The Indian voter knows not to take manifestos seriously. This is mainly because of the shamefully long list of unkept promises. But it is also, in part, because manifestos have suffered serious neglect from political parties themselves. Even with the country going to polls in just days, the manifestos of some parties are yet to be released. However, very few are even batting an eyelid – the Indian voter is fairly familiar with this state of affairs.
Even so, a manifesto can be a critical document that has the potential to outline a party’s vision for change and encourage debate. In this context, the promises outlined by the Congress have set an important benchmark for promoting and protecting human rights in India. There is, of course, the small matter of taking on and defeating the saffron juggernaut before there is any question of implementation.
However, if the promises outlined translate into genuine political will and consensus, it could be a game changer. At the bare minimum, it may encourage other like-minded political parties to follow Congress’s lead on giving human rights issues the focus that they deserve.
In the current political climate, these promises are admittedly bold. Yet, from a human rights perspective, they stop short of being truly transformative. It is, of course, unfair to expect perfection when electoral considerations are at play. What the document does do, however, is serve as a benchmark that invites a deeper debate on a more ambitious agenda.
Here are some hits and misses of the manifesto that attempts to address some of the most pressing human rights issues in India.
Freedom of expression
Gauri Lankesh’s murder caused an uproar among civil society groups. Following the high-profile and brazen crime, many voices spoke out about the dangers facing journalists. Congress has seemingly heard these voices. In the manifesto, it promises that it will “work with State Governments to formulate rules to require the police to extend protection to journalists working in conflict areas or investigating matters of public interest and to journalists whose lives are threatened or otherwise in danger.”
However, what it fails to note is that journalists aren’t vulnerable to merely physical attacks. Online abuse against journalists, particularly female journalists, remains a pressing concern. Journalists like Rana Ayyub and Barkha Dutt have faced patriarchal vitriol and threats online. Male journalists aren’t immune to this either.
Also read: Amnesty Report Confirms What Women on Twitter Have Known All Along
The manifesto does “guarantee artistic freedom” by “opposing censorship” and promises to guard against “attempts by vigilante groups to censor or intimidate artists”.
In the current social environment, to put freedom of speech into practice has become lethally dangerous. Credit: Reuters/Adnan Abidi
In the realm of digital rights, a radical promise is to “provide access to all persons to high-quality Internet at affordable rates”. This is in line with a landmark report by the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and expression, which states that the internet is a catalyst for the enjoyment of freedom of expression.
In the same vein, the Congress also promises to “regulate the power to shut down the Internet and to prevent arbitrary shutdowns”. In 2018, the government reportedly shut down internet services 134 times, out of which 65 incidents were in Jammu and Kashmir alone.
Freedom of association and assembly
In a positive move that will aid international scrutiny into workers’ right of association, the manifesto includes a promise to ratify two ‘fundamental’ International Labor Organization Conventions. India has already ratified six out of eight fundamental conventions. Convention 87 deals with ‘Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise’ and 98 deals with the ‘Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining’.
A significant promise is to pass a “Students Rights Bill to codify the rights and obligations of students in colleges and universities” that has the potential to safeguard student associations and right to assembly.
While there is an entire section dedicated to “Engaging with citizens and civil society,” a glaring omission is the failure to address the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA). There is an urgent need to extensively amend the law. UN Special Rapporteurs have repeatedly said that the law in its current form fails to conform to international human rights standards and is being used to clamp down on civil society organisations in the name of regulating foreign funding.
Also read: The Chronology of Subterfuge on Amending the FCRA
The latest reprimand came in the form of public communication to the Indian government from three special rapporteurs. According to the data released by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the government has cancelled the FCRA certificates of a whopping 14,938 organisations since 2014.
Economic, social and cultural rights
Critical promises that look at laws and policies relating to education, health, food, housing, land, water and employment appear to have made genuine attempts to respect, protect and fulfil the rights that are enshrined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – to which India is a party. The attempt to look at these public provisions as ‘rights’ warrants appreciation.
Chief among them is the promise to pass a ‘Right to Healthcare Act’ and the guarantee of “the Right to Housing for the urban poor and protection from arbitrary eviction”. Importantly, the Congress promises to reverse the dilution of previously enacted landmark laws by stating, “that the distortions that have crept into the text and the implementation of the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the Forest Rights Act, 2006 will be removed and the original purposes of the Acts restored and enforced”. In the cultural realm, there is even a promise to retrieve India’s stolen art.
Also read: Yes, a Land Acquisition Act Can Address Both Justice and Prosperity
However, the manifesto fails to adequately address the violation of rights of vulnerable and marginalised sections of society by exploitative businesses. In an era where countries are recognising the need to codify the human rights obligations of businesses and drafting national action plans, this is a significant miss.
Baiga Adivasis march protesting displacement and denial of forest rights. Credit: File photo/Harshit Charles
New laws, amendments and policy reforms
The manifesto promises to pass a number of new laws that, if implemented, will have far-reaching implications for human rights. Many civil society organisations continue to campaign for these laws to be passed. These include a law to “protect the personal data of all persons and uphold the right to privacy,” a law to “provide adequate safeguards against unlawful or excessive surveillance and monitoring,” a “Law on Asylum consistent with international treaties and conventions,” an ‘Anti-Discrimination Law’ and the ‘Prevention of Torture Act’.
Giving due priority to the evil of mob-violence, there is a proposal to pass a law punishing hate crimes in the very first session of the parliament. Critical here is the reference to the term ‘hate crimes’ as opposed to the ambiguous ‘lynching’ or ‘mob violence’. Usage of this term recognises that these crimes are motivated by a bias motive towards certain identities.
There are a number of other proposals. Critical and much publicised is the promise of scrapping the criminal provisions of defamation and sedition, which, in practice, have acted as a noose around the neck of free speech in India. Journalists and activists have long clamoured for the scrapping of these archaic provisions. Their inclusion in the manifesto of a major national political party is a small victory for them.
Representative image of people protesting against mob lynching. Credit: Reuters/Amit Dave
Equally significant is the promise to amend the laws that allow for detention without trial. This has the potential to alter a number of repressive laws in India including the National Security Act, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, the Public Safety Act and the Goonda Act, among others. Some of these laws have been used to imprison Dalit rights activist Chandrashekhar Azad and Manipuri journalist Kishorechandra Wangkhem.
Also read: Manipur HC Orders Release of Journalist Held Under NSA Since November
Absolutely important and a courageous inclusion is undoubtedly the promise to amend the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act. Not only this, it promises to review the imposition of AFSPA in J&K. In an ideal world that human rights activists envision, this should have been coupled with an assurance of a political will to grant the sanction to prosecute all security personnel in all cases of violations that have gone to courts in order to ensure accountability for past crimes. Better still would be to scrap the provision of requiring sanction at all.
Aside from these “big ticket” human rights issues, it is worth noting that the manifesto outlines remedies to the oft-ignored problem of the abnormally high pretrial detention in India. Pretrial detention disproportionately affects Dalits, Muslims and Adivasis in India. It promises to “Amend the Code of Criminal Procedure and related laws to affirm the principle that ‘bail is the rule and jail is the exception'”.
While noting that no citizen of India will be denied inclusion in the final National Register of Citizens, it fails to mention how it would safeguard against the impending problem of mass statelessness. The issue of stopping indefinite migration detention also finds no mention. The omissions are to seemingly ensure that the Congress wins back some of its lost electoral ground in Assam.
The manifesto promises to amend the Aadhaar Act, review the Right to Information Act in order to strengthen it and withdraw the controversial Citizenship Amendment and the Transgender Rights Bills. It also promises not to dilute the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014 in light of serious opposition to the amendment Bill. It promises the repeal of the Habitual Offenders Act, 1952 that has “discriminated against and stigmatized Denotified and Semi-Nomadic Tribes and led to their harassment”.
On the issue of violence against women, it recognises the need to implement and review existing laws. However, it fails to take the radical step to promise the criminalisation of marital rape.
Some of these promises are also outlined in the manifestos of other political parties. However, the breadth of Congress’s promises advances the conversation on human rights. Some of these issues are being discussed as topics of electoral significance for the first time. For that reason alone, the manifesto is a step in the right direction.
Likhita Banerji is a human rights researcher based in Bengaluru.