Hindustan Times (Bathinda)

India must scrap the habitual offenders Act

Since protecting rights is a moral obligation of the State, this law is out of consonance with democracy and justice

- SUDHIRENDA­R SHARMA Sudhirenda­r Sharma is developmen­t researcher with the Delhibased think tank The Ecological Foundation The views expressed are personal

Over the last few months, there has been a lot of discussion and debate in India on the fate of the Rohingyas of Myanmar, who are facing State oppression. The Centre has argued that it wants to send the members of this community back to Myanmar because it wants to protect the fundamenta­l rights of Indian citizens. Human rights activists have opposed this view. While we discuss the fate of the Rohingyas, let’s not forget the plight of certain tribes in this country who have been facing persecutio­n since British times. Even under the Indian government, they are oppressed and have never been granted fundamenta­l rights.

Following the 1857 mutiny, 237 castes and tribes were given the criminal-by-birth tag under the ambit of the Criminal Tribes Act, 1931. After Independen­ce, the Indian government replaced this Act with the Habitual Offenders Act, 1952. But far from improving their lives, the new Act only re-stigmatise­d the marginalis­ed tribes.

Today variants of criminal tribes such as the Pardhis, Kanjars, Ramoshis, and Vanjaris continue to remain outside the reach of affirmativ­e State action. Stripped of their fundamenta­l right to justice, equality, and freedom, these tribes live in fear of the authoritie­s. They are often subjected to headcounts on account of their being considered habitual offenders by the State. Quite often, the members of such tribes become easy replacemen­ts for criminals whom the police fail to apprehend.

India is perhaps the only country that continues with this Orientalis­t notion of tagging tribes as hereditary criminals. The Centre has constitute­d a National Commission for Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes to specify the economic interventi­ons required for raising their living standards through asset creation and self-employment opportunit­ies. The panel is expected to submit its final report in 2018.

The National Human Rights Commission has recommende­d the repeal of the Habitual Offenders Act, 1952. In 2007, the UN’s Committee on the Eliminatio­n of Racial Discrimina­tion said: “The so-called de-notified and nomadic people which are listed for their alleged ‘criminal tendencies’ under the former Criminal Tribes Act (1871), continue to be stigmatise­d under the Habitual Offenders…,” and asked India to repeal the Habitual Offenders Act and rehabilita­te the de-notified and nomadic tribes. Since protecting rights is a moral obligation of the State, classifyin­g all members of a tribe, including the newborn, as criminals is out of consonance with principles of democracy and justice.

 ?? SSPL VIA GETTY IMAGES ?? A group of Thuggees in 1894. They were organised gangs of criminals who preyed on trade caravans and wealthy travellers. The Criminal Tribes Act, 1931, was created to bring such groups to account
SSPL VIA GETTY IMAGES A group of Thuggees in 1894. They were organised gangs of criminals who preyed on trade caravans and wealthy travellers. The Criminal Tribes Act, 1931, was created to bring such groups to account
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India