Newsline 31 March 2017

Government finally launches consultation on caste discrimination, but only asks “whether” law should change

News | Wed, 29th Mar 2017

The Government's consultation on caste discrimination was finally launched this week after years of delay.

The consultation will run until July 2017, "to ensure that everyone will have the opportunity to express their opinions", but it is limited to the narrow question of "whether caste is required to be an aspect of race in the Equality Act", rather than considering how to implement the legal change that Parliament has already sought.

The Equality Act 2010 currently mandates that a minister "must by order amend this section so as to provide for caste to be an aspect of race" as it is considered under the legislation.

NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood said: "It was expected but concerning that the consultation asks whether there should be legislation, given Parliament has demanded it and the UN strongly recommended it."

The foreword to the consultation document says that while no one "should suffer prejudice or discrimination on any grounds", the Government did not want to "create or entrench any notion of caste consciousness or caste-based practices into British society, which may prove counterproductive or divisive."

The Government said it did not want to "associate caste issues with any one particular community or religion".

The Government has also expressed concern that dealing with caste discrimination through legislation would create a stereotype of caste "as a discriminatory practice of certain ethnic groups creating potential problems in the harmony of the social fabric of modern British society."

Mr Wood said this kind of objection would be "unthinkable" in any other type of equality consultation. "A report commissioned by the UK Government concluded in 2010 that caste-based practices existed in quarters of British society. Far from introducing caste consciousness the required legislation would tackle existing prejudices," he added.

That report estimated that there were between 50,000 and 200,000 'low caste' people in Britain who could be "at risk" of caste discrimination. The authors said that a "major quantitative survey" would need to be carried out for a more accurate figure.

Currently those who do face discrimination due to their perceived 'low caste' status must rely on ambiguous case law and making a legal argument that an interpretation of the Equality Act can includes caste under race, but this is risky, expensive and does not provide expansive enough legal protection, the NSS said.

The Society has rejected the Government's assertion that allowing case law to develop would be sufficient in creating precedents that caste should be treated as a sub-section of race.

"An explicit reference to caste is required," Mr Wood said. "The Government is seeking consultation responses on the 'disadvantages' of relying on case law to implement a ban on caste-based discrimination, so at the very least this consultation will give us a chance to raise the serious problems with this approach."

Despite the limited parameters of the consultation, the NSS has welcomed the Government's statement in the consultation that "categorising or treating people by reference to their origins, in particular their caste" is unacceptable.

Conservative MP Bob Blackman criticised attempts to outlaw caste discrimination on the basis that it is "unwanted" by the Hindu community.

Caste discrimination: Fear of upsetting religious groups must not impede social justice

Opinion | Fri, 31st Mar 2017

Caste discrimination is the latest area where misplaced sensitivity could allow deference to religion to trump social justice, argues Stephen Evans.

The Government's recently launched consultation on caste discrimination reveals something very alarming. Despite the countless injustices wrought by undue respect and privilege for organised religion, the Government still seems to be allowing religious sensitivity to get in the way of doing the right thing.

In this latest example, the Government's eagerness not to upset groups claiming to represent British Hindus means those at risk of discrimination on the basis of caste may continue to receive no statutory legal protection.

To outlaw caste discrimination, you first need to define it. An Explanatory note to the Equality Act 2010 does that just fine:

"The term 'caste' denotes a hereditary, endogamous (marrying within the group) community associated with a traditional occupation and ranked accordingly on a perceived scale of ritual purity. It is generally (but not exclusively) associated with South Asia, particularly India, and its diaspora. It can encompass the four classes (varnas) of Hindu tradition (the Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra communities); the thousands of regional Hindu, Sikh, Christian, Muslim or other religious groups known as jatis; and groups amongst South Asian Muslims called biradaris. Some jatis regarded as below the varna hierarchy (once termed "untouchable") are known as Dalits."

However, the Government's consultation expresses concern that this definition "contains origin and community identifiers, which has led to controversy and resentment because it associates caste with particular religions, which may be socially divisive".

Surely we've learned by now that what really is socially divisive is when we turn a blind eye to discrimination and abuse in certain 'communities' for fear of upsetting religious or cultural sensitivities – or more accurately the sensitivities of 'religious leaders'.

Take Rotherham, for example. The inaction and silence there over the rape, torture and sex trafficking of children was driven by political correctness and a fear of tackling the fact that victims had identified perpetrators as being of Pakistani and Muslim heritage.

However misguided, some of the reluctance to tackle this was no doubt well-intentioned, but concern over protecting race relations and religious harmony should never have prevented authorities from doing the right thing by the victims.

Other examples where 'treading carefully' around religion has impeded and continues to impede social justice includes the failure to deal with FGM and genital cutting, unregistered and illegal 'faith' schools, 'witchcraft' allegations and the widespread physical and sexual abuse by clerics of the Catholic Church. The list is endless.

Secularism challenges religious privilege. It allows a light to be shone on the shady parts of religion that some religious leaders would prefer was left shrouded in darkness.

But as the leader of a Muslim youth organisation in Rotherham pointed out, "The fact these guys were predominantly Pakistani heritage men should not be a reason for providing a cloak of invisibility."

With its reluctance to upset British 'high-caste' Hindus, the Government risks providing a cloak of invisibility to allow discrimination on the grounds of caste to continue.

The Hindu Council UK has been highly vocal in its opposition to anti-caste discrimination law, complaining that "many allegations have been made at the Hindu Community in the UK stating that we promote caste discrimination". If Hindu organisations want to distance themselves from caste discrimination, that's great – all they need to do it condemn it outright and support legislation to outlaw it.

But instead, the Director of Interfaith Relations the Hindu Council, Anil Bhanot OBE, pretends that caste isn't an issue in the UK, and describes attempts to get it included in the Equality Act as the "vengeful" act of Dalits (the bottom of the Hindu caste system) stemming from animosity toward 'higher castes'.

The reality is that such discrimination does exist in the UK and it is rooted in and perpetuated by religion. It's impossible to have a sensible discussion about caste discrimination without recognising this.

This doesn't mean we need to get into a theological debate or play the blame game. Can we not just all accept that any prejudice and discrimination based on a person's origin is unfair and unacceptable in a modern society and that it should be unlawful? In the interest of protecting religious freedom, places of worship may have limited exemptions to continue to discriminate, but in the secular sphere – the workplace and in the provision of goods and services, discrimination on grounds of caste must no longer be tolerated.

Too often leaders and institutions duck difficult issues in fear of being labelled racist or insensitive. This again seems to be the case with the Government Equalities Office. It's clear from the wording of the consultation that Government would much rather kick legislation explicitly outlawing caste discrimination into the long grass. To do so would be to side with the discriminators.

Stephen Evans is the campaigns director of the National Secular Society. You can follow him on Twitter @stephenmevans1. The views expressed in our blogs are those of the author and may not represent the views of the NSS.

This article was originally published by Conatus News.