Unless we pose a threat to the state, our issues will not be addressed

JUN 17 -
The first member secretary of the National Dalit Commission, Durga Sob is at the forefront of the civil society movement that’s demanding justice for victims of the recent attack on Dalit settlements in Pipariya, Rautahat. Over 65 houses weres destroyed and more than 200 Dalits displaced following a month long dispute over the entry of Dalits in a Hindu temple. In the aftermath of the attack, the Post's Dewan Rai and Darshan Karki spoke to Sob about the challenges to the Dalit movement and Dalit representation in the upcoming Constituent Assembly elections.

Can you tell us what actually happened in Rautahat?

About a month ago, a few Dalits tried to enter a local temple for a marriage ceremony. They had always been barred from entering the temple but in this particular event, it was the Yadavs who barred the ‘Rams’, who belong to the Chamar caste, from entering the temple. The Dalits were attacked. The event was reported to the police but they did not look into the matter. Young Dalits argued that as Hindus they should be able to enter the temple. So, they made repeated efforts to enter the temple. But they remained unsuccessful. Then on Jestha 24 (June 7) when Dalits tried to enter the temple once again, villagers ransacked and destroyed their brick and thatched houses and even stole their jewellery. The only land the Dalits possess in the area is where their houses are built. They need to go outside to use the fields as toilet and graze their cattle. But now, they are even facing restrictions in doing so. Few taps that were the Dalits’ only source of drinking water were also destroyed. The government is currently fixing their taps but has yet to rebuild their homes, which are currently unlivable because of rain. However, there is a police team stationed in the village to protect them. Luckily, the Superintendent of Police (SP) in the area, Govinda Pariyar, is a Dalit.

Eighteen people injured in the event are still in the hospital while the perpetrators are on the run. When our team wanted to talk to some perpetrators, we were barred from doing so. Women and children, all belonging to non-Dalit castes, were found surrounding the temple and barring anyone from entering it. The Rautahat event is shameful and condemnable, an attack on the dignity of Dalits. It showed that this untouchability-free country is nothing more than a farce.

Do you see any difference in the status of Madhesi and Pahadi Dalits?

When we look at the overall structure of Nepal, the Madhes lags behind the Pahad. That is why we had the Madhes Movement against the discrimination faced by Madhesis in state administration, institutions and with regards to their identity and language. Madhesi Dalits lag even further behind. They are behind economically, education-wise, are less aware and the nature of discrimination they face is similar to what Dalits face in India. Dalits in the Madhes face problems of citizenship and more than 40 percent of them are landless. The Madhesi voice has been heard by the state to a certain extent. But the more important issue is: who among the Madhesis have benefitted? There were so many Madhesi leaders who held important Cabinet positions but we do not see Madhesi Dalits anywhere. They keep harping on about how Madhesis lag behind but never raise the issue of those marginalised within the Madhesis themselves. Even now we find very few Dalit central committee members in political parties.

Why has this situation persisted more than 60 years since the start of the Dalit movement in Nepal?

The voices of the marginalised groups in Nepal were only heard after the restoration of democracy in 1990. But their demands of equal participation went unheard and it resulted in the 10 year long Maoist insurgency. Dalits, Janajatis and women—all minorities—were actively involved in the war. Their aspirations still remained unmet, which again resulted in 2006 Janaandolan. So, whatever little has changed for Dalits is an outcome of a long movement.

Where has the Dalit movement reached?

Frankly speaking, the Dalit movement has not been able to pose a threat to the state in the same way Madhesis and Janajatis were able to do within political parties. Unless we present a threat, our issues will not be addressed. Dalits have remained too loyal to political parties that have not done anything for them or their community. They are unable to quit political parties nor can they form a new political party. Also, we don’t have a strong relationship between Dalit rights activists and Dalit politicians. Though we are both working for the same mission—the creation of a society where Dalits do not face any form of discrimination on the basis of caste and ensure their meaningful participation—we lack coordination.

What has brought about this gap between Dalit political leaders and civil society?

Unlike civil society members, Dalits affiliated with political parties seem to have certain limitations when it comes to supporting a cause. I think this is the primary reason for the gap between us two. This comes back to the inability to create pressure and threat. For instance, there was a chance to bring in a Dalit as a minister in the current Cabinet but that didn’t happen. Recently, 169 judges were appointed but not one of them was a Dalit. Still, we couldn’t do anything about it.

Is there a clash of egos between Dalit political leaders and civil society members?

No, it’s not the case. The current agenda of Dalit activists is to ensure meaningful participation of Dalit leaders in their parties. Our argument is that political parties are not listening to Dalit leaders. Many young Dalit party members are quitting their parties and joining Janajati parties. However, most Dalit leaders have not been able to part with their parties.

So what are main challenges for Dalits and the Dalit movement in Nepal?

Very few Dalits are educated. Their lack of participation in different state and non-state mechanisms is another challenge. The prolonged transition phase of the country is also a

big problem for Dalits. Early on, the transition looked like an opportunity but now its extension means a situation without rule of law or a proper constitution. This state of affairs affects women and Dalits the most.

On a different note, now that the election date has been declared, what is your take on the threshold debate?

In my opinion, there should be a threshold. In that case, bigger parties will secure more votes and if that happens, more Dalits will need to be brought in too. Smaller parties are not required to meet the inclusion criteria. So if there are many parties which secure only two-three seats in Parliament, Dalits won’t be brought in. So my support for the threshold is entirely from a Dalit representation perspective. However, we are worried that the seats for Dalits will decrease. So we have demanded a 60 percent share from Proportional Representation (PR) and 40 percent from First-Past-The-Post (FPTP). And even FTPT should be made proportional if possible. If not, some electoral constituencies should be separated for Dalits to contest. In case, 14 percent Dalit representation is not ensured by both the FTPT and PR system, it should be met from the 11 seat nomination provision. The representation of Dalits was eight percent in the last Constituent Assembly (CA). So, it shouldn’t be reduced below eight percent but we demand 14 percent in proportion to the Dalit population and according to the latest census.

How will you ensure 14 percent in the CA?

For now we have submitted a memorandum to all political parties. Also, there is a problem for Dalits who want to contest elections through the direct system. Most don’t want to do so because lots of money needs to be invested, which they cannot afford. So, another of our demands is that if Dalits want to contest elections through the FPTP system, political parties should bear the cost. The issue is one of dignity. Dignity, participation, access and control are important.

Lastly, how progressive do you think Nepali society is in terms of Dalit issues?

Sadly, I don’t think our society is progressive enough when it comes to Dalits. If the educated masses working for human rights had been progressive, such an event, like what happened in Rautahat, would not have occurred in the first place. We only see prompt action being taken against perpetrators when Dalits themselves are in the police administration. Then, they make an effort to provide justice.

We receive so many press releases, even when there is a minor event, but I received nothing on the Rautahat issue from many human rights activists. It was as if they were apathetic. It only became an issue for Dalits. It could not become an issue for all human rights activists. The society at large is not progressive either. Discrimination against Dalits has not ended. It has only changed its form. Earlier, Dalits were barred from collecting water from taps and not allowed to enter temples. Now it mostly manifests in inter-caste marriages.

Labels: Interview