Power Politics, Professionalism, and Patron–Client Relationships in Human Rights Advocacy: How Dalit Rights became Human Rights

Abstract

Under what conditions does international advocacy contribute to the establishment of new human rights? This article explores the question by examining the advocacy experience of the Dalits, India's ‘Untouchables’, at the United Nations. After decades of unyielding pleading, starting in 1996 a number of developments led to the recognition of caste discrimination as a human rights abuse at the UN. The article narrates the process by examining three intriguing puzzles that the existing literature has left unaddressed. To this purpose, it looks at the interactions between the concerned actors as patron–client relationships structured by professionalism or power politics. The findings downplay the importance of organizational factors, highlight the competitive dynamics of the ‘NGO community’, and suggest two different pathways advocacy groups may follow to achieve recognition of new human rights.

¿Bajo qué condiciones contribuye la promoción internacional al establecimiento de los nuevos derechos humanos? Este artículo explora el planteamiento mediante la experiencia de la defensa de los Dalits, los ‘intocables’ de la India, en las Naciones Unidas. Después de décadas de súplicas inquebrantables que iniciaron en 1996, una serie de hechos condujo al reconocimiento de la discriminación de castas, como un abuso de los derechos humanos en las Naciones Unidas. El artículo narra el proceso analizando tres intrigantes enigmas que la literatura existente había dejado sin atender. Para este propósito, el artículo observa las interacciones estructuradas por profesionalismo o poder político entre los actores interesados. Los hallazgos restan importancia a los factores de organización, subrayan la dinámica competitiva de la ‘comunidad ONG’, y sugiere que dos vías diferentes de grupos de defensa, logren el reconocimiento de nuevos derechos humanos.

国际支持在什么条件下有助于新人权的建立？本文通过考察达利特人即印度的“不可触者或贱民阶层”在联合国的游说历程，对这一问题进行了探讨。自1996年开始，经过十余年不屈的申诉，承认种姓歧视制度是对人权的侵害这一点在联合国逐渐得到认同。本文通过研究现有文献未能解决的三个谜团，对这一过程进行了解释。为此，本文对职业化或权力政治所建构的庇护关系双方的互动进行分析。研究发现，组织因素的重要性下降，“非政府组织共同体”的竞争态势得到强调，同时指出了倡导团体实现新人权认同可能遵循的两条不同路径。

Keywords:

• human rights
• international advocacy
• Dalits

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Faculty members and friends from CSSS Calcutta, especially Kamalika Mukherjee and Deepak Aryal, for their warm hospitality and generous support in 2007–2008.

Notes

Even though the scope of the word is in constant expansion, in general Dalits is the political identity of the part of the Indian population designated by the Indian Constitution as Scheduled Castes and formerly known as Untouchables. According to a usual representation, the traditional ‘caste system’ divided Hindus into occupational and status groups; society was seen as made up of four varnas or strata reflecting a broad division of labor along with a ritual order of purity-pollution, with the Priests at the top, followed by the Warriors and Merchants, and with the Servants at the bottom. The Hindus that did not belong to any of the four varnas were the ‘Untouchables’. De jure, they were outside the varna system, but de facto they participated in it below the Servants. Traditionally, they performed the occupations perceived as the most polluting, like carrying dead animals, working leather, or sweeping. Untouchables were also associated with ‘polluting’ habits, like eating beef (and in more recent times, the consumption of alcoholic drinks). As ritual pollution was believed to be transmissible—like certain diseases—through bodily contact, the polluted ‘outcastes’ were considered Untouchables. A number of traditional restrictions on inter-caste interaction followed, like Untouchables' prohibition against using the same water source as varna Hindus or varna Hindus' prohibition against coming into contact with Untouchables. These traditional restrictions are incompatible with the Indian Constitution and other provisions passed after Independence.

  As a measure of historical compensatory justice, the Indian Constitution allows for policies of ‘affirmative action’ in favor of the Untouchables. The implemented policies entitle them to preferential access to places in educational institutions and jobs in the public sector. ‘Scheduled Castes’ is the name the Constitution accords to the former Untouchables, and their right to ‘reservations’ refers to their preferential status in access to education and public employment. Dalits is the self-attributed term that broadly designates in the political arena the same segment of the Indian population that the Constitution calls Scheduled Castes.

In this regard, I follow Sidney Tarrow's observation that coalition constitutes ‘a more precise term’ than network. Coalitions represent ‘means-oriented arrangements that permit distinct organizational entities to pool resources in order to effect change’ (Tarrow, 2005, p. 164).

Long overdue reports like India's in 1996 follow a cursory procedure.

CERD 26th No. 18 A/8418 (1971), 28TH No. 18 A/9018 (1973), 30th No. 18 A/10018 (1975), A/33/18 (1978), A/34/18 (1979), A/36/18 (1981), A/38/18 (1983), A/42/18 (1987).

Fourteenth periodic reports of States parties due in 1996: India, CERD/C/299/Add.3 (1996).

The full name of the bill is ‘The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989’.

First (1992–1993), Second (1993–1994), and Third (1994–1995) reports of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

‘Accomplishments’, website of the Ambedkar Center for Justice and Peace, http://www.ambedkar.net/.

CERD A/51/18 (1996).

Report by the Ambedkar Center for Justice and Peace dated 17 July 1996, cf. Summary record of the 1162nd meeting: India, Malta. 13/08/96, CERD/C/SR.1162.

CERD/C/SR.949, During that session a member of the Committee had objected that Somalia's case fell outside the scope of the Convention, pointing out that the concerned groups were not racially or ethnically distinguishable, since they were not different in phenotype, spoke the same language, and practiced the same religion. Another member replied that this posed no hindrance to the Committee's jurisdiction, since those groups were in fact distinguishable by descent (CERD/C/SR. 948). The remark was based on the prevalent understanding that Somalia's civil war was a conflict between clans united by common ethnicity but separated as watertight endogamous groups. Cf. Besteman (1996).

Namely, General Assembly resolution 52/111 of 12 December 1997.

Report of the Bellagio Consultation on the UN World Conference against Racism, International Human Rights Law Group, January 2000.

Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Fifty-second session, Summary Record of the 8th meeting, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/SR.8.

Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Fifty-second session, Resolution on discrimination based on occupation and descent (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/L.14).

Although the main theme was ‘Migrants and trafficking in persons with particular reference to women and children’, the Dalit advocates did not spare efforts to have their voice heard. A joint NGO statement thus called ‘to give full consideration to the elimination of caste as an insidious and deeply entrenched form of discrimination on the basis of work and descent’, and indeed some experts took up the issue in their interventions. Report of the Asian-Pacific regional seminar of experts on migrants and trafficking in persons with particular reference to women and children, A/CONF.189/PC.2/3.

Report of the Asian Preparatory Meeting, A/CONF.189/PC.2/9.

Preparatory Committee, Report of the Preparatory Committee on its second session, A/CONF.189/PC.2/30.

World Conference against Racism, Draft Programme of Action, A/CONF.189/5.

World Conference against Racism, Draft Programme of Action, A/CONF.189/PC.3/8/ Corr.1.

The INGO International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), one of the allies of the Dalits in the Durban process, argues that ‘it later came to the public knowledge that the withdrawal was due to the strong pressure from India and the United States on Bern.’ I thank one of the anonymous reviewers for drawing my attention to this version of the facts. Source: http://www.imadr.org/en/pdf/World%20Conference%20against%20Racism.pdf.

Instead, the organ contented itself to reiterate the less specific call it had made the previous year to consider debt bondage in its connection with discrimination based on race or descent. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Fifty-third session, Summary Record of the 16th meeting, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2001/SR.16.

WCAR NGO Declaration, Advocacy Materials and Documents (CD produced by the National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights).

CERD/C/SR.1457 and 1458 (2001).

CERD/C/SR.1444 (2001).

CERD/C/SR.1531.

CERD, General Recommendation XXIX, Article 1, paragraph 1 of the Convention (Descent), 01/11/2002.

Black Paper: Broken Promises and Dalits Betrayed, National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights, 1999.

Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Fifty-fourth session, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/L.42.

Expanded working paper by Mr Asbjørn Eide and Mr Yozo Yokota on the topic of discrimination based on work and descent, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2004/31.

‘Caste-based discrimination and analogous forms of inherited social exclusion: Discrimination based on work and descent’, Joint NGO written statement, Human Rights Council, seventh session, 3–28 March 2008.

For a partially different approach, cf. Clifford (2008).