Dalits and International Conventions:A perspective on “Internationalization of Dalit issues”

Dr. Dominic DEmail: davidappa@hotmail.com

“Recognition of extraordinary lengths to which one must go to challenge a given structure of intelligibility, to intervene in resident meanings by bringing what is silent and un-glimpsed into focus, is an essential step towards, opening up possibilities for politics and ethics of discourse”

- Michael J.Shapio

Before getting into the theoretical underpinnings of the topic, “Dalits and International Conventions: A perspective on “Internationalization of Dalit issues” let us try to have a glimpse at the following reality bites. They capture the mood of this paper and clarify the positions on the issue. Further they also throw light on the generalised stereotypes that are used to identify the dalits.

The first reality bite is an incident that took place last year when the Karnataka State’s SC Commission development Board sponsored a research work on documenting the multi facets of 50 years experiences of dalits in Karnataka. According to the plan, I had to interview the former dalit MLA Mr. K. H. Ranganath.1 During the interview I asked him to narrate his experience of untouchability. He took no time to rebuke me by saying, “go and ask those who inflicted the wound”. This precisely the issue – when we say a person untouchable, what do we mean? Do we mean that this person is born as an untouchable? Or is it an attribute of the upper caste person who dumps it on the dalit in order to get him subjugated to perpetuate his privileges? The latter seems to be the crux. Thus, the stereo-type ‘untouchable/untouchability’ had to be used not to describe the dalit persons.

The second episode pertains to a report published in Varthabharti on 31st August. According to the report of C S Madaiah Committee, that monitors the implementation of the reservation in the colleges that come under the purview of Bangalore University, found out that in 50 high tech colleges of Bangalore have failed to implement the reservation policy in education, particularly St. Joseph’s college, Mount Carmel College, Bishop Cotton Ladies College and others have completely failed. The committee says that these colleges will be fined with Rs.1lakh to fifty thousand. My point here is that these high tech colleges who depend upon the state for their resources have violated the constitutional mandate. Even if we take Christ College, I am, sure that it also will come under scrutiny. If we go into their assumptions, it is the concept of quality education that ultimately denies admission to the students of dalit community. In other words merit seems to be the accepted criteria where dalit students are not meritorious. The excuses that are cited are that dalit students don’t come. For me it ultimately a casteist nuance that

1 K H Ranganath is known for his integrity and for implementing the land reforms Act in Karnataka His whole interview has been given in K. Ramaiah Ed., Talaparike, S.C. Development board, Bangalore 2006, p. 356

thrives in the name of quality and standard education. Further analysis will give us that standardization in any field means elimination of the dalits, adiwasis, women and children from acquiring their rights. Therefore, the sociological term ‘hierarchy’ was an attribute to understand the caste reality in India, had to give way to the concept of ‘standardization’ to understand the caste practice in reality.

The third reality bite pertains to the context of Bangalore Slums. The editor of Slum report found out that most of the slum women who render domestic services hail from OBC and Dalit backgrounds. Among them many of them are also cook in the houses of their domestic service. But, none of the women belonging to Dalit community cook in those house! This again highlights the urban reality of caste practices.

The fourth reality bite directly places us in the domain of international politics and particularly UN. In 1992 the UN declared the year of Columbus – the five hundred years of the discovery of America. As UN declared the year, all over the world there were protests against this. For, Columbus symbolized the villain no.1 for the homicide of 500 million Blacks for the civilization of America. To respond to the protests of the people all over the world against the declaration 1992 as the Columbus Year, the UN on the following 1993 declared as the year of Indigenous People. Thus, the resistance and the struggle of the communities against all forms of discrimination, exploitation and Xenophobia attained Human rights for their dignity and opportunity.

It in these contexts that we come to the discussion of “Dalits and human rights: a perspective on internationalizing the dalit issues”. As we seen in the above reality bites any category and definition is not innocent or neutral. Only when we understand the politics of these categories and definitions we are able to do justice to them. Thus, they could help in making and unmaking the political possibilities for different communities and particularly the dalits. Let’s therefore try to unravel the various dimensions of the terms like dalits, human rights, etc.

The much used term ‘dalit’ cannot really represent the aspirations of the communities that suffer from the caste practices in India. Moreover the recent struggles of the madiga community across the country has opened the debate that we cannot simply put the term dalit to understand the various communities like Madiga, Arundathiar etc. Further, it may be incorrect, strictly speaking, to talk of dalit, if by that term we simply mean the binary2

of the modern, development, science and reason. It requires one to interrogate the two artifacts political modernity in India – secularism and the nation. The notion of secular politics gave way to the rightist politics in 80’s onwards. In this period and more significantly in the 90's new trends and theoretical developments in Social Sciences acquired respectability and popularity in the academia. Following Ambedkar’s theoretical positions as well as the subaltern perspectives, the neglected or the marginalised communities that were codified in social anthopological texts were made available in the

2 The term binary always places the burden of change on the exploited lot. Further it does not recognize the agency of the person who always resists any kind of domination. Further we just say that the dalit is the opposite of Brahmin, the Brahmin is absolved of his responsibility of injustice perpetuated through his/her adherence to caste system. For details see, Dominic & Robert, Binary opposition in our thinking: an analysis, Vichara Sahitya, Sahitya Academy, Bangalore, 1999, p. 6.

market for public consumption. (For instance, in kannada literature under the patron of Culture Department more than 28 texts on different dalit comunities were published in 90's and also Ambedkar writings were translated to Kannada audience. Similarly in other languages too these could be seen). In Western discourses on modernity and post-modernity added to the above debates on culture and communities. More importantly scientism, rationalism, progress, objectivity, liberalism.. etc came under severe attack. This shift was conceptualised as post-modernism. According to this discourse there was no possibility of an absolute grand theory that could capture the reality bites. Questions that were considered marginal or insignificant began to be taken seriously. The problems of the 'emotional universe' demanded new interpretations and representations. These led to the current debates on the politics of culture and identity.

Another significant factor that came to the forefront in India was the change in the political milieu. The rise of new social movements like the Narmada Bachao Andolan, the chipko movement, the fish workers struggles, the farmers movements, the dalit movements that were pluri in nature, the Adivasi movements, the women's movement, rights of the sexual minorities, and also the right wing politics threw up issues that could not be easily dealt with through the conventional 'economy-centred' developmental theories. These social movements are under-girded by and foster a philosophical body of literature that takes up questions about the nature, origin and futures of the identities being defended. Identity politics as a mode of organizing is intimately connected to the idea that some social groups are oppressed; that is, that one's identity as a woman or as a Dalit, for example, makes one peculiarly vulnerable to cultural imperialism (including stereotyping, erasure, or appropriation of one's group identity as discussed above), violence, exploitation, marginalization, and powerlessness. Identity politics starts from analyses of oppression to recommend, variously, the reclaiming, re-description, or transformation of previously stigmatized accounts of group membership. Rather than accepting the negative scripts offered by a dominant Sanskrit tradition about one's own inferiority, one transforms one's own sense of self and community, often through consciousness-raising.

Thus, Dalit politics embodies ‘difference’ that has been created by modernity. However, this difference was appropriated and hegemonised by the Sanskrit tradition as Colonial modernity made an entry in India. The tragedy was that Sanskrit Tradition was taken to be the foundation for modern cultural India. It was in this context that Ambedkar conceptualises modern India by bringing in the Buddhist tradition to the forefront. Thus, his efforts forecasted a different frame to both individual and the community to visualise their future course of action by utilising the available opportunity in liberal parliamentary system.

According to Kancha Ilaiah, “The Gandhian harijanisation process was also carried out through the state apparatus. The Nehruvian state did this through the process of brahminisation of the state structures which ensured that the so-called secular state became the private property of the Brahminical Castes. The recruitment boards, educational centres, judicial structures, the military and police agencies were consciously handed over to the brahminical forces. To appear to be secular, some marginalized

institutions were allowed to be headed by the Muslim elite, but they were coerced into accepting Brahmin hegemony.” To continue with Ilaiah’s critique, he goes on to argue that the “Nehruvian state was not a secular agency because in its everyday practices in the offices, Brahmanism alone was constructed as meritorious and it alone was shown to be India’s salvation” (Ilaiah, 1998:275). His critique then makes the most amaging move of distinguishing between two different modernities in India: The Hindu Nationalist or what we may understand as official – modernity and the indigenous modernity of the proto-scientific practices of the dalitbahujans and women, always ever innovating in the course of their productive work (Ilaiah, 1998:275).

In the above analytical frame work, it was long due that the dalit issue entered the international scenario. Though certainly during colonial times missionaries did their might to highlight the issue, but it was under the religious frame that was represented and not in terms of rights. Therefore, it is only in the 70’s that journals like Dalith Voice under the leadership of V.T.Rajashekar and Dalit movements in the country took up the campaign for the rights of the Dalits. Later, by the time of Durban conference in 2002 NGO’s joined in massively to internationalise the dalit issue.3 In 2001 there came a net work Called National Campaign for Dalith human rights. Similarly Indian Social Institute of Delhi and Bangalore to did its might in politicizing dalit issues.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is a body of independent experts responsible for monitoring states’ compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), ratified by India in 1968. It guarantees rights of non-discrimination on the basis of “race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.” In 1996 CERD concluded that the plight of Dalits falls squarely under the prohibition of descent-based discrimination. As a state party to ICERD, India is obligated to submit periodic reports detailing its implementation of rights guaranteed under the convention. During the review session CERD examines these reports and engages in constructive dialogue with the state party, addressing its concerns and offering recommendations. CERD uses supplementary information contained in non-governmental organization “shadow reports” to evaluate states’ reports. India’s report to CERD, eight years overdue, covers compliance with the convention from 1996 to 2006

3 For insance, The NCDHR Delegation consists of five persons, N. Paul Divakar, National Convener, and other member bodies - Ms. Ruth Manorama, Convener of the National Federation of Dalit Women, Mr. P.L. Mimroth convener of the Centre for the Dalit Human Rights, Rajasthan, Ms. S. Hajamma an activist among Devadasi women and working with the AP Jogini Vyvastha Vythireka Sanghatan and Dr. Sirivella Prasad, Director of Sakshi, Dalit Human Rights Watch, Hyderabad. These NGOs exposed the current and changing patters of the discrimination based on caste system in the country and condemned this in-human practice of Caste system, which affected millions around the world. The many constitutional provisions and laws that have been promulgated but are still large areas unimplemented and yet to be enforced. They recommended that the CERD name Caste-based discrimination as the primary form of descent-form discrimination and should effectively bring the Dalits under the purview of the committee. There were statements from Joint Statement from of 26 NGOs (International Dalit Solidarity Network), National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights, India, National Federation of Dalit Women, Sakshi-Dalit Human Rights Watch - Andhra Pradesh, Centre for Dalit Human Rights, Rajasthan, AP Jogini Vyvastha Vyathireka Porata Sanghatan, Lutheran World Federation-Geneva, International Movement Against discrimination and Racism - Japan, Buraku Liberation League, Nepalese Dalit NGO Federation, Human Development Organisation - Sri Lanka, National Dalit Commission (Nepal), RADDHO (Senegal ), SAFRAD- Somali Association, Timidria - Niger, Centre Minority Rights Development (Kenya)

yet does not contain a single mention of abuses against Dalits – abuses that India’s own governmental agencies have documented and verified.

Commission on Human Rights, on three categories of human rights violations: 1. Violations of human rights and international humanitarian law (also known as the

laws of war) in the context of the armed conflict. 2. Violations of democratic rights, such as the rights to freedom of expression, freedom

of association and freedom of peaceful assembly; and 3. Long-standing human rights concerns in Nepal, such as caste- and ethnicity-based

discrimination and gender-based discrimination.

The protection and promotion of human rights of members of Dalit communities and members of indigenous nationalities falls within each of these categories.

Moreover, today Dalith women’s voice too has come to the forefront to claim its distict position in human rights frame. The Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 saw for the first time international recognition given to the discrimination faced by Dalit women. Dalit women also played a crucial role in the World Conference Against Racism in South Africa in 2001, where Dalit   issues were brought to the fore of the international attention. Following the National Conference on Violence against Dalit Women in Delhi on 7 and 8 March 2006, Justitia et Pax Netherlands, Cordaid, and CMC as members of the Dalit Network Netherlands (DNN), in collaboration with the National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR) and other Dalit and Dalit Women's organisations, responded to the request of Dalit women and organised the International Conference on the Human Rights of Dalit Women on 20 and 21 November 2006 in The Hague, The Netherlands.

Dalit women today are not simply passive victims; the current mood is not one of mere acceptance, but one of determination to ‘transform their pain into power'.   In fact, they have been active throughout history, though often this has not been recognised and recorded. They have been actively involved in the anti-caste and anti-untouchability movements. Today they are the strongholds of the Dalit movements in thousands of South Asian villages, and are often at the forefront of struggles for basic human rights. They continue to play a critical role in the movements for land and livelihood rights and against untouchability, pointing to the potential for their self-emancipation, given adequate support. They are making their mark as independent thinkers and writers in the literary world by critiquing dominant caste ideologies. They participate today as visionary leaders in the local governance institution by asserting their rights. While they continue to struggle against structural discrimination and exclusion, violence and impunity are systematically unleashed by dominant castes to keep them in their place.

But Human rights frame too has its limitations. First and foremost to claim the rights the individual has to be educated and conscious that there is an international bidy called UN that guarantees his/her rights. But this does not address the community rights. The withdrawal of the welfare state, in as much as it is a withdrawal, from development responsibility with regard to the rich, neo-rich and dominant caste forces. A greater and

more responsible provision of equal opportunities to the Dalits must accompany such a withdrawal. In the mechanism of governance as well as in State institutions like education, health, communication, technology, markets. In this context that Human Rights organisations all over the world have till now focused on violations by the State and its institutions as human rights violations. That all other forms of atrocities have been relegated to the realm of civil strife by these bodies. Such a position is untenable. In India the state and civil society are hand in glove in the denial of rights to the Dalits and other indigenous people of the country. While state abets violations by the civil society it is forced to take sides with the dominant caste society in its favour.

Moreover, the middle class hegemony of the representation of human rights has to stop. Let the elites take the responsibility for the violation of dignity of the dalits in India.

Therefore, in conclusion I would say that Human rights are only a means rather than an end in the journey communities’ liberation and in their demand for social justice. All the same we are aware that the any social group cannot be pigeon holed into a category of collectivity. If it happens, then a process of essentialising and patenting acts as monopoly over the future possibilities.

Peace is inextricably linked to hunger and untouchability. Their existence means the absence of human rights. If these are not addressed the struggle becomes inevitable.

Peace should be understood in a human way in a broad social, political and economic way. Peace is threatened by unjust economic, social and political order, absence of democracy, environmental degradation and absence of human rights.

Bibliography:

Bibliography:

Khare R.S, 1998, Cultural diversity and Social Discontent, Sage Publications, New Delhi. Arjun Appa Durai, 1997, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalisation, Oxford

University Press, New Delhi.

Ghanshyam Shah(Ed), 2001, Dalith Identity and Politics, Sage Publications, New Delhi.

Surinder S. Jodka (Ed), 2001, Communities & Identities: Contemporary Discourses on Culture and Politics in India, Sage Publications, New Delhi.

Smriti Srinivas, 2004, Landscapes of Urban Memory: the sacred and the Civic in India's High-Tech city, Orient Long man, Hyderabad (A.P).

Vasavi.A.R, 1999, Harbingers of Rain: Land and Life in South India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Goldberg, David Theo. 1993. Racist Cultures: Philosophy and the Politics of Meaning. Oxford: Blackwell.

Rajat Ganguly & Macduff (Ed), 2003, Ethnic Conflict & Secessionism in South & Southeast Asia: Causes, Dynamics and Solutions, Sage Publications, New Delhi

Noam Chomsky, 1999, Making Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order, Madhyam Books,Delhi,

Sarah Nuttall and Carli Coetzee, 1998, Negotiating the Past: The making of Memory in South Africa, Oxford University Press, Cape town.

Henry Lefebvre, Tr., by Donald Nicholson Smith, 1991, The Production of Space, Blackwell, Uk.

Shelley Walia, 2000, Between Truth and History: Perspectives on Culture, Politics and Thoery, Sterling Publications, New Delhi.

Veena Das & Others (ed), 2002, Remaking a World: Violence, Social Suffering and Recovery, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Bhikhu Parekh, 1989, COLONIALISM, TRADITION AND REFORM: An analysis of Gandhi's Political Discourse, Sage Publications, New Delhi.

Sumit Sarkar, 1997, Writing Social History, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Nicolas Dirks, 2002, Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the making of Modern India, Oxford University Press, Delhi.

Panikar K.N, 1995, Culture, Ideology, Hegemony (Intellectuals and Social consciousness in colonial India), Tulika,, New Delhi.

Benedict Anderson, 1983, Imagined Communities (Reflections on the Origin and spread of Nationalism), Verso, London.

Uwe Flick, 1998, The Psychology of the Social, Cambridge University Press, USA.