• Background
• Introduction
• Issues and challenges regarding minority protection in South Asia
• Issues to be addressed through advisory services
• Advisory services
• Recommendations
• Agenda of the workshop
• List of documents
• List of documents

Background

This workshop on advisory services represents one component of an ICES project on minority protection in South Asia. The aim of the workshop is to explore the possibilities of developing some form of regional and national advisory services with a view to enhancing minority protection, accommodating diversity, and contributing to the prevention of ethnic tensions. The objective is that advisory services draw on regional and international expertise to function as a forum for advising and assisting all sectors of society to enhance minority protection through a diversity of local and regional mechanisms, both new and existing. Such advisory services could contribute to confidence-building measures, and occasion the strengthening of networks among individuals, groups and institutions committed to the advocacy of minority rights and minority protection in the South Asian region.

The workshop brought together key leaders of non-governmental organizations and academic staff of universities in the South Asian region. The workshop was held at the Renuka Hotel in Colombo on 24 and 25 April 2001. A number of background documents were made available to the participants, and additional suggestions were provided in writing by Mr. Rehman, Chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. The agenda of the workshop is found at annex 1 to this report, the list of documents is at annex 2 (all the background documents are available from the ICES Secretariat) and the list of participants at annex 3.

This report of the workshop is divided into nine different sections as follows: introduction; issues and challenges regarding minority protection in South Asia; issues to be addressed through advisory services; targets, form, content and focus of advisory services; strategies for different target groups; ongoing initiatives and resources; the providers of advisory services: recommendations: and conclusions. As the workshop was held in the format of a brainstorming session, the suggestions that were made are reflected in bullet form in the report.

Introduction

Mr. Jeevan Thiagarajah from the International Centre for Ethnic Studies (ICES) introduced the workshop on advisory services by giving a brief background of the context in which this workshop was being held. He mentioned in particular the ongoing work of ICES in South Asia regarding the collection of information on minority situations in various countries and the identification of challenges which needed to be addressed in the field of minority protection. Advisory Services, he said, could provide a viable tool to strengthen national institutions, civil society and minorities in enhancing the promotion and protection of minority rights. He highlighted that advisory services were already included in two ongoing projects, namely, the ICES Diversity Project and the Minorities Project International, which could provide a useful framework for future work on advisory services and as a follow-up to this workshop, both in South Asia and beyond.

Issues and challenges regarding minority protection in South Asia

The participants discussed a number of issues of relevance to South Asia which could inform the identification, content and form of advisory services.

One of the major issues discussed was that of the identification and definition of minorities, and consequently also the beneficiaries of minority rights in South Asia. A number of participants felt that in order to ensure better protection for minorities, the term 'minorities' needed to defined and better understood within the context of South Asia. The caste system as manifested in a number of countries was identified as an element which transcended the identification and definition of minorities. Land ownership and land distribution in Bangladesh for example is not only an issue of minorities, but is also one of caste. In Nepal, while non-governmental organizations may have labeled some groups as minorities, the Government may not have officially recognized these same minorities.

Participants stressed that it was important to demonstrate how minority rights contributed to the richness and diversity of society and to this end, the participants felt that it may be useful to build on the knowledge already existing in a society. With regard to international human rights instruments such as the United Nations Declaration on the rights of persons belonging to minorities, it was noted that in countries where national legislation guaranteed minority rights, there was no specific need to refer to the Declaration, while in other countries with much more restrictive regimes, it was useful to use the Declaration as a reference for the enhancement of minority protection at national level. For example, the Indian and the Bangladeshi Constitutions already provide certain safeguards on minority rights and the Nepali Constitution guarantees the rights for all castes and 'backward' communities, including in the area of religion, language and culture. In Pakistan on the other hand, the Constitution fails to guarantee fundamental rights and freedoms, especially for religious minorities, and in Bangladesh the Peace Agreement with the Chittagong Hill Tract People circumvented majoritarianism, by granting rights to minorities while at the same time contributing to segregation by failing to integrate minorities within overall society.

A number of participants mentioned that in the majority of countries in South Asia, national security was equated with the power of central government, with little space given to the aspirations of minorities. The need to strike a balance between individual rights and group rights within the State structure was emphasized. Furthermore, the discussion centred around the need to marry individual rights with the need for diversity and accommodation of all groups within society and the ways by which diversity could be enhanced through national structures. Particular reference was made to the need to create space for minorities to develop their identity and maintain their characteristics, which in Pakistan for example is almost non-existent for religious minorities.

Participants discussed at some length the strengths and weaknesses of national level structures in creating space for minorities, accommodate diversity and guarantee minority rights. In India, for example, there existed many State structures such as the Human Rights Commission, the Commission for Scheduled Castes, and the Minorities Commission, but many of these were too weak to effectively guarantee the respect of minority rights or to create the necessary space for minorities to development their identity and characteristics. In Bangladesh it was difficult to incite governmental bodies to act rapidly to accommodate diversity, while in Pakistan the minority rights stipulated the Constitution are not implemented nor are the rights of minorities to maintain and develop their own institutions respected.

Additional issues of relevance to the question of minority protection in South Asia include the fact that minorities are often unable to defend their rights in courts and thus to obtain redress for grievances, minorities are facing widespread discrimination and are denied full and effective participation in all aspects of public and political life, including representation in the public service and in the government sector, as well as participation in social, economic and development planning at the national level.

Regarding the issues to be discussed, participants agreed that there was a need for approaches to be flexible, for advisory services to be designed and delivered in accordance with local needs and circumstances, and for minority protection to be, if appropriate, articulated through the United Nations Declaration on the rights of persons belonging to minorities.

Issues to be addressed through advisory services

General

Specific

Advisory services

Targets

Form

Content and focus

Strategies for different target groups

National institutions

Public-interest providers (schools, State employment, basic amenities, utilities, protection mechanisms

Opinion-makers (media, religious leaders, political parties)

Arbitration/mediation mechanisms (judicial, administrative, community intervention)

Non-State actors

Ongoing initiatives and resources

The providers of advisory services

RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

ANNEX 1

Agenda of the workshop

DAY 1

DAY 2

ANNEX 2

List of documents

ANNEX 3

List of participants