Papers by David Griffiths
This briefing is concerned principally with recent trends of communal violence against Christians... more This briefing is concerned principally with recent trends of communal violence against Christians, the factors which underlie this, the state responses to such violence, and ongoing violations of religious freedom in law.
India has a long history of religious pluralism, and compulsions towards mutual respect and violent intolerance continue to exist in parallel. The largest threat to pluralism comes from the Hindu nationalist ideology, espoused by a body of organisations known collectively as the Sangh Parivar (section 3.2). At its heart is the concept of a Hindu nation, excluding non-Hindus. The marginalisation, discrimination and violence faced by Muslims and Christians must be seen against this background. Communal violence is the outworking of this highly negative view of religious pluralism: ‘communalism’ sees relations between religious communities as a zero-sum game, in which conflict between religious groups is inevitable (section 3.3). Communal violence is most likely to occur in the context of long-standing antagonism along religious lines, with a sense among perpetrators that violence is justifiable and that police reactions would be absent, partisan or ineffective.
The worst post-independence case of communal violence faced by Christians took place in Orissa in 2008, including brutal murders and rapes, widespread destruction of churches and property and forcible conversions to Hinduism. Three years later, there continue to be serious concerns over the rehabilitation of victims, the delivery of justice and community reconciliation (section 5.1). Karnataka continues to see the highest rate of incidents of violence against Christians. This occurs against the background of the intensive attacks around September 2008. In February 2011, the one-man Justice B.K. Somasekhara Commission of Inquiry released its report on the violence, which has been criticised as a whitewash for largely exonerating the Sangh Parivar and state Government, whereas the independent People’s Tribunal Enquiry by Justice Saldanha found evidence of pre-planned attacks carried out with the complicity of the state, and heavily criticised police brutality.
Incidents of communal violence continue to take place in other states, as in previous years. Concern has been raised about an upward trend of violence in southern Rajasthan and western Madhya Pradesh, although this is not being reported consistently yet. Avenues of legal redress are theoretically strong, but the implementation of the law is weak, and negligent police responses are common. This has reinforced a culture of impunity, which needs to be reversed in order to ensure that inciters and perpetrators of communal violence expect to be brought to justice.
The Government should do more to address systemic problems underlying communal violence, including tackling extremist organisations responsible for instigating it, addressing the failings of law enforcement authorities in response to it, and empowering its victims. The Government has made it a priority to introduce a pioneering bill to prevent, control and deal with the aftermath of communal violence. Following criticism of an earlier draft, the ruling UPA set up a working group to review the bill; this has produced a new draft, which continues to attract a number of key concerns (section 4.5). The Government should continue to consult with civil society to construct an effective bill.
Overall, India boasts an excellent constitution and a strong body of legislation providing for the right to freedom of religion and belief. However, there remain several problematic areas of legislation. These include the de facto penalisation of Dalits who convert to religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism (section 4.3), which several Indian bodies and two UN committees have recommended be changed, and state-level anti-conversion laws (section 4.4), described by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief as raising “serious human rights concerns”.
Uploads
Papers by David Griffiths
India has a long history of religious pluralism, and compulsions towards mutual respect and violent intolerance continue to exist in parallel. The largest threat to pluralism comes from the Hindu nationalist ideology, espoused by a body of organisations known collectively as the Sangh Parivar (section 3.2). At its heart is the concept of a Hindu nation, excluding non-Hindus. The marginalisation, discrimination and violence faced by Muslims and Christians must be seen against this background. Communal violence is the outworking of this highly negative view of religious pluralism: ‘communalism’ sees relations between religious communities as a zero-sum game, in which conflict between religious groups is inevitable (section 3.3). Communal violence is most likely to occur in the context of long-standing antagonism along religious lines, with a sense among perpetrators that violence is justifiable and that police reactions would be absent, partisan or ineffective.
The worst post-independence case of communal violence faced by Christians took place in Orissa in 2008, including brutal murders and rapes, widespread destruction of churches and property and forcible conversions to Hinduism. Three years later, there continue to be serious concerns over the rehabilitation of victims, the delivery of justice and community reconciliation (section 5.1). Karnataka continues to see the highest rate of incidents of violence against Christians. This occurs against the background of the intensive attacks around September 2008. In February 2011, the one-man Justice B.K. Somasekhara Commission of Inquiry released its report on the violence, which has been criticised as a whitewash for largely exonerating the Sangh Parivar and state Government, whereas the independent People’s Tribunal Enquiry by Justice Saldanha found evidence of pre-planned attacks carried out with the complicity of the state, and heavily criticised police brutality.
Incidents of communal violence continue to take place in other states, as in previous years. Concern has been raised about an upward trend of violence in southern Rajasthan and western Madhya Pradesh, although this is not being reported consistently yet. Avenues of legal redress are theoretically strong, but the implementation of the law is weak, and negligent police responses are common. This has reinforced a culture of impunity, which needs to be reversed in order to ensure that inciters and perpetrators of communal violence expect to be brought to justice.
The Government should do more to address systemic problems underlying communal violence, including tackling extremist organisations responsible for instigating it, addressing the failings of law enforcement authorities in response to it, and empowering its victims. The Government has made it a priority to introduce a pioneering bill to prevent, control and deal with the aftermath of communal violence. Following criticism of an earlier draft, the ruling UPA set up a working group to review the bill; this has produced a new draft, which continues to attract a number of key concerns (section 4.5). The Government should continue to consult with civil society to construct an effective bill.
Overall, India boasts an excellent constitution and a strong body of legislation providing for the right to freedom of religion and belief. However, there remain several problematic areas of legislation. These include the de facto penalisation of Dalits who convert to religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism (section 4.3), which several Indian bodies and two UN committees have recommended be changed, and state-level anti-conversion laws (section 4.4), described by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief as raising “serious human rights concerns”.
India has a long history of religious pluralism, and compulsions towards mutual respect and violent intolerance continue to exist in parallel. The largest threat to pluralism comes from the Hindu nationalist ideology, espoused by a body of organisations known collectively as the Sangh Parivar (section 3.2). At its heart is the concept of a Hindu nation, excluding non-Hindus. The marginalisation, discrimination and violence faced by Muslims and Christians must be seen against this background. Communal violence is the outworking of this highly negative view of religious pluralism: ‘communalism’ sees relations between religious communities as a zero-sum game, in which conflict between religious groups is inevitable (section 3.3). Communal violence is most likely to occur in the context of long-standing antagonism along religious lines, with a sense among perpetrators that violence is justifiable and that police reactions would be absent, partisan or ineffective.
The worst post-independence case of communal violence faced by Christians took place in Orissa in 2008, including brutal murders and rapes, widespread destruction of churches and property and forcible conversions to Hinduism. Three years later, there continue to be serious concerns over the rehabilitation of victims, the delivery of justice and community reconciliation (section 5.1). Karnataka continues to see the highest rate of incidents of violence against Christians. This occurs against the background of the intensive attacks around September 2008. In February 2011, the one-man Justice B.K. Somasekhara Commission of Inquiry released its report on the violence, which has been criticised as a whitewash for largely exonerating the Sangh Parivar and state Government, whereas the independent People’s Tribunal Enquiry by Justice Saldanha found evidence of pre-planned attacks carried out with the complicity of the state, and heavily criticised police brutality.
Incidents of communal violence continue to take place in other states, as in previous years. Concern has been raised about an upward trend of violence in southern Rajasthan and western Madhya Pradesh, although this is not being reported consistently yet. Avenues of legal redress are theoretically strong, but the implementation of the law is weak, and negligent police responses are common. This has reinforced a culture of impunity, which needs to be reversed in order to ensure that inciters and perpetrators of communal violence expect to be brought to justice.
The Government should do more to address systemic problems underlying communal violence, including tackling extremist organisations responsible for instigating it, addressing the failings of law enforcement authorities in response to it, and empowering its victims. The Government has made it a priority to introduce a pioneering bill to prevent, control and deal with the aftermath of communal violence. Following criticism of an earlier draft, the ruling UPA set up a working group to review the bill; this has produced a new draft, which continues to attract a number of key concerns (section 4.5). The Government should continue to consult with civil society to construct an effective bill.
Overall, India boasts an excellent constitution and a strong body of legislation providing for the right to freedom of religion and belief. However, there remain several problematic areas of legislation. These include the de facto penalisation of Dalits who convert to religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism (section 4.3), which several Indian bodies and two UN committees have recommended be changed, and state-level anti-conversion laws (section 4.4), described by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief as raising “serious human rights concerns”.