INDIA: A social boycott and mob violence is waged against Dalits in Becharpura

Dear friends, 

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from Navsarjan, a human rights organisation based in Gujarat, that an entire Dalit community is being punished for the crime of one Dalit. Twelve households have been living under a social and economic boycott which denies them employment, the use of village shops, social interaction with non-Dalits and access to areas of the village. The ostracism is in retribution for the crime of one Dalit who committed rape and who has been arrested. The boycott has lead to forced migration and a mob attack against Dalit women and children, resulting in injury and damage to homes. 

CASE DETAILS: (According to information gathered by Navsarjan) 

Around noon on May 21, 2009, around two hundred upper-caste men came to the Dalit section of Becharpura village, many armed with stones, bricks, sticks, sickles and axes. Only women and children were home, and they gathered in one house. The mob threw objects at the houses and the surrounding structures. threatened to burn the frightened Dalit women and children alive and told them to leave the village. The attack lasted for an hour, during which three women (two of them elderly) were injured. One woman managed to phone her husband, who in turn called the local police. Someone informed the attackers that the police were arriving and the mob dispersed. About four or five police officers arrived on the scene but after a brief inspection of the homes they told the women that they had done the damage themselves. 

This attack was in reaction to the Dalits’ attempt to gain government relief, to ease the economic difficulties caused by the social boycott. That day the Dalit men had gone to the District Social Worker Office to file a memorandum on the boycott. To confirm their story, the District Panchayath President of Mehsana made a call to the flourmill owner, Phavnaben Vinugirigoswami (who had been refusing to allow Dalits to use the mill) and he told the rest of the community about the investigation, which led to the mob attack. 

The boycott was put in place because of the rape of a minor girl of the dominant Patel caste by a Dalit, Vipulbhai Gandabhai Senwa on February 9. Vipulbhai fled the village but was arrested on February 14. After the rape, the Patels gathered all non-Dalits and announced that anyone who speaks, gives work, sells, rents to or buys anything from a Dalit will be fined 1000 Rupees. The Dalit communities only learned of this after the women were refused from shops the next morning. The social boycott is also maintained by some Patel families in nearby villages. 

Despite the immediate departure of the rape perpetrator’s family after they were threatened by the Patels, the boycott continues now, months later. The Dalit community is forced to rely on the support of relatives for food. By mid-March, the lack of food and work had caused three landless families to leave the village. 

Though registering the FIR (First Information Report: necessary for lodging a complaint) resulted in police protection for the community, no effort has been made by the government to relieve it, or give aid. Only five of the accused have been arrested and they were released on bail. No compensation was given for the extensive property damage, which has left some families with little shelter for the oncoming monsoon season. 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 

As illustrated by this case, women bear the biggest burden during social boycotts since it is they who most often run errands in and around the village. During a boycott many women confine themselves, worrying for their safety and for that of their children left at home, and they find it hard to get work to supplement the family income. 

Also in this case, although the FIR was registered at the Visnagar Police Station on the day of the mob attack in Becharpura, the charges only refer to the actual attack and not to the boycott. The charges include the breach of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989– the principal legislation intended to protect Dalits from atrocities–but social boycotts are not clearly defined in this Act. They are instead dealt with indirectly (in Section 3 of the Act, particularly through a wider interpretation of Sections 3 (xiv) and 3 (xv) – not often resorted to by the trial courts). Due to this, the Act has become less effective and the boycotts are becoming a popular, legally immune form of discrimination 

The tendency of officials to push compromise instead of enforcing the law and basic rights and having the case be seen in court, has also been a major obstacle for Dalit rights. As a result, new ways of applying the Act are rarely tried or recorded, and clear statements about social boycotts as a violation of human rights are rare. These ‘compromises’ often involve Dalits simply giving up their claim, and their right to a day in court; morale in these cases can run very low. 

Attempts by Dalits to access government benefits can lead to violent retribution and protection should be available to pre-empt such violent attacks. 

SUGGESTED ACTION: 

Please send letters to the authorities below expressing your concern in this case. The AHRC is also sending a letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance calling for an intervention in this case. 

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER