Caste-based Discrimination

Lord Cashman Excerpts

Monday 11th July 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Cashman (Lab)]

My Lords, I congratulate the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, on securing this debate, and I pay tribute to the late Lord Avebury.

The aspect of the Government’s failure to make caste discrimination unlawful under statute that I find the most worrying is their 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”.

The sorely missed late Lord Avebury, who cared so much about protecting the Dalits, and the National Secular Society commissioned an expert legal opinion that confirmed that the UN was correct in asserting that our international human rights obligations require us to legislate on caste. The influential Equal Opportunities Review responded to the opinion by stating that,

“there seems no convincing justification for the Government not to agree to bring the prohibition on caste discrimination into force”.

The key points from the detailed and carefully referenced opinion include, first, that where discrimination has been identified, states are under,

“a positive obligation to take effective action”.

Further, it is stated that,

“criminal laws and other legal provisions prohibiting racial discrimination must also be effectively implemented”,

and that,

“where a State Party fails ... that State Party violates article 2.1(d) of the Convention”.

Further, the violation cannot be justified, either in principle or on the facts, by the necessity of either further evidence-gathering or consultation. Secondly, the obligation in Article 2.1 of the convention is described as being one which applies “without delay”. Thirdly, where the adopted laws,

“do not seem to respond fully to the requirements of the Convention”,

a state party will fail to uphold its obligations.

Therefore, the UK is obliged in international human rights law to legislate for caste discrimination. Its failure to do so since 2002, and certainly since 2010, is a violation of Article 2.1 and Article 6 of the convention. This could hardly be clearer. Your Lordships may be surprised to discover that in 2014 Her Majesty’s Government told the UN in the mid-term government report that they intend “to introduce legislation” under the Equality Act and that:

“A public consultation process on the detail of the prospective legislation is expected later in 2014”.

Yet by 2015, Caroline Dinenage MP, replying on behalf of the Government Equalities Office to a letter to the Prime Minister, told the National Secular Society that Her Majesty’s Government were of the view that,

“we are fully compliant with our international obligations in this area”.

She added that she had asked for the legal opinion that I have cited, which the Government have had for three years,

“to be given further consideration”.

What is the result of that consideration?

Case law falls far short of the obligations I have cited, even if it were unambiguous. Yet Ms Dinenage and the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Williams of Trafford, acknowledge that the Tirkey case on which they rely provides only “potential” protection—hence the former’s unconvincing reference to seeing,

“the development of case-law that provides protection against it as helpful”.

In summary, we are obligated to legislate and have told the UN that we will; yet instead of doing so, Her Majesty’s Government are asking us to believe that they hope someone will come forward to clarify the case law. That is entirely unacceptable. In conclusion, it is indefensible that the Government have shown so little concern to protect the victimised, and I ask on their behalf that the Government now comply with our international obligations. I also ask for an undertaking for the immediate insertion of caste into the Equality Act, which could be achieved by secondary legislation. I urge the Government to endorse the UN principles and guidelines on combating discrimination based on work and descent, and pay tribute to the outstanding work of the International Dalit Solidarity Network and the strides that it has made, particularly across other parts of the European Union.