Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - India (Ratification: 1960)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations by the Garment Labour Union (GLU), dated 8 October 2015.

Legislative developments. The Committee notes that, in the context of the current consolidation of existing labour laws into four codes, the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, among others, will be repealed and its non-discrimination provisions will be replicated in the various codes. The Committee asks the Government to ensure that the principle of the Convention is fully reflected in the new legal provisions. These should define and prohibit direct and indirect discrimination in all aspects of employment and occupation with respect to all the grounds set out in the Convention. The Government is asked to provide copies of the codes once they are adopted.

Article 2 of the Convention. Equality of men and women with respect to vocational training. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the training programmes offered through the National Vocational Training Institute (NVTI) and the Regional Vocational Training Institutes (RVTIs) which, together, in 2015–16 trained 7,324 women in fields such as secretarial practice, stenography, electronics, mechanics, computer operation, dressmaking, cosmetics and fashion design technology, among others. The Government also indicates that the participation of women under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Development Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has further increased compared to the last three years. It also refers to the adoption of supportive measures, including the provision of crèches at the workplace, which are being promoted. The Committee further notes from the concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) that the school drop-out rate among adolescent girls is as high as 64 per cent (CEDAW/C/IND/CO/4-5, 24 July 2014, paragraph 26). Recalling that the Committee previously noted that many of the trades and skills offered to women by the network of the NVTI and RVTIs tend to lead to jobs and occupations traditionally considered “suitable” for women, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the steps taken with a view to broadening the range of training programmes available to women and to ensuring that the courses offered are free from considerations based on stereotypes or prejudice. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on any measures adopted or envisaged to promote and ensure girls’ access to education and on the practical impact of the training programmes implemented on women’s access to employment and occupation. It is also requested to provide information, disaggregated by sex, on participation rates in the various vocational training courses offered by the NVTI, the RVTIs and industrial training institutes.

Article 1(1)(a). Discrimination based on social origin. Sumangali practice. The Committee notes that the GLU refers to the “Sumangali” scheme, also known as the “marriage assistance system” in the State of Tamil Nadu, whereby young women from Dalits or other low-caste communities from rural areas, mostly between the ages of 15 and 18, are recruited for three to five years to work in the spinning mills. The GLU alleges that the “Sumangali” practice amounts to discrimination on the ground of social origin since young women from Dalits or other low-caste communities are “targeted” under the scheme because of their vulnerability related to their poor socio-economic background and that of their parents. The GLU indicates that there currently are 1,600 mills in Tamil Nadu with a workforce of over 400,000 persons, 60 per cent of whom are girls and young women vulnerable to the practice of the Sumangali scheme. The GLU also indicates that the Tamil Nadu High Court has found the Sumangali practice to be unlawful and has asked the authorities to take steps to abolish the system and regularize the services of the women workers affected. The Committee notes from the Government’s response to the observations made by the GLU with respect to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), that the Scheme was abolished in 2007. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on all steps taken to ensure that there is no direct or indirect discrimination based on caste and sex, in law and practice, against young women from Dalits or other low-caste communities from rural areas.

Discrimination on the basis of social origin (untouchability). Enforcement. The Committee notes that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (the POA Act), has been amended by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. The Amendment Act incorporates new offences, such as intentionally touching a scheduled caste (SC) or scheduled tribe (ST) woman in a sexual manner without her consent; or dedicating an SC or ST woman as a devadasi to a temple; or compelling an SC or ST woman to dispose of or carry human or animal carcasses, or to undertake manual scavenging. The Act also provides for the establishment, at the district level, of exclusive special courts mandated to hear the offences listed under the Act with a view to ensuring that cases are concluded within two months. The Committee notes from the statistical information provided by the Government on the enforcement of the Protection and Civil Rights Act, 1955 (the PCR Act) and the POA Act that the number of pending cases before the courts under both Acts remains high. In 2014, 89.9 per cent of cases concerning the PCR Act and 85.3 per cent of cases under the POA Act were pending. The Committee also notes that very few cases resulted in a conviction under both the PCR and POA Acts (in 2014, 6.2 and 28.9 per cent respectively). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the practical application of the POA Amendment Act, 2015, including statistics on the number and outcome of the cases handled by the special courts. It is also requested to continue supplying information on the practical application of the PCR Act and on any measures adopted to address the backlog and delays in processing the cases filed. The Committee also asks the Government to identify the measures adopted or envisaged to raise awareness and build the capacity of the judiciary, public prosecutors and the police with a view to strengthening the enforcement of both Acts.

Article 1(1)(b). Discrimination on the basis of HIV status. The Committee notes the updates provided by the Government concerning the HIV/AIDS (Prevention and Control) Bill, which sets out to address discrimination related to HIV and AIDS, and asks the Government to continue providing information on any further development.

Enforcement. The Committee notes with interest the judgment delivered in 2014 by the Supreme Court in the case National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (SCC 438), in which the Court recognized that discrimination, violence and prejudice based on a person’s gender identity violates India’s constitutional provisions relating to equality. The Committee notes that the Court ordered the State to include transgender persons within the categories eligible for various affirmative action schemes. It further notes from the Government’s report to the United Nations Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review that, in 2016 the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill, 2016, was introduced in the Lok Sabha. The Bill aims to protect transgender persons from violence and discrimination and provides for equal opportunities in education, employment and residence (A/HRC/WG.6/27/IND/1, 23 February 2017, paragraph 145). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any action taken to follow up the judgment of the Supreme Court and to indicate any developments concerning the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill.