Law On Reels : "Witness" - A Hard-hitting Criticism Of Manual Scavenging

Manual Scavenging?

A simple google search in the news section with the keywords' manual scavenging' reveals the menace of scavenging recorded through deaths reported weekly in various newspapers. However, even though there are laws and international instruments to prevent the scourge of manual scavenging - it is still prevalent in India.

Though there are a plethora of legislations and laws banning manual scavenging, over time, the reportage of deaths due to manual scavenging has never stopped. For instance, on December 13, 2022, Minister of State for Social Justice and Empowerment Ramdas Athawale replied to a question in the Lok Sabha that around 400 People have died while undertaking hazardous cleaning of sewers and septic tanks since 2017. However, the data is not uniform, and there seem to be discrepancies. According to a report, the inter-ministerial task force in 2018 accounted for a whopping number of 53,000 manual scavengers in India - four times more than the survey conducted in 2017. While on the other hand, private NGOs and organizations have a different accounts for manual scavenging. The International Dalit Solidarity Network claims that around 1.3 million people in India (mostly women) are involved in manual scavenging. Further suggesting that around 99% of them connote a particular caste and 95% to women. The film's central argument against manual scavenging runs on a similar footing that it is a 'forced labour or slavery' which coerces one to succumb to it through continuous discrimination and debt bondage.

A long ride of indignity

The film primarily revolves around the conception of human dignity of the lower strata and manual scavengers through the journey of Indrani and the union working towards bringing justice to Pratibhan's death. The narrative is clear to understand - it does not victimize the death of scavengers nor layers it with typical film genre emotional drama. Instead, it portrays a resistance by the marginalized against impunity.

The discrepancy in data on deaths and affected scavengers, along with the failed implementation of prevention laws, adds to the miseries and makes it an even more complex problem. The feudal structure of caste based on social stratification went unchecked for a long time, and only the adoption of the Constitution in 1950 was a revolutionary striking point which penalized the practice of untouchability. However, scavenging has even then continued the ignominy of discrimination and untouchability.

But how does it affect dignity? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights rests on human dignity with five references. The inclusion of 'dignity' in UDHR remains a formal transcendental norm to legitimize human rights claims. In the Indian scenario, Justice A.K. Sikri writes that dignity forms the fundamentals of human rights, without which human rights cannot be enjoyed. One can find references to dignity in the Indian Constitution - thrice: in the preamble, Directive Principles of State Policy and fundamental duties.

Judicial Standards against Manual Scavenging

The movie's narrative revolves around a problem to which the judiciary stands as a spectator as caste hierarchy takes over the judicial procedures. In reality, the executive and judiciary have not been able to actively implement and adjudicate matters related to manual scavenging for various reasons. In a leading case of Safai Karamchari Andolan vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court noted that there had been a lack of intent in implementing policies to eradicate manual scavenging. In another case during the SC/ST Act review, the Supreme Court said, 'No Country sends its people to gas chambers to die.'

However, for courts to adjudicate such matters, there is a need for swift filing and reporting of cases. But a look into the records of NCRB hits on a different note. The cases filed under the prevention of manual scavenging Act (2013) revealed that only two cases were registered under this law. After 2016 NCRB stopped publishing data about cases filed. Various High Courts have taken a firm stand against the ongoing practice of scavenging in respective states.

The Orissa High Court in In Re: Deaths of Sanitation Workers ordered compensation of Rupees 10 lakh for deaths due to manual scavenging. Further, the Punjab & Haryana High Court took suo-moto cognizance of a newspaper article and ordered the executive magistrate to rehabilitate the scavengers. The Delhi High Court in Amit Sahni v. Govt of NCT Delhi stated, 'if people are dying, someone has to go to jail.' In another case filed by three widows before the Bombay High Court in Vimla Govind Chorotiya vs. the State of Maharashtra, the court ordered compensation of Rupee 10 lakh and rehabilitation for the petitioners. In November 2019, the Telangana Chief Justice handed over Rs. 75 lakhs to families of 9 deceased manual scavengers who died between 2003-17. The tough stand of the courts on the apathy towards manual scavengers by the states remains a significant concern.

Notes from Pop-Culture

George Orwell, in his fascinating work "Notes on Nationalism" wrote, "Those who 'abjure' violence can do so only because others are committing violence on their behalf." Orwell was right when he placed this quote. The systematic apathy connotes violence evident through a series of deaths. As Orwell would note, the lack of a will to eradicate manual scavenging from India is in addition to the violence.

The advent of OTT has brought the diversity of law and caste into popular culture. It has become easier to realize the kind of apathy that flows and could be witnessed through films like Mandela and Karnan. During the last few years, there have been releases which encapture the strategic areas of law and touch the intricacies of caste, including Jai Bhim, Karnan and Asuran. Some of these movies have reflected upon the intersectionality of law and caste, for instance, Custodial violence against a particular community in Karnan.

Shaileshwar Yadav, Author may be reached at @shaileshwar21