Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Minority Report

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Minority Report

    MINORITY REPORT
    Bipin Adhikari [email protected]

    E Kantipur
    2009-07-02 00:30:28

    The report of the Constituent Assembly (CA) Committee on the Protection
    of Rights and Freedoms of Minority and Marginalized Communities, which
    is now under discussion at the plenary session of the House, captures
    many of the current requirements under its terms of reference. The
    report contains a concept paper and a preliminary draft as much as
    they relate with the minority rights issues to be covered by the new
    constitution to be drafted by the unicameral House.

    The report deals not only with normal individual rights as applied to
    members of ethnic, class, religious, linguistic or sexual minorities,
    but also collective rights accorded to minority groups by virtue of
    their minority status. Marginalized groups are also carefully brought
    within the fold. In its entirety, it covers protection of existence,
    protection from discrimination, protection and promotion of identity,
    and participation in political life. But then it also happens to
    contain a very controversial provision while dealing with the right
    to equality.

    As a proviso to the general rule which guarantees that the state
    shall not discriminate between people on the basis of ethnicity,
    religion and so on, it also goes on maintaining that the state shall
    provide by law special measures on the basis of positive discrimination
    along with compensation for the persecution rendered in the past for
    the protection, development and empowerment of the communities and
    classes left behind in economic, social, political and educational
    areas and in the area of health (emphasis added).

    An identical provision has been proposed also in the context of racial
    discrimination and misconduct of "untouchability" and religious and
    personal persecution. Here, too, the state has been obliged to provide
    compensation for the discrimination, misconduct and persecution,
    in addition to the measure of proportional representation in state
    institutions. Firstly, the committee intends to treat the first
    set of communities differently than the second set of communities,
    yet both these provisions maintain that Nepal has been a persecuting
    state - a grave charge that remains to be substantiated on explicit
    grounds. Secondly, it defines discrimination associated with the
    untouchability stigma as racial.

    At the outset, it must be emphasized that comparative constitutional
    law has developed a rich discourse over the last half century or
    so on how the state might respond in varying ways to the claims
    concerning historical injustices. There are different models of
    reverse discrimination or affirmative action, which could be applied
    to promote equal opportunity and set the balance right. They focus on
    measures ranging from employment and education to public contracting
    and health programmes. The drive behind them are two-fold: to maximize
    diversity in all levels of society, along with its presumed benefits,
    and to redress perceived disadvantages due to overt, institutional
    or involuntary discrimination.

    The intention here, as far as the report of the committee is concerned,
    seems to be apparently different. Going beyond the historical wrongs,
    it talks about "persecution", which in general may imply the systematic
    mistreatment of a community by another community through murderous
    activities and efforts of extermination, enslavement, deportation
    or maltreatment on political, racial or religious grounds. The most
    common forms of persecution are religious, ethnic and political,
    though there is naturally some overlap between these terms. In any
    case, the term "persecution" implies deeply traumatic injustices.

    Without generalizing too much, certain apparent characteristics of
    persecution could easily be established. When the committee uses the
    term, (a) It assumes in the first place that Nepal has a history
    of persecution (b) That the persecutors have acted with the power
    of the state in the job of persecution (c) That this went on for a
    long time of history and (d) Resulted in continuous deprivation of
    some groups, which needs to be remedied by offering compensation by
    the state. It also implies that affirmative actions or measures of
    positive discrimination are not enough to redeem them.

    In the given framework, the "state" must be defined as persecutor,
    and compensation must be paid by it as the culprit of history. It
    goes without saying that the state (persecutor) here means the Khas
    community, especially Bahuns and Chhetris, who are now implicated
    for capturing this country for long. This is the community that
    produced King Prithvi Narayan Shah, who unified the country in the
    latter half of the 18th century and allegedly started the process of
    persecution through his new establishment. Linked with this is the
    argument that Khasas are the invaders while the other communities
    are the victims. The committee has not offered the basis on which
    this conclusion has been grounded.

    The world definitely has a history of systematic mistreatment of groups
    due to their religious affiliation - resulting in the persecution and
    killing of millions. Atheists have experienced persecution throughout
    history. In the two thousand years of the Christian faith, about 70
    million believers have been killed for their inability to turn back
    from their religion. The persecution of Jews occurred many times
    in Jewish history. Hindus have been historically persecuted during
    Islamic rule on the South Asian subcontinent. The persecution of many
    ethnic groups, not to mention ethnic Germans and albinos, are the
    most scandalous episodes in world history. These are not stories of
    isolated examples, but of unrelenting persecution over a long period
    of time. But do they have parallels in Nepal?

    During 1915-20, when Ismail Anwar was the ruler of Turkey, 12 lakh
    Armenians, almost 8 lakh Greeks and 5 lakh Assyrians were eliminated
    because of ethnic reasons. It is said that during the reign of Chairman
    Mao Tse-tung of the Chinese Communist Party, more than seven million
    people were killed due to political and ethnic reasons. During 1932-39,
    Joseph Stalin eliminated 2.3 million people from different parts of
    the Soviet Union.

    Adolf Hitler of Germany was by all means the worst persecutor. He
    killed six million Jews to establish what he described as Nazism
    just seven decade ago. During 1941-44, almost 50 million people were
    killed in Japan. Cambodia's Pol Pot regime of 1975-79 and of North
    Korea's Kim Il Sung's regime between 1946-1994 were the other worst
    scenarios. All these examples can help explain what persecution is,
    and at what time the state must be identified with the persecuting
    rulers or their communities.

    Even among the cases softer than them, treating the problems of Nepal
    on a par with the treatment of indigenous peoples, such as the Indians
    and Inuits in Canada, the Aboriginal people of Australia, the Maoris
    of New Zealand, the Sami of Scandinavia, the Inuits of Greenland and
    the Indian tribes of the United States cannot be prudent. There are
    many such examples, where natives suffered because of persecution
    rendered by outsiders who settled in the country.

    Unfortunately, Nepal as a persecuting state does not fit anywhere. The
    committee report must then be discussed why the state should be scolded
    for grave injustices and persecution that it has not committed against
    anybody. And if the purpose is only to create space for further
    affirmative action and positive discrimination measures for those
    who deserve them, why the reference about persecuting state or the
    persecuting community. If the strategy is not to diminish the political
    identity of this country, there is scope for serious discussion.
Working...
X