Author Archives: Danni
Parliament debates failure of the UK Government to implement anti-caste based discrimination legislation
20th July 2016
Following an event held at the House of Lords by the APPG for Dalits and the APPG for Human Rights called “Dalit rights are Human Rights” in May 2016, Lord Harries called for a debate on 11 July 2016 in the House of Lords asking Her Majesty’s Government on the planed steps to implement anti-caste based discrimination legislation.
Lord Harries started the debate by clarifying that:
‘First, what we are concerned about is discrimination in the public sphere. The law is concerned with what happens in public. It exists to ensure that there is no discrimination in the areas of employment, education and the provision of public goods and services. Secondly, we are concerned with caste as a social phenomenon, which has affected all religions from the Indian subcontinent, including Christianity and Islam’.
He went on to summarise the steps since 2013 with regard to the caste discrimination legislation:
‘In July 2013 the Government introduced a timetable which set out a series of steps, including a public consultation, which was to lead to the implementation of this Act in the summer of 2015. As part of the process Ministers approved a feasibility study to be conducted into if and how it might be possible to estimate the extent of caste-based discrimination in Britain. A consortium conducted the research in the autumn of 2014.
The consortium’s report was due in November 2014, but it is yet to be published. My first question to the Minister therefore is: why has this research not been published? The question posed by the Government was clear enough. Is it or is it not possible to estimate the extent of caste-based discrimination in the UK? If it is possible, why has this not been carried out? If it is not possible, or if there is a downside to doing so, we need to hear the reason for that. In either case, there is no good reason to stop the process <…>. When we have raised these issues in the past, the Government have repeatedly cited the Tirkey v Chandhok employment tribunal case as a reason for non-implementation of the legislation so far. In that case the tribunal noted that caste-based discrimination can constitute unlawful race discrimination in certain contexts and that caste should be an aspect of race as defined by Section 9(1) of the Equality Act 2010. However, the judge made it clear that he was dealing only with the facts of that case and was not making any more general point about caste and the law.
I think the Minister, as well as the whole country would find it quite intolerable if issues of discrimination on the basis of gender, race or religion were left simply to employments tribunals with no statute law to back them up. May I ask the minister why discrimination on the grounds of caste should be regarded as different?’
Lord Cashman stated he found ‘the most worrying <…> [the government’s] casual disregard of the United Nations and our international treaty obligations. The 2012 UN Human Rights Council’s recommendation could not be clearer. It states: “Put in practice a national strategy to eliminate discrimination against caste, through the immediate adoption of the Equality Law of 2010 that prohibits such discrimination, in conformity with its international human rights obligations, including”, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination’s, “General Recommendation 29 and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racism”’.
Lord Lester QC ended his speech stating: ‘The current state of the law lacks legal certainty. There is no binding and authoritative legal precedent. That legal uncertainty violates the rule of law, and the government’s continuing inaction violates Parliamentary sovereignty’. He called ‘on the Minister to inform the House in her reply whether or not the government will now perform the duty cast upon it by Parliament, and, if not, what is their justification for refusing to do so’.
Both Lord Desai and Baroness Flather, Hindu Peers, spoke strongly and passionately on the need for legislation.
Lord Desai was clear: ‘It has been explained what the law is and what the Government ought to do. So why do they not do it? Obviously, there is a very strong lobby—let us call it the caste Hindu lobby—which is very powerful, prosperous and persistent. They have abandoned me but I know they would love to get me on their side.’
And from Baroness Flather: ‘Naturally, they are not going to say, “Oh, there is caste discrimination”. They are a powerful group of people. There are a lot of Hindu organisations and they have a lot of connections in Parliament, possibly in the House of Lords as well. We have to be aware that they have quite a lot of pull in this matter.’
Apart from the Minister, who did not give an opinion one way or the other, the only Peer to speak out against the legislation was the Conservative Hindu Peer, Lord Popat, who even went as far asking for the amendment to be repealed: ‘I urge the Government to bring forward legislation to repeal the amendment to the Equality Act 2010. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to implement. It is unnecessary, given that there is little hard evidence of caste discrimination. The amendment supports out-of-date notions of caste that belong in a different continent,’
Speaking on behalf of Her Majesty’s Opposition, Baroness Thornton did not mince her words: ‘We have seen the opposite of strong and swift. “Flabby and slow motion” would better describe the lack of activity since 2013. This lack of activity, as the noble Lord, Lord Deben, and others have said, shows a contempt for Parliament that is really unacceptable.’
The UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission in their briefing for the debate stated quite clearly
– without any room for doubt.
‘In our view, it is both necessary and desirable for the Government to implement section 9(5) of the Equality Act 2010 (the Act), in order to clarify that the Act’s prohibition of race discrimination and harassment includes protection against discrimination and harassment based on “caste”. ….We therefore consider that it remains necessary for Government to implement section 9(5) of the Act in order to provide legal clarity.’
Lord Deben outlined that: ‘In her first statement, she (Theresa May) reminded the Conservative Party that her first principle was to ensure that all people had a fair do in life. Can one possibly say that and yet exclude from the fair do in life those who happen to be Dalits? This is the first chance that a new Government have got to stand up and tell this House that they intend to obey the law’.
Baroness Williams of Trafford on behalf of the Government ended the debate saying: ‘I agree that this is an issue which the new Administration, led by the new Prime Minister, who herself was Minister for Women and Equalities in 2010-12, will need to consider afresh, and I am sure that they will.
A full transcript of the debate can be found here.
APPG for Dalits and the Parliamentary Human Rights Group on the 24th of May 2016 hosted a successful event at the Houses of Parliament titled “Dalit Rights are Human Rights”
19th July 2016
[ezcol_1half]
[/ezcol_1half]
[ezcol_1half_end]
The speakers at the event included Diya Sen Gupta, Satpal Muman, Santosh Dass, Clive Baldwin, Rania El Rajji, Aidan McQuade and Jin Kalkat.
The first part of the event overviewed the UK scene in relation to Dalits’ situation and anti-caste discrimination legislation. The event started with Meena Varma reading Jeremy Corbyn’s[/ezcol_1half_end]
message in which he stated that he is sad to step down from the APPG for Dalits Chair’s role but happy to pass it on to Yasmin Qureshi, and will continue supporting Dalits’ campaign.
Diya Sen Gupta gave an overview of anti-caste discrimination legislation progress and British case law. She highlighted that Equality Act 2010 prohibits direct and indirect discrimination and harassment. 2013 amendment added a statutory duty to include caste under race, yet no timeline was set. In 2014 the Equality and Human Rights Commission carried a public consultation, yet no publication of the consultation was made.
Mr. Justice Langstaff, the judge in Tirkey v Chandok caste was clear that his ‘focus has been on the appeal in this particular case, in its particular circumstances <..> not to resolve academic disputes, and establish more general propositions, of no direct relevance to the case in hand’. Therefore, the case is not a precedent for other caste-based discrimination cases, and as this type of process is expensive and discouraging, anti-caste discrimination legislation is very much needed. On the future of the legislation Ms Gupta added that government has no immediate plans to implement the legislation and it may not be exercised before April 2018, when the Sunset clause could come into play and the law may be repealed due to anti-legislation lobbying.
Kate Green MP stated that the reluctance to adopt the anti-caste discrimination legislation is politically driven and influenced by allies outside the UK. HMG has not honoured the timetable it introduced in 2013 despite efforts from Peers and MPs and responses to the PQs asked: How to respond to this ‘aggressive inertia’?
She suggested to: (1) point out to the government its disregard of this as a human rights issue, thus weakening the government’s reputation; (2) making it very clear to ordinary families affected by caste what it would mean for them and emphasising that their culture and family life would not be affected; and (3) advance the argument for anti-caste based discrimination legislation by going back to the moral principle (statement) that this form of discrimination is not acceptable and statute is extremely helpful to secure human rights and protect people against discrimination. Human rights should not be subordinate to short term political gain. She suggested that the campaign should focus on specific strategies and become louder.
A statement from the audience (Keith Porteous Wood) highlighted that under the last Universal Periodic Review (UPR) the UN recommendations included words like “obligation” in relation to the anti-caste discrimination legislation and the UK representatives agreed to it. Hence now within the UN the UK looks bad.
Satpal Muman said he was representing the community’s perspective and expressed his disappointment with the lack of HMG’s interest and stated he is losing his confidence in the government. He ensured that he continues to campaign and write to government officials but sees no light at the end of the tunnel. In his view the opposition to caste legislation undermines community cohesion and concluded by saying that there should be no room for caste-based discrimination in this country where we have “better rights”.
Santosh Dass stated that Indians coming to the UK bring their culture and practices with them hence there is a need for legal protection against caste-based discrimination to protect Dalits in the UK.
Baroness Flather suggested that the issue is out of people’s sight and everyone should speak to their MPs and create Dalit specific organisations. She has recirculated the EHRC reports which do have very specific pro-legislation recommendations.
We need to marshal friends in both Houses – Hindu organisations have been well organised and mobilised – now is the time to agitate. Look at the Sikh Gurudwaras that have been built on caste lines.
Jin Kalkat spoke about his journey and caste discrimination he experienced in the UK. As a result of caste-based discrimination he described feeling upset, hurt and less than a human, no longer safe. He also said he started feeling as an outsider and felt this might lead to radicalisation of an individual. He concluded by asking a question: if there is no respect for human rights in the UK how can we promote it elsewhere?
The second part of the event looked at caste discrimination globally.
Clive Baldwin highlighted that CERD is an international law prohibiting discrimination and recently celebrated its 50 years anniversary. He stated that India has good laws in place, including prohibition of manual scavenging, yet this inhumane practice still exists. Nepal has also made an extreme transition over the past decade, yet there is a political dismissal of discrimination. He concluded that whilst there is good evidence of international law being translated into domestic laws an issue of implementation remains.
Rania El Rajji spoke about caste discrimination in Yemen and the situation of Muhamasheen (“marginalised ones”) people, also known as Al Akhdam, who are at the bottom of the caste system. She highlighted that in March 2015 when the conflict erupted in Yemen, the Muhamasheen ended up at the front of the conflict; yet with very restricted access to humanitarian assistance. She concluded that although normally war brings communities together, the MRG report “Even war discriminates” highlights that Muhamasheen in Yemen are by-passed and discriminated against during the conflict in accessing even the basic goods.
Aidan McQuade started by saying that a failure to recognise caste in the UK is a sign of weak leadership. He highlighted that those enslaved come from discriminated groups. As Ambedkar pointed out, caste restricts opportunities, and instead offers division of labour and economic injustice. Aidan reiterated that law can counteract prejudice. He finished by saying that for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office human rights are no longer a priority but trade deals are, which leaves very little incentive for other states, like Nepal or India, to change. To address human rights violations and discrimination politicians have to be prepared to be unpopular.
The audience was invited to suggest steps to take in moving forward. Those included submitting shadow reports for the UK review in August 2016 under the CERD, using the EHRC’s reports as a reference, educating people on caste-based discrimination and arranging a follow up APPG meeting.
As a result of this meeting Lord Harries of Pentregarth later proposed a debate on caste-based discrimination at the House of Lords, which took place on the 11th of July 2016.
Big thank you to Methodist Women in Britain
24th May 2016
On Saturday, 21 May 2016, Methodist Central Hall in London hosted a wonderful concert organised by the Methodist Women in Britain. The event was opened by Revd Tony Miles of Methodist Central Hall, Westminster. Linda Crossley, the former President and current Vice President of Methodist Women in Britain welcomed some honoured guests and introduced the speakers.
[ezcol_1half] The honoured guests included Kasta Dip, Director of India Peace Centre in Nagpur and Revd David Haslam MBE, founder of the Dalit Solidarity Network UK and the Churches’ Dalit Support Group, and Meena Varma the Director of the Dalit Solidarity Network UK, which had provided much of the information contained in the Dalit Resource Pack.
The speakers included Revd Meena Bhati and Ms Priya Masih, both representing the Church of North India and Steve Pearce, Partnership [/ezcol_1half] [ezcol_1half_end]
[/ezcol_1half_end]
Coordinator, Asia and the Pacific, The Methodist Church.
DSN-UK would like to thank Methodist Women in Britain for its significant efforts in raising our profile, Dalit struggle in India and the UK, and encouraging everyone at the concert to support our work.
For more information – including on the wonderful Paul Field and Garth Hewitt whose songs and music made the concert so memorable, please see Methodist Women in Britain leaflet, which also highlights their key achievements over the past five years.
Tributes to Dr Ambedkar on his 125th birth anniversary
27th April 2016
This April a range of events and ceremonies have been organised around the world to celebrate Dr Ambedkar’s 125th birthday.
The Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations in New York hosted a Special Event at the UN Headquarters on 16 April with the title ‘Combating Inequalities for the Achievement of SDGs’.
UNDP Administrator and Chair of the United Nations Development Group, Ms. Helen Clarke, who is among the candidates for the post as the next UN Secretary General, delivered the key note speech wherein she commemorated the legacy of Dr. Ambedkar and stressed the relevance of his vision and ideals for the realization of the Sustainable Development Agenda, adopted by the UNGA last September.
- Please see the official press release from the Mission’s own webpage.
- The full event can be streamed from UNTV via the following link.
On April 14th UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues Ms. Rita Iszák-Ndiaye also made a speech to mark the event.
DSN-UK trustee and Vice Chair, Corinne Lennox, wrote a wonderful tribute celebrating Dr Ambedkar, called ‘Dr Ambedkar: a visionary for human rights’.
There was also a range of celebratory events organised by India’s representations around the world, including in Geneva, Copenhagen, Beijing, Indonesia, Turkmenistan, Brunei and Guatemala.
Dalit Solidarity Network UK, together with other activists advocating for Dalits rights, celebrated Dr Ambedkar’s 125 birthday at a dedicated event at the House of Lords on 14 April.
Lord Harries of Pentregarth opened the event by requesting a minutes silence to honour Lord Avebury, a champion of Dalit Rights who sadly passed away on 14 February 2016.
[ezcol_1half]
Dr Ambedkar
[/ezcol_1half]
[ezcol_1half_end]
Dr Annapurna Waughray, reader in Human Rights Law at Manchester Metropolitan University and Dr David Keane, associate professor in International Human Rights Law at Middlesex University started the panel discussion by saying that on 13 April Dr Ambedkar received the first official recognition at the UN level in New York and was commemorated by a panel discussion on ‘Combating Inequalities for the Achievement of SDGs’. In their presentation both highlighted the importance of
[/ezcol_1half_end]
Dr Ambedkar’s work for Dalits and internationalisation of caste discrimination.
Jens Lerche, reader in agrarian and labour studies at SOAS, noted that DR Ambedkar was fighting against inequality and poverty, and despite the high level of economic growth in India a large number of people in the country, especially Dalits and Adivasis, continue living in poverty, work in exploitative industries and perform least attractive jobs. He highlighted that Dalits and Adivasis experience historic discrimination and inequalities in power, and regardless of affirmative action in education system caste discrimination prevails in the sector.
Murali Shanmugavelan, researcher at SOAS, stated that to achieve equality and non-discrimination caste hierarchy should be rejected without a compromise, including a rejection of Hindu social order. He also suggested that India should recognise caste as a primary lens to address discrimination and inequality in the country.
Dr. Virander Paul, Deputy High Commissioner for India in London, gave a summary of events he attended on the day to celebrate Dr Ambedkar’s 125 birth anniversary and indicated that the discussion at this event, celebrating Dr Ambedkar and what he stood for, was most detailed.
Baroness Flather added that discrimination based on caste can be forbidden under the British laws and urged an ongoing campaign for anti-caste discrimination legislation.
Mr Ravi Kumar, general secretary of Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance, ended the panel by reminding everyone that Dr Ambedkar stood for everyone, not just for Dalits.
Lord Harries summarised the situation of anti-caste discrimination legislation in the UK. He highlighted some of the challenges, such as the government refusing to publish the findings of consultation on caste discrimination in the UK and the recent attempts to block the legislation.
Some of the questions and comments from the audience included worries that caste legislation will reach the sunset clause deadline and the process will have to restart. Everyone was encouraged to ensure that their MPs, especially those with big Hindu communities, know where we stand. A question was raised on the use and purpose of Dr Ambedkar’s house in London, which was not decided on yet. And a final question asked why there is no treaty on caste discrimination, like there is one on apartheid. To this Dr Keane answered that not all pressing issues get an UN treaty, including Indigenous and Minorities, although there is a Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues.
DSN-UK tribute and thanks to the much beloved Lord Eric Avebury
16th February 2016
We all have our own personal and professional memories of the much beloved Lord Eric Avebury. The pictures below indicate a time of triumph and celebration, with Eric at its heart and centre.
It was 23 April 2013, St George’s Day – the day that commemorates the time when one man took on the mighty dragon. And so too in 2013, when the little known Dalit campaign to address caste discrimination in the UK took its protest to the streets and Parliament Square.
We took on the might of the Her Majesty’s Government who had steadfastly refused to activate a clause in the Equality Act that would provide legal protection for victims of caste discrimination – in the same way that it did for race, religion, gender, transgender and other protected characteristics.
Members of CasteWatch UK, Dalit Solidarity Network UK, Voice of Dalit International, Federation of Ambedkarite Buddhist Organisations UK, Central Valmik Sabha UK, Indian Christian Concern and Dr Ambedkar Memorial Committee GB, as well as scores of regional and community organisations met at the rally on Tuesday 23 April. The date will now live in all our memories forever.
The carnival atmosphere was evident as we heard at 2.30pm that the UK Government had laid down their amendment to use the Ministerial power to trigger the legislation in the Equality Act 2010 to outlaw discrimination on the basis of caste, providing much needed legal protection to victims of caste discrimination in the UK.
Amendments tabled by the then Business Secretary Vince Cable in the House of Commons stated that the Equality Act will “provide for caste to be an aspect of race”.
The government had conceded on the principle and tabled an amendment, which requires the Secretary of State to bring forward regulations to include Caste as an aspect of Race (under Section 9(5) of the Equality Act) within two months of enactment of the Enterprise Regulatory and Reform Bill. The Bill was enacted 2 days after the protest on 25 April 2013.
Lord Avebury had joined the ‘protesters’ in Parliament Square before the news had filtered through. The protest then became a time to celebrate.
Lord Avebury said’ This is all the more terrific for being totally unexpected!’
Eric and other members of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Dalits were so key to this victory. Without their unerring support and commitment we would never have seen this day.
Sadly our regret is that Eric passed away before the current Government had addressed many of Eric’s own Parliamentary Questions on the implementation of the caste legislation – which was agreed by Parliament and across all parties now shockingly nearly 3 years ago.
We will keep fighting for the will of Parliament not to be ignored and for the caste legislation to be implemented. Eric would expect nothing less.
We will miss him greatly.
Meena Varma
Director
Dalit Solidarity Network UK
DSN-UK and READ share their first-hand experience and knowledge of debt bondage in India with a Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequence
10th February 2016
[ezcol_1half]
Special Rapporteur, Urmila Bhoola
[/ezcol_1half]
[ezcol_1half_end]
This September, Urmila Bhoola, Special Rapporteur (SR) on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences, will present to the Human Rights Council a thematic report on debt bondage. As a result, she invited various stakeholders such as international and regional organisations, national human rights institutions, UN agencies, non-governmental organisations, research institutions and businesses to complete a questionnaire on debt bondage practices.
[/ezcol_1half_end]
The International Labour Organisation’s report ILO Global Estimate of Forced Labour 2012 estimates that 20.9 million people are victims of forced labour. In 2009 annual report SR on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences stated that bonded labour is a form of slavery and one of ‘the most traditional and widespread forms of forced labour’. Article 1 of the Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery defines debt bondage or bonded labour as ‘the status or condition arising from a pledge by a debtor of his personal services or those of a person under his control as security for a debt, if the value of those services as reasonably assessed is not applied towards the liquidation of the debt or the length and nature of those services are not respectively limited and defined’.
Information gathered on bonded labour by the SR in 2009 indicates that the practice occurs when ‘a person offers his/her labour services in exchange for the repayment of a debt’ and gets coerced into working in exploitative conditions with long working hours, low wages, no days off, etc. SR identified a number of root causes: first, poverty plays a crucial role because people have no other way of subsisting; second, isolations, lack of guidance, and lack of contract with institutions and authorities create extremely vulnerable situation, which facilitates exploitation and forced labour; third, low levels of education of the concerned population puts them in a vulnerable situation where they are not able to understand the nature of their debts, control them in any way or understand their rights as workers, not able to negotiate minimum wages, maximum daily work hours, holidays, frequency of pay and methods of payment; fourth, bonded labourers are from most socially excluded groups who suffer additionally from discrimination and political disenfranchisement; and fifth, populations that have limited access to land for their traditional income-generating activities are more likely to become bonded labourers.
ILO research also indicated a clear link between long-standing patterns of discrimination and forced labour, especially in India where the overwhelming majority of bonded labour victims are from Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
[ezcol_1half]
[/ezcol_1half] [ezcol_1half_end]
[/ezcol_1half_end]In 2013 Dalit Solidarity Network UK funded by TRAID (Textile Recycling for Aid and Development) started working in partnership with Rights Education and Development Centre (READ) to End the Sumangali Scheme in South India, where textile and garment products are made for big brands and retailers by girls and young women from low caste backgrounds under exploitative conditions. Girls and young women are recruited by brokers to join the so-called ‘Sumangali Thittam’ or ‘Marriage Scheme’, promised they would receive a considerable amount of money at the end of three to five years of employment.
This exploitative scheme is tantamount to bonded labour because employers withhold part of the workers’ wages until the end of the ‘contract’. Workers are severely restricted in their freedom of movement and privacy. The majority of the workers are Dalit (outcaste) girls younger than 18, from poor families who are lured in with the promises of a decent wage and the lump sum payment upon completion of the contract that may be used for their dowry.
This January DSN-UK and READ completed the Special Rapporteur’s questionnaire on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences questionnaire on bonded labour, sharing their first-hand experience and knowledge of the Sumangali Scheme. The submission will be published on the website of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences and included in the thematic report on debt bondage.
DSN-UK will also publish the completed questionnaire on our website once it has been made public by the Special Rapporteur.
DSN-UK submission to the International Development Select Committee inquiry on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) highlights the absence of attention to caste-based discrimination
3rd February 2016
[ezcol_2third]
In the 5th oral evidence session for the inquiry into the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), on 11 January 2016, the International Development Committee questioned Secretary of State for International Development, Justine Greening MP. She reported on the Government’s progress and summarised its approach towards implementation of the SDGs based on received oral evidence.
In September 2015 the UN Member States formally accepted SDGs, replacing more narrow Millennium Development Gaols, which were signed in 2000 and expired at the end of 2015. SDGs include 17 universal measurable goals, 169 targets and yet to be agreed indicators, that should shape global and national political agendas of developed and developing countries until 2030. The new SDGs intend to reduce inequality and bring transformative change that should ‘leave no one behind’.
[/ezcol_2third]
[ezcol_1third_end]
Justine Greening MP, Picture: Russell Watkins/DFID
[/ezcol_1third_end]
World leaders, including UK Prime Minister David Cameron, in September 2015 pledged a commitment to achieving them. Following this, the International Development Committee launched an inquiry into how SDGs should be implemented in the UK and invited written submissions from interested organisations and individuals.
DSN-UK made a joint submission with Asia Dalit Rights Forum, highlighting that although the SDGs are formulated to ensure that ‘no one is left behind’, caste-based discrimination was excluded from the final draft. The framework needs to take into consideration the world’s most vulnerable people, including Dalits, who are disproportionally affected by intergenerational poverty and hierarchical exclusion, preventing them from accessing justice and development programmes. The submission made recommendations to include caste-based exclusion to goals 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 17, and use disaggregated data, including caste, in the SDGs follow-up and monitoring process.
The Chair of the International Development Select Committee, Stephen Twigg MP, emphasised during the 5th session, some of the challenges that Dalits and other repressed groups like LGBT people in Uganda face, and asked the Secretary of State for International Development ‘None of this is easy. Where it can be particularly difficult is when there is a strong social norm against a minority….How do you best take that forward in the context of development and humanitarian assistance, where there is a set of universal rights to which countries are signed up and yet, in some of the countries that we are rightly supporting, there are strong social norms against religious or sexual minorities in those countries’.
Justine Greening MP stated that Department for International Development (DFID) works at grassroots level until there is some momentum. She also highlighted the need for disaggregated data to better understand what the DFID programmes are delivering.
However, the Government has no plans to introduce a national action plan or set a taskforce to implement the SDGs but rather will include some of the relevant goals into the existing priorities. Sadly this might result not only in a missed opportunity to address caste-based discrimination in the UK but also in the DFID programmes overseas.
The joint DSN-UK and the ADRF submission is also available in a pdf format here.
Thank you
6th January 2016
We would like to thank Mrs Wilson for her generous donation to DSN-UK. It is the first donation received this year!
It will make an enormous difference to our work.
Human rights discussions between PM Cameron and PM Modi
21st December 2015
Just before India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited the UK in November this year Rob Marris MP wrote to the UK Prime Minister Mr David Cameron, highlighting some of the human rights concerns in India, including the treatment of Dalits. The letter can be accessed here.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office replied stating that Prime Minister David Cameron did discuss human rights with Prime Minister Modi during his visit and the FCO will ‘continue to work collaboratively with the Indian government on a range of important issues, including the promotion and protection of human rights’. A full reply can be found here.
Members of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Dalits continue to raise the issue of caste discrimination to Her Majesty’s Government
21st December 2015
Following the Lord Harries of Pentregarth Parliamentary question on the assessment of human rights situation in India the House of Lords debated the situation on 7 December 2015. The debate highlighted issues of access to justice for Dalits, violence against women and treatment of minorities. The full transcript of the debate is available here.
To read all Parliamentary questions and answers submitted in relation to caste discrimination both in the UK and overseas in this parliamentary session please click here.