The South Asia Collective (SAC), formed in 2015, is a platform of researchers and practitioners from the South Asia region that aims to address the plight of South Asia’s minorities, through documentation, public education and advocacy. SAC also engages in cross-border initiatives to empower marginalised minority communities, through conversations, capacity building and local advocacy.
We feel privileged to respond to UN SR on Minority Issues’ call for inputs to their report to the General Assembly on institutional arrangement of states on minority rights.
Introduction
The recent years have witnessed South Asian countries experiencing rising political polarisation, alongside a weakening of rule of law and human rights. These have created grounds for greater exclusion of minorities – religious, ethnic, caste and gender, among others. Across the region, minority groups have seen a further weakening of their right to participate effectively in cultural, religious, social, economic and public life. And their participation in decision making that effect their lives, has been circumscribed. These trends are having negative consequences for minority rights protection and promotion across the region. Below are inputs on the call, by country, arranged alphabetically.
Afghanistan
Afghanistan is an extreme example of minority groups facing collective threats such as systemic attacks and discrimination, in the context of the absence of recognition of the country’s linguistic, ethnic and religious minorities. The dominant group in Afghanistan are Pashtuns who lead the Taliban that governs much of the country, and all other groups have become marginalised in a sense of losing access to power and politics. The legal system of previous Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, which on paper guaranteed equality of citizens, has been replaced with extreme interpretation of Islam that is exclusionary. The authorities explicitly seek to implement Islamic Sharia and Hanafi jurisprudence which automatically excludes other minority groups.
Under the Taliban, minorities have been systematically discriminated and marginalised. in the absence of elected parliament, the minorities remain without any representation in Afghanistan. Based on available reports, there is no Shia or other minority group or a woman judge in the judicial system. Women from minority communities face double discrimination because of their gender as well. After the Taliban came to power, relief aid distribution organisations are compelled to follow authorities’ demands at the local levels, resulting in minority groups in central highlands (Bamian, Ghazni, and Daikundi) have been systematically deprived from humanitarian assistance provided by the international community.
Minorities have also been discriminated in public sector job recruitment as well. The authorities have created a system where all recruitment process need to pass the security check through their Directorate of General Security. There have been several documented cases where job aspirants were rejected due to their religious affiliations, such as being Shia or working with the former regime.
In such a scenario, a general trend of assimilation of minority groups has been taking places with resultant erasure of their language, culture, and religion. Many minority groups have left the country entirely; for example, the number of Hindu-Sikhs in Afghanistan has decreased from tens of thousands in the past to a handful today.
Bangladesh
Bangladesh is a country of many religious and ethnic minorities with 91 per cent of the population following Islam. Almost 98 per cent of the population belongs to the ethno-linguistic Bengali identity. This creates a unique combination of minorities from different linguistic (Urdu-speaking Muslims), ethnic (Munda, Chakma), or religious (Hindus) identities.
The constitution of Bangladesh provides for protecting the rights of every citizen, including minorities, such as prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, gender, or the place of birth and the right to freedom of expression, ensuring individual practice and profession of faith.
Several government and state institutions are active in ensuring the rights of the minorities. The Ministry of Religious Affairs oversees religious affairs, including mosques, temples, churches, and other places of worship. The National Human Rights Commission investigates human rights violations, conducts inquiries, and recommends measures to address systemic issues affecting minority communities. The Ministry of Social Welfare is responsible for developing and executing policies and initiatives aimed at enhancing the well-being and empowerment of marginalised communities by offering social protection services, rehabilitation programmes, and socio-economic assistance, particularly for those experiencing poverty or discrimination. The Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs oversees the socio-economic, cultural, and political concerns of indigenous communities in the region, managing land rights and conflict resolution in partnership with local authorities and indigenous leaders, with a focus on preserving cultural heritage and facilitating participation in decision-making processes.
However, there is no guarantee for political representation of excluded minorities. In the 350‑member parliament, elections are contested for 300 seats and 50 are reserved for women. Although without any reservations, three Chittagong Hill Tracts seats are represented by people belonging to the indigenous communities. With changing population composition, there are concerns over how long this can sustain.
In Bangladesh, giving political autonomy to the indigenous communities in the Hill Tracts is a pressing issue. Because of cultural and religious differences, it would help them create their own identity to protect them from the shadows of a dominant majority. For the other interspersed minorities, however, it is important to create an environment conducive to celebrate and nurture their Bengali national identity, which was the founding pillar of the country’s independence.
India
India has several institutional arrangements meant to protect and promote the interests of marginalised groups, including their effective political participation. However, several of these are not extended to religious minorities – including Muslims, Christians, Sikhs among others. This disparity is widely seen as worsening further under the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is in power at the federal level and in a majority of provinces. The BJP has been openly hostile towards the effective participation especially of India’s over 200 million Muslims.
The constitution contains a few provisions that apply specifically to minorities, mostly their cultural rights, viz., the conservation of minority groups’ language/script/culture and the right to establish and administer educational institutions. There are also general guarantees that also apply to all citizens – such as equality before law, prohibition of discrimination, and equal opportunities in employment and appointment to public offices. The provision of affirmative action benefits in matters of public employment and education has constitutional backing. However, only religious minorities belonging to designated Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), or Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) have access to those. A Presidential Order in 1950 restricted inclusion in the list of SCs only to Hindu groups, with later addition of Buddhist and Sikh. Its expansion to include Muslim and Christian groups have been opposed by BJP, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently declaring that there would be no such constitutional protections extended to Muslims so long as he is alive.
SCs and STs have electoral constituencies, but not religious minorities, reserved for them at both the federal/parliamentary and provincial/assembly levels. A first-past-the-post electoral system further marginalises minorities from political representation. Despite accounting for 14.23 per cent of India’s population (2011 census), Muslims hold only 5 per cent of national parliamentary seats, with similar results at provincial level. In the executive branch, India does not have a single Muslim minister at the national level. Muslims are also very poorly represented in the judiciary, the civil bureaucracy, and police machinery. Other religious minority groups like Christians and Sikhs are better represented than Muslims, but still poorly relative to their share in the total population.
Recent changes in laws, including the nation-wide Citizenship Amendment Act, and state level segregation laws and practices, are further marginalising minorities. There are also constitutional provisions that apply only to some states, primarily aimed at safeguarding the interests of tribal and indigenous communities inhabiting these regions, such as Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), previously India’s only Muslim-majority state, which were notably unilaterally revoked in 2019. J&K has been ruled directly by the central government since then and has been without any form of popular representation since 2018.
Myanmar
After the junta’s takeover on 1 February 2021, Myanmar erupted in the Campaign for Civil Disobedience Movement. The military adopted the most brutal repression tactics and tried to curb the protests with live fire, water cannons, and rubber bullets. The movement can now be characterised as an amalgamation of multiple civil wars with violent clashes between local and regional armed groups and the Tatmadaw (the armed forces of Myanmar). At present, it has assumed the form of a low-intensity, protracted civil war between the Tatmadaw and people’s war supported by the opposition, consisting of the National Unity Government (NUG) and the various Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAOs).
Within the first few weeks of the February 2021 coup and the ensuring violence, the political alignments of the EAOs have shifted drastically. They have suspended all forms of political negotiations with the regime. Responses have been varied. While some have distanced themselves from the political resistance entirely, others have sheltered dissidents, provided military training, and engaged with the NUG politically.
Currently, Myanmar’s ethnic conflicts have assumed a form that is both complex and dynamic. EAOs were forced to make difficult strategic decisions under strong pressure from their grassroots supporters to escalate the fight with the military. More than a million people have fled across the borders as refugees, while hundreds of thousands remain internally displaced. A recent study conducted by the United Nations Human Rights Council documents that Myanmar has regressed profoundly in terms of economic, social, civil, political, and cultural rights since the coup. Civilians have been targets of attacks, victims of targeted and indiscriminate artillery barrages and air strikes, extrajudicial executions, torture, and arson. In addition to this, the targeting of activists and rights defenders has escalated in the past year. Lawyers who have attempted to represent the arrested have faced several systematic obstacles, usually imposed by the military authorities along with threats of arbitrary arrests and detention.
The United Nations has warned that Myanmar stands at the ‘precipice of humanitarian crisis’ with 18.6 million people (a third of its population), 19 times more than before the military coup, in need of humanitarian assistance and millions of lives at risk. The 2024 population planning figures by the UNHCR show that there are likely to be 1.35 million people in refugee-like situations in Myanmar. This estimate alarmingly excludes the 2.3 million internally displaced peoples and 657,500 stateless persons.
Nepal
Following the promulgation of the 2015 constitution, the Nepali government extended a range of rights to its minority communities, encompassing proportional representation in all state organs, Dalit rights, women’s rights and the establishment of constitutionally mandated thematic commissions empowered with addressing concerns of minority groups. Despite such a robust constitutional framework and the state’s declaration of secularism, Nepal persists in its pre-democracy/monarchical tradition of favouring Hinduism, manifesting through both tacit and explicit support. From state officials partaking in Hindu rituals to constitutional emphasis on preserving sanatana dharma—referring to Hinduism—minority freedoms have witnessed a notable decline in recent years. This predicament is further compounded by the country’s anti-proselytisation law in the penal code regulating conversions from Hinduism, which could potentially be exploited to persecute members of minority faiths, particularly Christians. The vague wording in the law leaves everyday acts of faith susceptible to misinterpretation as acts of conversion. Similar challenges persist in acquiring burial spaces within and outside Kathmandu, as well as in registering religious organisations for Christians and Muslims. Additionally concerning is the increasing endorsement of Hindutva within the upper echelons of Nepal’s political parties. Even historically neutral or relatively secular parties are now embracing a pro-Hindu stance, as evident in the run-up to the 2022 general elections, where prominent political figures sought to advance a pro-Hindu agenda to bolster voter support.
The state’s ethnic, indigenous, and Dalit populations are also facing setbacks in exercising their civil and cultural rights, despite adoption of laws such as the 2011 Caste-based Discrimination and Untouchability (Offence and Punishment) Act. Not only are Dalits regarded as belonging to the lowest rungs of Nepali society and enduring persistent social and caste-based discrimination—which even influential elected representatives are not immune to—but they are also historically under-represented in governance structures. In an attempt to remedy this issue, the constitution implemented electoral quotas for Dalits and other marginalised groups. However, it also allocated quotas for the dominant Khas Aryas, potentially consolidating power further in the hands of the already privileged. Concerning is the reality that minority groups are frequently only able to secure nominations through proportional representation (PR) system rather than direct elections. Even when minority groups are able to contest under the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system, they frequently face obstacles in mobilising votes due to socio-economic barriers influenced by societal biases, limited financial means, and other factors. Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive review of Nepal’s legal, political and social apparatus to reconcile conflicting laws and strengthen inclusive practices and comply with international human rights obligations.
Pakistan
In Pakistan, the treatment of minority groups has been a topic of concern and debate. While Pakistan has constitutional provisions and laws aimed at safeguarding minority rights, including reservation in the national and provincial assemblies for non-Muslim minorities, their actual influence may be limited. Power dynamics, entrenched interests, and lack of meaningful engagement in decision-making process may marginalise minority voices within these institutions.
Pakistan’s federal structure grants certain powers and autonomy to its provinces and autonomous regions. In regions where minority communities constitute a significant portion of the population or where there are specific agreements or arrangements, decisions on certain minority issues such as cultural preservation, linguistic rights, and community development may fall within the authority of regional or local authorities. In some cases, minority issues may be addressed through customary or traditional agreements, particularly in regions with diverse ethnic or tribal populations.
Additionally, there are government initiatives and programmes aimed at promoting the socio-economic development of minority communities. Their effectiveness can be hindered by various factors, such as systemic discrimination, lack of meaningful participation, and limited resources. The National Commission for Minorities addresses the concerns and grievances of minority communities and advocates for minority rights and facilitate dialogue between minority groups and government authorities.
Pakistan’s judiciary serves as a check on state authorities’ actions, including decisions related to minority rights. However, the implementation and enforcement of laws and policies designed to protect minority rights may face bureaucratic inertia and political resistance. There have also been reports of discrimination, persecution, and violence against religious and ethnic minorities, stemming from societal prejudices, historical tensions, and sometimes inadequate enforcement of existing laws.
Legal, administrative, and societal barriers prevent persons belonging to minority groups from participating effectively in cultural, religious, social, economic, and public life. Discriminatory laws and policies, exemplified by blasphemy laws, limit freedom of expression and religious practice for religious minorities, while limited access to quality education and economic marginalisation hinder socio-economic mobility. Deep-seated societal prejudices and discrimination, along with violence and intimidation against minority communities, deter their full participation in public life. Despite reserved seats in legislative bodies, minority representation may be inadequate, leading to policies that overlook minority needs. Additionally, cultural and linguistic differences pose challenges, and lack of access to justice exacerbates the situation.
Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka is a multi-religious, multi-ethnic country that has seen a trend towards majoritarianism – prioritising the Sinhala Buddhist majority and progressively marginalising all the other communities (Tamils, Christians, Muslims, and Burghers). Introduction of the Sinhala Only Act that disenfranchised the Tamils living and working in the hill country led to a civil war leading to the deaths of thousands. After the war, Muslim and Christian communities have been subjected to harassment.
The constitution recognises the fundamental rights of all people, including the rights of minorities to their language and religion, but not in practice. Buddhism is the dominant religion with active state patronage. The thirteenth amendment to the constitution established provincial councils designed to enable minorities to exercise autonomy in their regions. But these councils have been stripped of many of the powers they were expected to exercise.
The personal laws of the Muslims and Tamils are recognised, although they are contested by the women of these communities as they disadvantage them in some aspects of inheritance, control of their property, and about their children (in the case of Muslim women). Muslim women are periodically harassed for their dress (niqab, burqa), and at the height of the war, Tamil women were fearful of wearing the pottu (dot on the forehead) as it signified their ethnicity.
By constitution, Sinhala, Tamil, and English are official languages. Tamil children can be educated in their mother tongue in Tamil-majority areas. But without investment, all government administration is handled in Sinhala, marginalising the Tamil minority.
The central government has also resettled Sinhala people in the North and the East, historically populated by Tamils and Muslims, and this will have an impact on electoral representation and allocation of resources. With the adoption of proportionate representation, minorities will have representation in parliament but without a decisive voice. The Prevention of Terrorism law was primarily used against the Tamils during the civil and later Muslim minorities. Today, it is being used against political opponents of the regime irrespective of ethnicity.
The state institutions have not always been effective in ensuring the rights of the people. With directly elected president, it was assumed that this would require a candidate to reach out to all the people to secure their votes and support, but this has not been the case. There is a human rights commission but it is also under-resourced. The courts make judicial pronouncements that are not consistently in favour of minority or human rights.
Conclusion
In conclusion, across South Asia, minority communities face multiple, severe challenges to their rights and well-being. While some countries have constitutional provisions to protect minority rights, the reality often falls short due to political dynamics, societal prejudices, and majoritarianism. From Afghanistan’s systemic discrimination under Taliban rule, to India’s creeping discrimination and marginalisation of Muslims and other minorities, to Pakistan’s struggle for meaningful political representation, and from Myanmar’s humanitarian crisis to Sri Lanka’s trend towards majoritarianism, the region’s minorities see increased exclusion from participation and decision making, worsening their situation.
Recommendations
- National governments must uphold, in law and practice, international human rights commitments, ensure minority participation and decision-making in national life.
- United Nations and international community must support initiatives for greater minority participation in the region – through education, civil society participation, and support and pressure on national governments to make more room for minorities in cultural, social, economic and political life.
- Civil society and minority community-based groups must participate more in documenting minority exclusion, educating publics, and demanding space for greater role in governnace and decision making.
