DOCSLIB.ORG

Slicreproductiverightsbook-Fifth Proof.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Slicreproductiverightsbook-Fifth Proof.Indd CLAIMING DIGNITY: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS & THE LAW Human Rights Law Network CLAIMING DIGNITY: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS & THE LAW Human Rights Law Network Human Rights Law Network’s Vision • To protect fundamental human rights, increase access to basic resources for marginalised communities, and eliminate discrimination. • To Create a justice delivery system that is accessible, accountable, transparent, and effi cient and affordable, and works for the underpriviledged. • Raise the level of pro-bono legal experience for the poor to make the work uniformly competent as well as compassionate. • Professionally train a new generation of public interest lawyers and paralegals who are comfortable in the world of law as well as in social movements and who lean from such movements to refi ne legal concepts and strategies. CLAIMING DIGNITY: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS & THE LAW Introduction by: Kerry McBroom Compiled and Edited by Cheryl Blake © Socio Legal Information Centre ISBN : 81-89479-84-9 January 2013 Design: Cover Photo Credit : Emily Schneider Cover Design : Karla Torres Printed by: Shivam Sundram Published by: Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) A division of Socio Legal Information Centre 576 Masjid Road, Jangpura New Delhi 110014 India Ph: +91-1124379855/56 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.hrln.org Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this publication are not necessarily the views of HRLN. Every effort has been made to avoid errors, ommissions, and innacuracies. HRLN takes sole responsibility for any remaining errors, ommissions or inaccuracies that may remain. Note on Footnote: The authors have employed a simple and straight-forward formatting style to maximize the usability of the sources cited. *Any section of this volume may be reproduced without prior permission of the Human Rights Law Network for public interest purposes with appropriate acknowledgment ii Acknowledgments First, the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) expresses its sincere gratitude to the MacArthur Foundation for its generous support in funding this publication and for its long standing relationship with HRLN. We would like to extend our gratitude to Cheryl Blake who complied the judgments and wrote the summaries for each case. It was a pleasure to work with you at HRLN. We would also like to thank Colin Gonsalves for his continued dedication to Reproductive Rights issues. HRLN also expresses its gratitude to Anubha Rastogi for laying the foundation for this update on reproductive rights jurisprudence in the fi rst edition Claiming Dignity. HRLN is deeply grateful to Kerry McBroom, Jayshree Satpute, and Sanjai Sharma for their guidance and contributions through all stages of the research and writing process. Without their thoughtful feedback, this project would not have been possible. HRLN also wishes to thank Karla Torres and Shaneka Davis for their invaluable help in polishing the fi nal version. Special thanks to Emily Schneider for the cover photo. Finally our thanks to Preetha Subhash and Shivam Sundram for making this book a reality. iii Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................1 Abortion .......................................................................................................................39 Chandigarh Administration v. Nemo, High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh C.W.P. 8760/2009, Supreme Court Appeal 5845/2009 ................................39 Nikhil Datar v. Union of India, Bombay High Court WPL 1816/2008, Supreme Court SLP 5334/2009 ..............................................................................................72 Child Marriage ............................................................................................................82 Forum for Fact Finding Documentation and Advocacy v. Union of India, Supreme Court W.P. (C) 212/2003 .........................................................................................82 Coercive Population Measures ....................................................................................85 Javed & Ors. v. State of Haryana, Supreme Court AIR 2003 SC 3057 ..........................85 Maternal Health and HIV/AIDS ...............................................................................98 Shanno Shagufta Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore PILWP 2341/2007, Supreme Court SLP (C) 11844/2012 ..............98 Maternal Mortality and the Right to Health ............................................................103 Centre for Health and Resource Management (CHARM) v. State of Bihar & Ors., High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore W.P. (C) 7650/2011 ......................103 Centre for Youth and Social Action (CYSA) v. Nagaland, Gauhati High Court at Kohima W.P. (C) 62K/2008 ..................................................................................105 Court Suo Moto v. Union of India, Delhi High Court W.P. (C) 5913/2010 ...............110 Deepika D’Souza v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors., High Court of Bombay PIL 127/2009 ...............................................................................120 Dunabai v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore W.P. 5097/2011 ......................................................................................................122 Laxmi Mandal v. Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital & Ors., Delhi High Court W.P. 8853/2008, joined with Jaitun v. Maternity Home, MCD, Jangpura, & Ors., Delhi High Court W.P. 10700/2009 ......................................................................124 iv Laxmi Singh w/o Manas Ranjan v. State of Odisha & Ors., High Court of Orissa W.P. (C) 7687/2010 .....................................................................................................160 Mahila Atyachar Virodhi Manch v. State of Rajasthan, High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur W.P. (C) 3867/2011 ..........................................................................162 People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India, Supreme Court W.P. (C) 196/2001 ....................................................................................................................163 Premlata w/o Ram Sagar & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi, High Court of Delhi W.P. (C) 7687/2010 ................................................................................................166 Promotion and Advancement of Justice, Harmony, and Rights of Adivasis (PAJHRA) v. State of Assam, Gauhati High Court W.P. 21/2012 .....................................................171 Sandesh Bansal v. Union of India, High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore W.P. 9061/2008.........................................................................................................................173 Shri Rinsing Chewang Kazi v. State of Sikkim & Ors., High Court of Sikkim PIL No. 39/2012 .....................................................................................................................191 Snehalata “Salenta” Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, High Court of Allahabad W.P. 14588/2009 ......................................................................................................................193 Maternity Leave and Employment Discrimination .................................................195 Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll), Supreme Court AIR 2000 SC 1274 ...................................................................................................................195 S. Amudha v. Chairman, Neyveli Lignite Corporation, Madras High Court (1991) IILLJ 234 Mad .........................................................................................................................201 Sex Ratio ....................................................................................................................209 Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT) v. Union of India, Supreme Court AIR 2003 SC 3309 ......................................................................................209 Voluntary Health Association of Punjab (VHAP) v. Union of India & Ors., Supreme Court W.P. (C) 349/2006 .......................................................................................219 Sterilization ................................................................................................................221 Ramakant Rai v. Union of India, Supreme Court W.P. (C) 209/2003 ..........................221 Devika Biswas v. Union of India & Ors., Supreme Court W.P. (C) 95/2012 .............225 v vi Introduction Today in India, one woman will die from a pregnancy related cause every 10 minutes.1 Public health offi cials in India routinely deny women active control over their reproductive choices. In the fi rst half of 2012, scandals involving mass hysterectomies and unethical and illegal sterilization camps made headlines. HIV/AIDS positive, Dalit, and Below the Poverty Line (BPL) women have been evicted from hospitals while in labor. Child marriage continues to limit opportunities for millions of Indian women and four state governments have completely banned sexual health education for adolescents. Despite increased awareness, government schemes, and international pressure, women in India continue to face immense obstacles in accessing or exercising their reproductive rights. Since HRLN published the fi rst edition of Claiming Dignity in 2009, lawyers throughout India have fi led petitions on myriad reproductive
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The “Anti-Nationals” RIGHTS Arbitrary Detention and Torture of Terrorism Suspects in India WATCH
    India HUMAN The “Anti-Nationals” RIGHTS Arbitrary Detention and Torture of Terrorism Suspects in India WATCH The “Anti-Nationals” Arbitrary Detention and Torture of Terrorism Suspects in India Copyright © 2011 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 1-56432-735-3 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch 350 Fifth Avenue, 34th floor New York, NY 10118-3299 USA Tel: +1 212 290 4700, Fax: +1 212 736 1300 [email protected] Poststraße 4-5 10178 Berlin, Germany Tel: +49 30 2593 06-10, Fax: +49 30 2593 0629 [email protected] Avenue des Gaulois, 7 1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel: + 32 (2) 732 2009, Fax: + 32 (2) 732 0471 [email protected] 64-66 Rue de Lausanne 1202 Geneva, Switzerland Tel: +41 22 738 0481, Fax: +41 22 738 1791 [email protected] 2-12 Pentonville Road, 2nd Floor London N1 9HF, UK Tel: +44 20 7713 1995, Fax: +44 20 7713 1800 [email protected] 27 Rue de Lisbonne 75008 Paris, France Tel: +33 (1)43 59 55 35, Fax: +33 (1) 43 59 55 22 [email protected] 1630 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, DC 20009 USA Tel: +1 202 612 4321, Fax: +1 202 612 4333 [email protected] Web Site Address: http://www.hrw.org February 2011 ISBN 1-56432-735-3 The “Anti-Nationals” Arbitrary Detention and Torture of Terrorism Suspects in India Map of India ............................................................................................................. 1 Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Recommendations for Immediate Action by the Indian Government .................. 10 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 12 I. Recent Attacks Attributed to Islamist and Hindu Militant Groups .......................
    [Show full text]
  • Hindutva and Anti-Muslim Communal Violence in India Under the Bharatiya Janata Party (1990-2010) Elaisha Nandrajog Claremont Mckenna College
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont CMC Senior Theses CMC Student Scholarship 2010 Hindutva and Anti-Muslim Communal Violence in India Under the Bharatiya Janata Party (1990-2010) Elaisha Nandrajog Claremont McKenna College Recommended Citation Nandrajog, Elaisha, "Hindutva and Anti-Muslim Communal Violence in India Under the Bharatiya Janata Party (1990-2010)" (2010). CMC Senior Theses. Paper 219. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/219 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you by Scholarship@Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in this collection by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CLAREMONT McKENNA COLLEGE HINDUTVA AND ANTI-MUSLIM COMMUNAL VIOLENCE IN INDIA UNDER THE BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY (1990-2010) SUBMITTED TO PROFESSOR RODERIC CAMP AND PROFESSOR GASTÓN ESPINOSA AND DEAN GREGORY HESS BY ELAISHA NANDRAJOG FOR SENIOR THESIS (Spring 2010) APRIL 26, 2010 2 CONTENTS Preface 02 List of Abbreviations 03 Timeline 04 Introduction 07 Chapter 1 13 Origins of Hindutva Chapter 2 41 Setting the Stage: Precursors to the Bharatiya Janata Party Chapter 3 60 Bharat : The India of the Bharatiya Janata Party Chapter 4 97 Mosque or Temple? The Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi Dispute Chapter 5 122 Modi and his Muslims: The Gujarat Carnage Chapter 6 151 Legalizing Communalism: Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (2002) Conclusion 166 Appendix 180 Glossary 185 Bibliography 188 3 PREFACE This thesis assesses the manner in which India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has emerged as the political face of Hindutva, or Hindu ethno-cultural nationalism. The insights of scholars like Christophe Jaffrelot, Ashish Nandy, Thomas Blom Hansen, Ram Puniyani, Badri Narayan, and Chetan Bhatt have been instrumental in furthering my understanding of the manifold elements of Hindutva ideology.
    [Show full text]
  • FIGHT to Award Winner
    MUSKAN SHOWS THE LIGHT INTERVIEWING DAWOOD LAWLESS LAW STUDENT Sightless youngster encourages youth How a journalist missed meeting the Don Colleges for education, not violence NOVEMBER 2017 `100 VOLUME I ISSUE 4 SPECIAL Lalu Prasad Yadav Vasundhara Raje Arvind Kejriwal Anil Baijal V K Sasikala Interview with Colin Gonsalves Right Livelihood FIGHT TO Award winner Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje’s safety valve Bill boomerangs; Delhi Chief MinisterTHE Arvind Kejriwal in last mile battleFINISH with Lieutenant-Governor in Supreme Court; and, Chief Justice of India wants a speedy trial of tainted netas LEGAL NOTES LEGAL NOTES ONE-ON-ONE ONE-ON-ONE placed, or innocent men put behind the bars in You have taken keen interest in legal battles the name of ‘love jihad’ or terrorism. ranging from the right to food to securing ‘Current phase in India’s history is as compensation for farmers and acid attack You are known to be a fighter for the rights of victims. the poor and the underprivileged for decades, It is my passion that keeps me moving forward dark as the Emergency’ setting many legal precedents in the process. despite resistance from various quarters. These The 65-year-old Senior Supreme Court Advocate Colin Gonsalves has been chosen for When did you start thinking of these people? movements take a big toll on an individual’s life. the prestigious 2017 Right Livelihood Award, widely known as ‘Alternative Nobel Prize’ I was a civil engineering student at the Indian For the Right to Food case, I went to the court Institute of Technology (IIT), Bombay.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductiverights.Org…
    LITIGATING REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: Using Public Interest Litigation and International Law to Promote Gender Justice in India Center for Reproductive Rights 120 Wall Street New York, New York 10005 www.reproductiverights.org [email protected] Avani Mehta Sood Bernstein International Human Rights Fellow Yale Law School [email protected] © 2006 Center for Reproductive Rights Avani Mehta Sood Any part of this report may be copied, translated, or adapted with permission of the Center for Reproductive Rights or Avani Mehta Sood, provided that the parts copied are distributed free or at cost (not for profit), that they are identified as having appeared originally in a Cen- ter for Reproductive Rights publication, and that Avani Mehta Sood is acknowledged as the author. Any commercial reproduction requires prior written permission from the Center for Reproductive Rights or Avani Mehta Sood. The Center for Reproductive Rights and Avani Mehta Sood would appreciate receiving a copy of any materials in which information from this report is used. ISBN: 1-890671-34-7 978-1-890671-34-1 page 2 Litigating Reproductive Rights About this Report This publication was authored by Avani Mehta Sood, J.D., as a Bernstein International Human Rights Fellow working in collaboration with the Center for Reproductive Rights. The Robert L. Bernstein Fellowship in International Human Rights is administered by the Orville H. Schell, Jr. Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School. In 2004, the Center for Reproductive Rights launched a global litigation campaign to promote the use of strategic litigation for the advancement of women’s reproductive rights worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018, Four Senior Most Judges of the Supreme Court, Namely Justice
    Rebellion in the Supreme Court By N.T.Ravindranath, dated 12-03-2018 On January 12th, 2018, four senior most judges of the Supreme Court, namely justice Chelameshwar, Ranjan Gogoi, Joseph Kurian and Madan Lokur stunned the people of India by openly revolting against the Chief Justice of India and conducting a press conference in Delhi accusing CJI Deepak Mishra of selective allocation of important cases for hearing to junior judges in an improper and inappropriate manner. Allocation of cases to different benches is the sole prerogative of the Chief Justice of India. Many important cases have been allocated to junior judges in the past and there is nothing unusual or unfair about it. The four dissident judges claim that all judges are equals and that the chief justice is only the first among the equals. On the other hand, contradicting their own assertion, they refuse to treat their own junior judges as their equals. Thus, their allegations against the chief justice Deepak Mishra can be seen as baseless and without any merit. Hence, the open mutiny staged by the four rebel judges is highly condemnable. This episode has not cast any shadow of doubt on the reputation and credibility of CJI Deepak Mishra. On the contrary, it is the four rebel judges who now stand exposed as crooks by their open expression of frustration and anger over non-allocation of certain cases of their interest to them. Their open revolt has only helped to expose their undue interest in getting certain cases allocated to them for their own vested interests which has raised questions about the impartiality and credibility of the Supreme Court.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sangh Parivar, Narendra Modi, and the Government of Gujarat
    Genocide in Gujarat The Sangh Parivar, Narendra Modi, and the Government of Gujarat Coalition Against Genocide March 02, 2005 Genocide in Gujarat The Sangh Parivar, Narendra Modi, and the Government of Gujarat Contents Gujarat: Narendra Modi and State Complicity in Genocide---------------------------------------------------3 * Under Narendra Modi’s leadership, between February 28 and March 02, 2002, more than 2,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed in Gujarat, aided and abetted by the state, following which 200,000 were internally displaced. * The National Human Rights Commission of India held that Narendra Modi, as the chief executive of the state of Gujarat, had complete command over the police and other law enforcement machinery, and is such responsible for the role of the Government of Gujarat in providing leadership and material support in the politically motivated attacks on minorities in Gujarat. * Former President of India, K. R. Narayanan, stated that there was a “conspiracy” between the Bharatiya Janata Party governments at the Centre and in the State of Gujarat behind the riots of 2002. * According to independent human rights observers, the events in Gujarat meet the legal definition of genocide. The Sangh Parivar: Narendra Modi’s Inspiration---------------------------------------------------------------7 * Narendra Modi was a functionary of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu nationalist organization. * Nazi and fascistic ideologies motivated founding ideologues of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a Hindu nationalist organization. * Modi has incorporated the teachings of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in his governance of Gujarat. Gujarat: Continuing Violence --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 * Following the events of February 27-March 02, 2002, the Government of Gujarat was grossly and willfully negligent in providing necessary support, security, relief, resettlement and rehabilitation measures to the victims.
    [Show full text]
  • Symposium on Legal Support for Accessing Transgender Rights
    Meeting Report SYMPOSIUM ON LEGAL SUPPORT FOR ACCESSING TRANSGENDER RIGHTS New Delhi February 14, 2018 Human Rights Law Network 576, Masjid Road, Jangpura New Delhi- 110014 ABBREVIATIONS F to M/F-M/FTM Female to Male HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus ID Identity Cards IPC Indian Penal Code LGBTQ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer MA Master of Arts MBBS Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act MHA Ministry of Home Affairs M to F/M-F/MTF Male to Female MSJE Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment Report NALSA National Legal Services Authority NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NLUP New Land Use Policy NSAP National Social Assistance Programme OBC Other Backward Classes PhD Doctor of Philosophy POCSO Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act RSBY Rashtriya Swasthiya Bima Yojana RTE Right to Education SC Schedule Caste SRS Sexual Reassignment Surgery ST Scheduled Tribe TG Transgender Trans Transgender US/USA United States of America 2 GLOSSARY OF TERMS Gender Gender is an internal sense of one's self with regards to being "male,""female," both or neither regardless of one's physical sex. Although "gender" is commonly misused to refer to the sexual distinction between males and females, it should not be viewed as a biological condition or confused with a person's attraction to sex partners. Binary Gender System A culturally defined code of acceptable behaviors and appearance which insists that there only two and only two sexes and two and only two genders that matches them. Butch Butch is a word commonly used in the lesbian and gay communities to identify masculine females or sometimes masculine gay men.
    [Show full text]
  • Webinar On:- HRLN Webinar on the 'Law to Bring Justice' INTERACTION
    Webinar on:- HRLN Webinar on the ‘Law to bring justice’ INTERACTION WITH LAWYERS AND STUDENT ACTIVISTS Prepared By Shah Faisal. Time Session Speaker District 17:00 – 17:05 General Introduction Adv. Syed Musaib Srinagar 17:05 – 17:20 Supreme Court Judgments on: Colin Gonsalves ******** Manipur AFSPA & J&K Pellet gun case. 17:20 – An overview of Preventive Detention Shah Faisal Srinagar 17:25 laws in J&K (PSA) 17:25 – 17:30 Misunderstanding of Armed forces Special Mr. Danish Raiz Srinagar Powers Act. 17:30 – 17:37 Right to Health and an analysis of health Mr. MoominMalla Srinagar care system India. 17:37– 17:45 An introduction to Article 15/21: as a Mr. BasitFarooq Kulgam means to Justice and Liberty. 17:45– 17:55 An overview of using RTI Act as a tool to Adv. NaveedBukhtiyar Baramulla secure justice. 17:55 – 18:00 How law comes to rescue the rights of Syed RovealMurtaza Anantnag an indigent person/ pauper. 18:00 – 18:05 Human rights and vulnerable groups Ms. Afshan Bashir Budgam 18:05– 18:10 Role of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection Mir KamilNazir Anantnag of children) Act, 2000in rehabilitation of delinquent juveniles. 18:10– 18:15 Pandemic & justice for all Adv. Aamir Ahmad Dar Baramulla 18:15– 18:30 Open session Participant speaking From variou other Districts o Valley Date: 05.10.2020; 17:00 p.m. – 18:30 pm Syed Musaib:- Gave a brief introduction about the webinar and the speakers. He also spoke about the Human Rights law network Shah Faisal:- Gave introduction to the participants about Human Rights Law Network.
    [Show full text]
  • Call for Internship Stipend in India
    Call for Internship Stipend in India The Right Livelihood College (RLC) offers one stipend for a PhD or Master- student from RLC Campuses in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Port Harcourt, Nige- ria, Cordoba, Argentina, or Valdivia, Chile, to work with the “Alternative No- bel Prize” Laureate Colin Gonsalves and the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) in Delhi, India. Background The Right Livelihood College (RLC) is a global education and research initiative of universities and the Right Livelihood Award, also known as the "Alternative Nobel Prize" (www.rightlivelihood.org). The RLC has eight Campuses worldwide. In Africa and Latin America these Campuses are at: Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia, Uni- versity of Port Harcourt, Nigeria, National University of Cordoba, Argentina, and Universidad Austral, Valdivia, Chile. (www.rlc-blog.org). The Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) in India is dedicated to the use of the le- gal system to enforce the rights of poor marginalised people and to challenge op- pression, exploitation and discrimination (http://www.hrln.org). Dr. Colin Gonsalves is founder of the HRLN and Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of India. He received the “Alternative Nobel Prize” (Right Livelihood Award) in 2017. The internship The candidate should have first experience and expertise in juridical systems and have conducted preliminary research on a particular human rights issue in his/her country. Ideally, he/she is in contact with a local lawyer or law office. In Delhi, the intern will deepen his/her research together with Dr. Gonsalves and colleagues and identify how the constitutional law system can be used for advocating justice in in the particular case.
    [Show full text]
  • Shr Human Rights Training Module
    STUDENTS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS human rights training module Concept & compilation Janice Birch Human Rights Law Network HRLN Vision n To protect fundamental human rights, increase access to basic resources for the marginalised communities, and eliminate discrimination. n To create a justice delivery system that is accessible, accountable, transparent, efficient and affordable, and works for the underprivileged. Raise the level of pro bono legal expertise for the poor to make the work uniformly competent as well as compassionate. n Professionally train a new generation of public interest lawyers and paralegals who are comfortable in the world of law as well as in social movements, and who learn from social movements to refine legal concepts and strategies. SHR: Human Rights Training Module 2010 © Socio Legal Information Centre* Conceptualised & compiled by Janice Birch Edited by Suresh Nautiyal Assistance in editing Vasudha Saini Illustrations, paintings, pictures & message boxes SHR team and others Design & layout Mahendra Bora Publisher Human Rights Law Network (A division of Socio Legal Information Centre) 576, Masjid Road, Jangpura, New Delhi – 110014, India Ph: +91-11-24379855/56 E-mail: [email protected] Website: hrln.org Printer Shivam Sundram E-9, Green Park Ext., New Delhi-16 Support European Union Dan Church Aid Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this publication are not necessarily views of the HRLN. Every effort has been made to avoid errors, omissions, and inaccuracies. However, for inadvertent errors or discrepancies that may remain nonetheless, the HRLN takes the sole responsibility. * Any section of this Module may be reproduced without prior permission of the Socio Legal Information Centre/Hu- man Rights Law Network for public interest purposes with appropriate acknowledgement.
    [Show full text]
  • Caste Discrimination Against India's “Untouchables”
    Hidden Apartheid was produced as a “shadow report” to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), in advance of its February 2007 consideration of a report by the government of India. CERD is a body of independent experts responsible for monitoring states’ compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. India ratified the Convention in 1968. The Convention guarantees rights of non-discrimination on the basis of “race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.” In 1996, CERD concluded that the plight of Dalits falls squarely under the prohibition of descent-based discrimination. As a state party to the Convention, India is obliged to submit periodic reports detailing its implementation of rights guaranteed under the Convention. During the review session CERD examines these reports and engages in constructive dialogue with the state party, addressing its concerns and offering recommendations in the form of “Concluding Observations.” As part of this process, CERD uses supplementary or alternative information contained in non-governmental organization “shadow reports” to effectively evaluate states’ reports. The India report being considered by CERD in February 2007 (the report was more than eight years overdue when it was submitted) covers more than a decade of India’s compliance with the Convention (from 1996 to 2006) yet does not contain a single mention of abuses against Dalits—abuses that India’s own governmental agencies have documented and verified. This report fills that gap and presents CERD members with information that we believe is essential to a fair assessment of India’s record and, ultimately, to encouraging the government to live up to its treaty obligations.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Field to the Judge's Bench
    From the Field to the Judge’s Bench: Developing Litigation Strategies to Improve the Lives of Women 24th – 25th November 2012 Assam Association A-14 B Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi IN COLLABORATION WITH HEALTHWATCH FORUM – BIHAR INITIATIVE FOR HEALTH AND EQUITY IN SOCIETY WOMEN’S ASSOCIATION MARCHING AHEAD MANASI SWASTHYA SANSTHAN ALL INDIA DRUG ACTIONNETWORK JANADHIKAR MANCH - BIHAR From the Field to the Judge’s Bench: Developing Litigation Strategies to Improve the Lives of Women IN COLLABORATION WITH HEALTHWATCH FORUM – BIHAR INITIATIVE FOR HEALTH AND EQUITY IN SOCIETY WOMEN’S ASSOCIATION MARCHING AHEAD MANASI SWASTHYA SANSTHAN ALL INDIA DRUG ACTIONNETWORK JANADHIKAR MANCH - BIHAR Human Rights Law Network’s Vision • To protect fundamental human rights, increase access to basic resources for marginalized communities, and eliminate discrimination. • To create a justice delivery system that is accessible, accountable, transparent, efficient, affordable, and works for the underprivileged. • To raise the level of pro-bono legal experience for the poor to make the work uniformly competent as well as compassionate. • To professionally train a new generation of public interest lawyers and paralegals to be comfortable in the world of law as well as in social movements and to learn from such movements to refine legal concepts and strategies. FROM THE FIELD TO THE JUDGE’S BENCH: DEVELOPING LITIGATION STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF WOMEN January 2013 © Socio Legal Information Centre* Editor: Kerry McBroom Coordinator: Karla Torres Printed at: Rudra Printers, 181, First Floor, Bapu Park, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi – 110003. Published by: Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) A division of Socio Legal Information Centre 576 Masjid Road, Jangpura, New Delhi – 110014, India Ph: +91-11-24379855/56 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.hrln.org Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this publication are not necessarily the views of HRLN.
    [Show full text]