marriage, education and employment, these measures would cease to apply in March 2002 following the expiry date of the special laws. The Government had yet to address a clear national strategy towards the eradication of Buraku discrimination after the expiration of the special laws.

LOUIS JOINET, Subcommission Expert, said Mr. Goonesekere's paper had shattered some preconceived ideas he had had about discrimination based on work or descent, among them that such discrimination was specific to India. It turned out it was widespread. The topic was clearly one of great complexity. The document had admirable balance and intellectual honesty. He hoped pursuit of this study would open a valuable debate. In reference to Sri Lanka, he wished to ask who were the owners of the former slaves who now suffered from such caste discrimination?

FRANCOISE JANE HAMPSON, Subcommission Expert, said there was a problem concerning unaddressed discrimination. These were situations where people were victims of human rights violations and the groups that these people belonged to were frequent victims of human rights violations. By way of example, look at the European Court of Human Rights. In case after case, Turkey had been found guilty of killings and torture. But the Court had not said that victims of Kurdish origin were more likely to be victims of such cases than those of Turkish origin, although all the victims in these cases were of Kurdish origin. The failure to address such a discrimination resulted in a failure to investigate the root causes of the problem. The discrimination would then remain. This could be a situation that the Subcommission should return to.

Mr. Goonesekere should be congratulated for an excellent report. It was amazing how many people worldwide suffered from this kind of discrimination -- 250 million. India had passed many laws on the subject, and had undertaken many practices, but there was still a problem with discrimination in daily life against the Dalits. Treating people differently based on descent was traditional, and the attitudes were deeply ingrained. Such an explanation based on discrimination on the colour of ones skin, however, would not be accepted. Another issue common to these situations was the failure of law enforcement officials to respond to complaints. These were not taken seriously, and not surprisingly then, they did not reach the courts. Ineffective investigations meant that the State was not effectively protecting human rights, and was allowing for a culture of impunity. It was hoped that a further report would be requested of Mr. Goonesekere for next year's session.

ASBJORN EIDE, Subcommission Expert, said the paper was thought-provoking, and it was interesting to find that this kind of discrimination extended well beyond South Asia. He hoped there would be effective follow-up to the report. In the West, it was important to remember, up to 50 or so years ago, there had been claims about a hierarchy among races and it had taken great effort to combat such attitudes and assumptions. What was clear was that discrimination based on occupation or descent was wrong and should be ended.

The report pointed out that atrocities were committed almost daily against Dalits, and that these crimes often went unpunished. That raised the old question of how law enforcement operated, and the matter of discrimination in the administration of justice. It was not enough to have laws or Constitutional provisions; what mattered was to enforce them and to punish perpetrators. He was somewhat perplexed that some Governments that attacked discriminatory problems of occupation and descent at home were not eager to talk about them or to have the topic pursued in international fora. Why did they have that reaction? Racism certainly was discussed internationally. He was puzzled by this sensitivity and wondered if some explanation could be given for it.

VLADIMIR KARTASHKIN, Subcommission Alternate Expert, said he had read the report with great interest. The information contained within was new and interesting. The information only concerned a few countries, and in virtually every country referenced, the report said the situation was improving. There needed to be more information from Governments themselves. How were Governments reacting to the information in the report? What were they doing to improve the situations described in the report? The countries on the subcontinent appeared to be making considerable efforts. Mr. Goonesekere said this was an introductory report, and it was hoped that the next time around, there would be more information about the countries themselves. The basic focus was on countries of Asia, although it was recognized that this problem was not exclusive to Asia alone. It was prevalent in many other continents.

FAN GUOXIANG, Subcommission Expert, said that while some thought this was a good report and that work should continue on the topic, he had a different opinion. When the topic had been assigned a year ago, he had not even understood what the subject was about. Other Experts also had been somewhat puzzled; Mr. Goonesekere himself had seemed puzzled. Now, with the working paper, it was clear what the matter referred to. However, there now was a demand by some that this kind of discrimination should be discussed at the World Conference against Racism, and at the Preparatory Committee now under way in advance of the Conference. Last year, he had stressed that the World Conference should focus only on racism because if the topic was broadened too much it would become diluted. Also it was clear that some countries were resisting efforts against racism, and tangential topics such as this one could be used to divert attention from the battle against racism. This could be counterproductive for the World Conference.

In his opinion, this was not the appropriate time to study the matter of discrimination based on occupation and descent. He wished to propose that since this study had been done, the issue should be put aside for a while; the matter should not be raised at the World Conference, as such a step could hurt the aims of the conference and even damage pursuit of the topic of discrimination based on work or descent, as people might confuse it with something else.

SOO GIL PARK, Subcommission Expert, said the issue of discrimination based on work and descent encompassed all forms of discrimination that fell within the jurisdiction of the Subcommission -- it could affect education, for example, and social rights and even in some instances indigenous peoples. This was definitely an issue not only limited to Asia, but other regions as well, and it was hoped that the study would focus on other continents in the future. What was the current status of victims in other regions? Had this been addressed under international law at all? Did victims have recourse? It was hoped that these answers could be provided in future reports. What sort of international action was needed to address this problem? India played a pioneering role in introducing a provision in its Constitution. What could other countries do toward education and reconciliation? He agreed with a previous suggestion that perhaps this issue should not be brought up before the Durban Conference in light of the lack of information. There were many more areas to be covered.

Y.K.J. YEUNG SIK YUEN, Subcommission Expert, said he agreed that the matter was not suitable for the World Conference against Racism. He felt the topic of the Conference was wide enough to accommodate it, but he did not think it wise to divert attention from the main topic of the Conference; such things might drown the fish.

He was very impressed by Mr. Goonesekere's paper on discrimination based on work or descent, although he wondered if Mr. Goonesekere nonetheless had got some facts wrong. There was a statement, for example, that some Dalits might have changed their occupations to engage in agriculture but had not been able to join occupations prohibited by caste traditions. He was not sure that gave credit to the fact that people in very high positions in India happened to be Dalits. The Prime Minister of India happened to be a Dalit. Otherwise he was happy with the report and would support a proposal that Mr. Goonesekere carry on with his study.

SAVITRI KUNADI, (India) said her country had fully supported the role of the Subcommission. Regrettably, however, it could not say the same about the report. The working paper overlooked recent constitutional amendments. It purported to focus on countries in Asia, but even a cursory reading showed that it focused mainly on India. This paper meant to target India. It failed to take note of the progress that had been made with these castes, including one of the most far-reaching affirmative actions in the world. The section on India quoted some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) equating castes with apartheid. India was trying to end the system, while apartheid had been a State-sponsored policy. Even the report later noted that the caste system was not based on racism.

It was wondered how the Expert had concluded that some of the castes did not benefit from the economic progress enjoyed by the country in the last 50 years. India was providing figures that showed crimes against lower-caste members had been declining. While there had been social tensions in some areas of the countries, the allegation in the report that it was a wide-spread problem was entirely inaccurate. These inaccuracies were all the more surprising because the issue of the caste system had been in the public eye since India became independent. India would not support the Subcommission continuing with this report. The energies and resources of the Subcommission could be better served investigating discrimination in other parts of the world. India was trying to eradicate the problem with discrimination based on caste.

PAULO SERGIO PINHEIRO, Subcommission Expert, said he thought it was not just the Subcommission's wishes that mattered in deciding whether a topic would be taken up at the World Conference against Racism. He agreed with Mr. Eide that the Conference would offer several Governments a chance to indicate their positive practices in relation to the topic of discrimination based on work or descent. He agreed with Mr. Kartashkin's contention that Governments be given a chance to provide data and facts on the matter. He understood Mr. Fan's remark that the Conference should play a role in highlighting good practices. In a calm frame of mind, and without pinpointing countries, it was a good idea to point out that such practices existed in many countries, including discrimination against Afro-Latins in some Latin American countries. He thought that with sufficient care, the World Conference could usefully discuss this subject. Rounding up the picture of racism was the right approach, in his opinion. Silence on this topic would not be the right approach.