Social ostracism against Dalits for refusing to dispose of dead animals

ISSUES: Police negligence; threats; caste system; administration of justice

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ________,

INDIA: Social ostracism against Dalits for refusing to dispose of dead animals  

Names of victims:
1. Kasubhai Amrabhai Solanki, Dalit resident of Nesda Village. The wheat crop in his small land had been burned and destroyed.
2. 12 families of the Dalit community residing in Nesda Village
Names of alleged perpetrators:
1. Tankara Station Police Sub-Inspector (PSI) R.B Rama
2. Tankara Station District Superintendent of Police (DSP), Mr. Solanki
3. Budarbhai Parsotanbhai Bimari, dominant-caste resident of Nesda Village
4. Rameshbhai Maganbhai Hadja, Sarpanch (village head) of Nesda Village
5. The Deputy Sarpanch of Nesda Village
6.  And the other members of the non-Dalit community in Nesda Village
Date of incident: May to October 15, 2008
Place of incident: Nesda Village, Tankara Taluka, Rajkot District

I am writing to express my concern about the case of caste-based discrimination reported by the Navsarjan Trust, a human rights NGO based in Gujarat. The case includes the implementation of a social boycott imposed by the entire non-Dalit community against all 12 Dalit families of Nesda Village, Tankara Taluka, Rajkot District. 

Allegedly, in May 2008, the Panchayat (village council) decided that government money granted with the intention of benefiting the entire community was going to be used tobuild roads in areas that excluded Dalit sections. They would actually be detrimental toDalits as it would cause water to run onto their dirt roads. The Dalits objected. The response was threats. When the Dalits went to the Tankara police station on May 2, 2008to file a complaint on the threats and the exclusion of government benefits, both the Police Sub-Inspector and the District Superintendent of Police reportedly denied their application. In response, the Dalits refused to dispose of dead animals, a duty assignedto their caste as per the traditions of "untouchability.” The non-Dalit community’s retaliation was to impose a total social boycott on August 5, 2008: the Dalits were forbidden from engaging in any economic or social interaction with non-Dalits, or from even setting foot in non-Dalit areas. Any non-Dalit that broke these terms would be subjected to the very same boycott.

I am also concerned about the manner in which the case was handled by the local authorities. Despite the numerous efforts of the Dalit community and Navsarjan workersto pressure the government over the course of two months, including a hunger fast, a rally and appeals to various authorities, the First Information Report (FIR) was allegedly not filed until September 29, 2008. Furthermore, the FIR does not include all applicable sections of the Schedule Castes/Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (SC/ST Act), the primary legislation intended to protect the Dalits. 

Furthermore, any relief or compensation given to the Dalit community by the government has been limited, temporary and arbitrary. On June 8, 2009 fifteen Dalits were given 100 days of work at 100 Indian Rupees (USD 2) a day under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) scheme. The Social Welfare Office (SWO) acknowledged a social boycott in Nesda from 15 September 2008 until 4 October 2009 –when there is no actual indication of a real end-date. Despite the ongoing hostile environment the Dalits must face, local police protection has only been provided for 15 days. All of these attempts at relieving the effects of the boycott are insufficient short-term solutions. They caused many Dalits to fear for their future after such aid measures expire. The case is still pending in court and continues to be delayed.  

The laws intended to protect the Dalits have been given no regard; they include the SC/ST Act and the Protection of Civil Right Act, 1955. These acts clearly demand that Dalits facing such treatment must be given relief, compensation and rehabilitation while the perpetrators, including the negligent public officers, must be punished. Furthermore, in 1968 India Ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.  This case directly undermines the credibility of India’s alleged commitment. I therefore request that:

1. An investigation be ordered by the Social Welfare Office on the social boycott, and the findings made public;
2. A FIR be immediately registered by a police officer of a rank not below that of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, including all relevant and proper sections of the SC/ST Act; 
3. A proper case on the social boycott be registered against all of the accused under the provisions of the SC/ST Act;
4. The boycott be officially recognized by the responsible authorities and the Social Welfare Department for as long as is necessary ;
5. The victims of these atrocities  given immediate relief, compensation, economic and social rehabilitation, as entitled under the SC/ST Act.

Yours sincerely,

----------------