IND33219 Country: India Date: 14 April 2008
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Refugee Review Tribunal AUSTRALIA RRT RESEARCH RESPONSE Research Response Number: IND33219 Country: India Date: 14 April 2008 Keywords: India – India – Muslims – Internal Relocation – Kerala This response was prepared by the Research & Information Services Section of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the RRT within time constraints. This response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum. This research response may not, under any circumstance, be cited in a decision or any other document. Anyone wishing to use this information may only cite the primary source material contained herein. Question 1. Are there other states besides Maharashtra State in India where a Muslim man could relocate and access a reasonable level of protection? RESPONSE Information was found to indicate that Indian citizens have the freedom to relocate to any state, except for some areas of Jammu and Kashmir, and certain border areas in some north- eastern states. Information was found to indicate that while laws exist in India protecting religious freedoms, the Government may not always act effectively to protect citizens from non-state actors, and significant levels of corruption subsist within various state police forces. Information was found to indicate that several Indian states, including Assam, West Bengal, and Kerala, have significant Muslim populations. Sources were located to suggest that of these states, Kerala may be a comparatively viable state for internal relocation for Muslims. An overview of source material on internal relocation for Muslims in India is provided below under the following sub-headings: Internal Relocation in India, Religious Freedom and General Treatment of Muslims in India, Police Corruption in India, Religious Demography of India, Muslims in Kerala, Politics in Kerala and the Muslim Community, Communal Tension and Violence in Kerala, and Languages Spoken in Kerala and the Muslim Community. Internal Relocation in India Advice from DFAT, dated 13 October 2003, provides the following information on freedom of movement in India: Indian citizens have the freedom to relocate from one area of India to another, with two exceptions: in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, Indian citizens from other states are not allowed to buy property, but can stay in any part of the state without seeking official permission. Indian citizens who are not residents of the particular area are required to obtain a permit to visit some border areas of Jammu and Kashmir, and border areas in the north- eastern states of India. The permits are valid for six months. Indian citizens who have been arrested and released on bail are required to report regularly to local police authorities. In these instances judicial permission is required to relocate to another part of the country (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2003, DFAT Report No. 519 – India: RRT Information Request: IND16042, 13 October – Attachment 1). The most recent US Department of State Report on Human Rights Practices in India provides the following assessment of freedom of movement for citizens in India: The law provides for freedom of movement, and the government generally respected this in practice; however, in certain border areas the government required special permits (US Department of State 2008, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2007 – India, 11 March, Section 2.d – Attachment 2). Previous RRT Research Response IND16331 of 3 December 2003 referred to sources which identified the role of linguistic nationalism and of localized social groupings in India, noting these factors as possible impediments to internal relocation in India (RRT Country Research 2003, Research Response IND16331, 3 December – Attachment 3). These sources included: A paper from the University of Kentucky website, which noted that ―India is a classic example of a polyglot state and linguistic nationalism is one of many forces threatening to tear the nation apart‖(‗Human Geography of South Asia‘ (undated), University of Kentucky website http://www.uky.edu/LCC/GEO/160/SouthAsia.htm – Accessed 3 December 2003 – Attachment 4). A paper which discussed the effects of forced relocation of communities for development projects in India, which noted that ―Communities of oustees are often fragmented and randomly atomised, tearing asunder kinship and social networks and traditional support systems… With the destruction of community and social bonds, the displaced are mired in anomie and a profound sense of loneliness and helplessness‖ (Hemadri, R. et al (undated), ‗Dams, Displacement, Policy and Law in India‘, World Commission on Dams website, p. xix http://www.dams.org/docs/kbase/contrib/soc213.pdf – Accessed 3 December 2003 – Attachment 5). Religious Freedom and General Treatment of Muslims in India The US Department of State report on Human Rights Practices in India in 2007 provides the following general information on the treatment of Muslims in India: The law provides for secular government and the protection of religious freedom, and the central government generally respected these provisions in practice; however, occasionally the government did not act effectively to counter societal attacks against religious minorities and attempts by state and local governments to limit religious freedom. This failure resulted in part from legal constraints inherent in the country‘s federal structure and in part from shortcomings in the law enforcement and judicial systems. There is no state religion, although the fact that the majority of citizens are Hindus adversely affected on occasion the religious freedom of others. Some Hindu hardliners interpreted ineffective investigation and prosecution of their attacks on religious minorities as evidence that they could commit such violence with impunity. …Muslims in some Hindu-dominated areas continued to experience intimidation and reported a lack of government protection, resulting in their inability to work, reside, or send their children to school (US Department of State 2008, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2007 – India, 11 March, Section 2.c – Attachment 2). The most recent US International Religious Freedom Report on India questions the capacity of the Indian State to adequately enforce laws protecting religious freedom: The country is a secular state with no official religion. The Constitution protects the right of individuals to choose or change their religion as well as practice the religion of one‘s choice. Many NGOs argue that state-level ―anti-conversion‖ laws are unconstitutional and may reinforce the dominance of the Hindu majority. While the law generally provides remedy for violations of religious freedom, it was not enforced rigorously or effectively in many cases pertaining to religious-oriented violence. Legal protections existed to cover discrimination or persecution by private actors. The country‘s political system is federal and accords state governments the exclusive jurisdiction over law enforcement and the maintenance of order, which limits the national government‘s capacity to deal directly with state-level abuses, including abuses of religious freedom. The country‘s national law enforcement agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), cannot investigate a crime committed in a state without the State Government‘s permission. However, the National Government‘s law enforcement authorities, in some instances, have intervened to maintain order when state governments were reluctant or unwilling to do so. (US Department of State 2007, International Religious Freedom Report for 2007 – India, September 14 – Attachment 6). An article published by Frontline on 18 November 2006 provides this general analysis of the situation of Muslims in India: The bulk of Indian Muslims suffer grave deprivation in social opportunity, because of lack of access to education, health care and other public services, and to employment. For the most part, they are even more disadvantaged than Dalits and are emerging as, if they have not already crystallised into, India‘s principal underclass. Forty-three per cent of them live below the official poverty line. Muslims are more likely to live in hovels without electricity than Dalits. Only 19 per cent have piped water supply, compared to 23 per cent Dalits. Muslim men‘s work participation rate (48 per cent) is lower than Dalit males‘ (53 per cent). For Muslim women, it is just 9.6 per cent, less than half the Dalit women‘s 23 per cent. Muslims are less likely to use the public distribution system for food (22 per cent) than Dalits (32 per cent) or vaccinate their children (40 per cent) than Dalits (47 per cent). …The literacy rate among Muslims is 59 per cent, below the national average (65 per cent) (Bidwai, Praful 2006, ‗Combating Muslim exclusion‘, Frontline, 18 November http://frontlineonnet.com/fl2323/stories/20061201003410600.htm – Accessed 14 April 2008 – Attachment 7). The recent Sachar Report, commissioned by the Indian Government, provides extensive information on the situation of Muslims in India, concluding that ―while there is considerable variation in the conditions of Muslims across states, (and among the Muslims, those who identified themselves as OBCs [other backwards castes] and others), the Community exhibits deficits and deprivation in practically all dimensions of development‖ (Prime Minister‘s High Level Committee, Government of India 2006,