Abstract

There is a common saying that health is the wealth. Health is considered as one of the major and basic aspects of human society. Right to a dignified life is considered a basic right of every human being. The Charter of United Nations declares health as a basic human right. This Charter aims to establish global equity with a human rights approach, focusing on the right to Universal Access to Primary Health Care. The Indigenous and Tribal People’s Convention (No. 169), 1989, in article 24 and 25 articulates the need to focus on the health needs of these communities through training of community based healthcare workers, especially in traditional health care practices.

# This is the revised version of the paper presented in International Seminar on Future of Human Rights, Humanity and Culture in Emerging Globalized World on 9 th and 10 th December 2012 at Lucknow (INDIA).

.

Introduction

Right to live and let live is considered as the motto of every human society. Every person wants to live a peaceful life without any kind of interference from the outside world. But it is known fact that all over the world people are discriminated and disintegrated in the name of super ordinate-subordinate power structure. The rights of others are exploited or curtailed by those people who claim power as an aspect of authority to rule over ‘others’. Thus others here become the part of vulnerable sections of the society where their rights related to life and livings are governed by the so called minority or ruler class (s). The denial of basic rights like- health, education, housing, food, security, employment, gender justice, and any other rights which become essential for the ‘survival’ to these vulnerable sections, thus become the focal point of human rights’ approach.

The Human Rights’ Approach is universally applicable, wherein needs of all sections of society are met in a humane manner with a priority to those neglected sections such as indigenous & tribal peoples, persons with disability, refugees, etc. Jacson (2000) describes security as “a foundation value in human relations”. He further says that “the human quest for security is our self-protecting response to what we believe in a world that contains menacing people who must somehow be kept in check”. Even the Directive Principles of the State Policy (Article 47) under the law of the land that is the Constitution of India impose a duty and an obligation on the State to raise the level of nutrition and standard of living and to improve public health. The Supreme Court of the India has widened the meaning of ‘life’ under the Article 21 of Indian Constitution in Francis Coralie Mulin v. The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi & Ors. (AIR 1981 SC 746). The Supreme Court held that expression ‘life’ does not connote merely physical or animal existence but includes right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, namely the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter. The unhygienic conditions and limited access to basic facilities have compromised the health of tribal peoples in India.

The sum of the total health status of the tribal peoples depend upon the surrounding of their immediate social and physical environment in which they live, genetic characteristics, cultural patterns and the lifestyles. Principle 1 of the Stockholm Declaration (1972) has categorically mentioned:

Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in an
environment of a quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being, and he bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations. In this respect, policies promoting or perpetuating apartheid, racial segregation, discrimination, colonial and other forms of oppression and foreign domination stand condemned and must be eliminated (United Nations Environment Programme, 1972).

The cultural arrangement of every society tries to satisfy the essentialities of its people in order to continue the existence of that society. According to anthropologist Malinowski (1944) there are certain primary or basic or biological needs of the people for the maintenance of the social order of the society. He mentions that metabolism, reproduction, body comforts, safety, movement, growth and health are the basic needs of every individual. As a whole, food , cloth and shelter are the fundamental needs of the every individual and they must be provided by the cultural systems of the society on the basis of priorities related to the protection of human rights of the people.

Indigenous Peoples/ Tribal Peoples: The Understanding

The definitional aspect of word ‘indigenous’ and ‘tribal’ represent varied meaning depending on the social construction of the society at the international level. According to the Oxford Dictionary ‘indigenous’ means native, belonging naturally, that of the people regarded as the original inhabitants of an area (UN, 1990,p.3). There has been no uniform definition of people known as indigenous or tribal. However, it is generally considered that pre-literate society or aboriginal people or native people having distinct cultural identities are often termed as ‘indigenous people’ and same parameter but different nomenclature is applied as ‘tribal people’ for such people in India. Nearly 350 million indigenous peoples belonging to 5000 or so groups are scattered in more than 70 countries. More than half of indigenous populations live in China and India, some 10 million in Myanamar and 30 million in South America.

In the International context, three types of the definition are used (Das, 2001, p.19). The first definition is an international law instrument, the ‘Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (Convention No. 169 of 1989) of ILO’. The second definition is a ‘Working Definition’ which has been accepted as an ‘Operational Definition’ in the elaboration of an instrument that is international in character. And third definition is found in the World Bank’s Operational Directive. As an agenda of political action at the international level, the term ‘indigenous’ was first introduced by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1957. In that year ILO adopted Convention 107 concerning the protection and integration of indigenous and other tribal and semi-tribal populations in independent countries (Roy Burmon, 1997, p.19). The Article 1 (1) (b) of the ILO Convention No. 107 defines “indigenous” as:

….members of tribal or semi-tribal populations in independent countries which are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the population which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs at the time of conquest or colonization and which, irrespective of their legal status, live more in conformity with the social, economic and cultural institutions of that time than with the institutions of the nation to which they belong (cited by Das,2001, p.20).

Thus, there is still no International consensus on what constitute the best definition, but there is now a more marked tendency to favour the term “indigenous peoples” over the term “indigenous populations”, especially as it reinforces the right to self-determination (Report of UN Seminar, 1989, p.4).

The tribal peoples have been addressed by different names in India. The popular names are ‘Vanyajati’ (castes of forest), ‘Vanvasi’ (inhabitants of forest), ‘Pahari’ (hill-dwellers), ‘Adimjati’ (primitive people), ‘Anusuchit Janjati’ (scheduled tribe) and so on. Among all these terms, ‘Adivasi’ is known extensively, and ‘Anusuchit Janjati’ (Scheduled Tribe) is the Constitutional name covering all of them (Vidharthi & Rai, 1976, p.25). Article 366 (25) of the Constitution of India refers to Scheduled Tribes as those communities, who are scheduled in accordance with Article 342 of the Constitution. This Article says that only those communities who have been declared as such by the President through an initial public notification or through a subsequent amending Act of Parliament will be considered to be Scheduled Tribes. With the succeeding censuses, the numbers of Scheduled tribes’ communities also increased in the country. There are over 700 Scheduled Tribes notified under Article 342 of the Constitution of India, spread over different States and Union Territories of the country. Many tribes are present in more than one State. The largest numbers i.e. 62, Scheduled Tribes are in the State of Odisha. The synonyms of these 700 or so tribes also vary many a times and are listed in the Schedule (Annual Report, 2011-12, p.26).

Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples: Efforts at International Level

Concern with the status of the vulnerable and disadvantaged comes from the realization that in every society certain individuals and groups systematically deprived of a wide range of human rights. They may be subject to human rights violation by the State, by others in the society, or from institutions, structural barriers, social dynamics and economic forces (Chapman & Carbonetti, 2011, p.683).The human rights ’ commitment in protecting the fundamental rights of the vulnerable and disadvantaged takes a variety of forms in the United Nations Human Rights system. Realizing the need of protecting the rights of weaker sections of the society, various specialized ‘human rights instruments and mechanisms’ have been developed at the International level.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965), the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981) , and the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (1994), etc. have been the instrumental efforts for the protection of various rights of the indigenous peoples related to the violation of human rights. In 1982, the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) was established under the auspices of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities with the mandate of examining annually the situation of indigenous peoples throughout the world and the development of new international standards for the realization of indigenous rights.

The Article 1 of the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 1994 states that ‘Indigenous peoples have the right to the full and effective enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Human Rights Law’. The Article 23 of the Draft Declaration has categorically highlighted the issue of health rights. This article says that:

Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right to development. In particular, indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop all health, housing and other economic and social programmes affecting them and, as far as possible, to administer such programmes through their own institutions.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has recalled that indigenous and tribal peoples have the right to access their territory and the natural resources necessary “to practice traditional medicine to present and cure illness” (I/A Court H.R., 2005, par.168). Indigenous peoples remain on the margins of society: they are poorer, less educated, die at a younger age, are much more likely to commit suicide, and are generally in worse health than the rest of the population (The Indigenous World, 2006, p.10). The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, (Banjul June 26, 1991) contains both a right to health and a right to environment. Article 16 of the African Charter guarantees to every individual the right to enjoy the best attainable state of physical and mental health. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (16 December 1966), guarantees the right to safe and healthy working conditions (Art. 7 b). The right to health contained in article 12 of the Covenant expressly calls on State parties to take steps for “the improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene” and “the prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational, and other diseases” (Shelton, 2002).

The cases in which indigenous and tribal peoples are deprived of nutrition, health and access to clean water because of such lack of access to ancestral territories, States have an obligation to “take immediate steps to ensure their access to the lands and natural resources on which they depend” in order to prevent an erosion of the right to health and the right to life (IACHR, 2009). Seeing the plight of indigenous peoples and to highlight the issues for their development, the United Nations celebrated the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples from the year 1995-2004 . The Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO) has been one of the institutions most attuned to the demands of Indigenous Peoples. In 1993, within the framework of the United Nations International Year of Indigenous Peoples, PAHO held a meeting on the health of Indigenous Peoples and recommended the transformation of health systems and support the development of alternative models of care including research and certification of traditional medicines (Cunningham, SOWIP_ Chapter 5, p.160).

Development and International Human Rights Law

The rapid growth required strong policy approach where some may loose and some may win by adjusting themselves with the emerging development plans. The Report of the Expert Group set up by the United Nations, Department of Social and Economic Affairs, 1951 has vividly remarked on the issue of development:

There is a sense in which rapid economic progress is impossible without painful adjustments. Ancient philosophies have to be scrapped; old social institutions have to disintegrate; bonds of caste, creed and race have to burst, and large numbers of persons who cannot keep up with progress have to have their expectations of a comfortable life frustrated. Very few communities are willing to pay the full price of economic progress (Esobar, 1995, p.4).

However, realizing the adaptation problem of some sections/human groups/communities of the society in emerging globalized world of development, the United Nations’ Declaration on the Right to Development (RTD) as adopted in 1986, has asserted that right to develop has to be acknowledged and supported by the international community with special emphasis on underdeveloped countries. To strengthen further this agenda, the Commission on Human Rights passed two resolutions (Res. 4/1977 and 5/1979) which affirmed that the right to development is a human right. In 1979, the Commission on Human Rights came out with a report which states that:

The central purpose of development is the realization of the potentialities of human person in harmony with the community; the human person is the subject not the object of development; both material and no-material needs must be satisfied; respect for human rights is fundamental; the opportunity for full participation must be accorded; the principles of equality and non-discrimination must be respected; and a degree of individual and collective self reliance must be achieved (Gready & Ensor, 2005, p.18).

Jurisprudence of Human Rights in India

The jurisprudence of Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) does not have full legal standing, but it is widely considered to be authoritative. Between 1989 and 2009 the CESCR issued twenty-one general comments, the majority of which address issues related to vulnerable, disadvantaged, or marginalized groups…. The general comment on the right to health, in what it terms “special topics of broad applications” (Chapman & Carbonetti, 2011, p.691), has subscriptions on gender perspective, women, children and adolescents, older persons, persons with disabilities, and indigenous peoples (General Comment No.14, 2000). The United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples is yet to be adopted by India. The Working Group of the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC), now replaced by the Human Rights Council (HRC) was set up in 1995 and its term extended by the Commission into Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (2005-2015).

The Judiciary in India has given new dimensions to the human rights jurisprudence on the protection of rights of vulnerable sections of the society and at the same time has tried to protect the faith of common persons with the notion that ‘ justice may be delayed but not denied’. In the initial stage, Supreme Court has been giving its judgment primacy to Fundamental Rights over Directive Principles. In the course of working of the Constitution, the Apex Court has gradually perceived, as would be evident from its judgment, that “Fundamental Rights” and “Directive Principles” complement each other. In determining reasonableness of restrictions on Fundamental Rights consideration of relevant Directive Principle are held to be permissible [( State of Gujrat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kasab Jamat , (2005) 8 SCC 534 )].

The sole possible source of sanction for violations of human rights prescriptions, as for other prescriptions, is imagined to reside in the coercive application of military instrument by one State to another State. The conception of International Law that inspires critics of the human rights development is that of preexisting body of rules whose exclusive function is regulating the interrelations of Nation-States (McDougal & Lung-chu, 1981, p.338). The notion of distributive justice has been the prime focus of Constitution making in India. The right to equality as enshrined in the Article 14 of Indian Constitution provides equality before law and equal protection of law for every citizen in this country.

Broadly classified Fundamental Rights mentioned in Part III under the Constitution of India are basic human rights of ‘life’, liberty, equality and dignity, where as Directive Principles are goals to be gradually achieved by efforts to guarantee social justice. Fundamental Rights speak of basic human rights as part of ‘life’. Directive Principles speak of ‘quality of life’ to be gradually improved (Justice Dharmadhikari, 2010, p.4). As judiciary is the bulwark that stands between the State and its members protecting their human rights, judicial indifference and timidity is a greater threat to these rights than their violation by other branches of the State. Thus, the task of judge in human rights area is acute rather than deferential; creative rather than mechanical; evolutionary rather than status-quoits; humanist rather than formalist (Harsh, 2008, pp.143-144). Further affirming its commitment to socio-economic rights and its abhorrence of human exploitation in the form of bonded labour, the court in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (A.I.R. 1984 SC 802) stated that it is the fundamental right of everyone in this country to live with human dignity and that it is the plainest requirement of Articles 21 and 23 that bonded labourers must be identified and on release be rehabilitated (ibid, p.152).

Health and Human Rights of Tribal Peoples in India

The World Health Organization defines health as ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’ (Constitution of the World Health Organization, 1946, p.1). The famous definition of health has been given by Landy(1977) who defines it as ‘the condition of an organism that permits it to adopt to its environmental situation with relative minimal pain and discomfort, achieve at least some physical and psychic gratification and possess a reasonable probability of survival’. Health is the source of normal and peaceful life.

Besides the magico-religious means of curing diseases, the tribal peoples also use plants and herbs. Some people have knowledge about the medicinal plants in their surroundings and also attribute cultural beliefs and practices to these plants (Singh, 2007, pp.177-185). Kar (2004) writes that health and disease are considered to be polar opposites. Disease refers to a departure from the state of health and health is the absence of disease. In all regions of the world, traditional healing systems and western biomedical care co-exist. However, for indigenous peoples, the traditional systems play a particularly vital role in their healing strategies.

According to WHO estimates, at least 80% of the populations in developing countries rely on traditional healing systems as their primary source of care (The Health of Indigenous Peoples). Mary Robinson, the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has aptly remarked that:

The right to health does not mean the right to be healthy, nor does it mean that poor governments must out in place expensive health services for which they have no resources. But it does require governments and public authorities to put in place policies and action plans which will lead to available and accessible health care for all in the shortest possible time. To ensure it happens is the challenge facing the human rights community and public health professionals (Quoted by Chatterjee & Sheoran, 2007, p.1).

The marginalized sections including the tribal peoples in India are facing various types of social inequalities related to the accessibility of basic facilities, and health constitutes one of the inequalities as basic need of tribal India. The modern health facilities are far away from the reach of the most of the tribal peoples living in the remote areas of the country. The Apex Court of the India has also highlighted the issue of health as the right of the person (s) in its various judgments. In the case of Consumer Education and Research Center v. Union of India [(1995) 3 SCC 42] by reading together the Directive Principles creating obligation on State to provide health facilities to men, women, children and workers as also old and handicapped persons [(as contained in Article 39 (e), Article 41, Article 42, Article 43)] with guaranteed fundamental right to life contained in Article 21 has held ‘right to health and access to medical care’ to be fundamental right.

In Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. v. ESI Corporation [(1996) 2 SCC 682], Article 21 has been construed widely to include in it right to health as a fundamental right (Justice Dharmadhikari, 2010, pp.42-43). Marginalized groups such as Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) continue to have low human development attainments. Forty-seven percent of India’s rural tribal population lives below the poverty line. Persistent gender inequity is reflected in the lowest child sex ratio since independence at 914 and women continue to face exclusion in social, economic, political domains, and gender-based violence, etc.

The challenge of tackling poverty, inequality and exclusion remains critical to India (UNDP in India 2012). The United Nations’ concept on social inclusion speaks that “An inclusive society must be based on respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms, cultural and religious diversity, social justice and the special needs of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, democratic participation and the rule of law” (Quoted by Sonowal, 2008, p.125). Sharma (2004, p.72) writes that:

The overall health status of the tribal community is dependent upon the effects of environment in which they live, genetic characteristics, cultural patterns and the lifestyles of the tribal groups, health care delivery service in tribal areas, and their detached attitudes largely in accepting the modern health care services at the initial stages of the disease.

As per NFHS-3 (2005-06) estimates, the under- five mortality rate and the child Mortality rate are much higher for Scheduled Tribess than any other social group/ castes at all childhood ages (95.7 and 35.8 respectively). However, it is found that Scheduled Tribes have a lower infant mortality rate (62.1) than Scheduled Castes (66.4) but higher than Other Backward Classes (56.6). Even the prenatal mortality rate for Scheduled Tribes (40.6) is lower than other social group/ castes. The Statistical Profile of Scheduled Tribes in India (2010, p.15) as issued by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Govt. of India has highlighted the poor health status of tribal peoples of the country. The forth coming tables (1&2) detail the infant and child mortality rate of the marginalized sections of Indian society.

Table 1-Early Child Mortality Rates by Background Characteristics

(Figures per 1000 live births)

Table 2- Prenatal Mortality for the Five-Year Period Preceding the NFHS-3 Survey

Note:Total includes cases with missing information on education, religion, and caste/tribe, which are not shown separately.

*Stillbirths are foetal deaths in pregnancies lasting seven or more months.

**Early neonatal deaths at age 0-6 days among live-born children

***The sum of the number of stillbirth and early neonatal deaths divided by the number of pregnancies of seven or more months’ duration

Source: NFHS-3 2005-06, M/o Health & Family Welfare, GOI

The infant mortality rates among the tribal peoples are very alarming. This situation is more prone in some of the States in the country highlighting the poor state of affairs of the health services in the concerned States. According to Census 2001, the Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) and the under 5 mortality rate (U5MR) for Scheduled Tribes is highest in Madhya Pradesh (110 and 169 respectively per 1000 live births) followed by Arunachal Pradesh (104 and 158 respectively per 1000 live births). There is a significant gap in the IMR and U5MR in rural and urban areas in almost all states and UTs (Union Territories). Compared at country level, the IMR and Under 5 Mortality among Scheduled Tribes is much higher than to that of Scheduled Castes [(ST- IMR 84 and U5MR 123 and SC – IMR 77 and U5MR 111)] (ibid. p.16). In spite of the efforts of the government, there are poor maternal and child health services and ineffective coverage of national health and nutrition. Research and surveys have found that infrastructure like Sub-Centres, Community Health Centres (CHCs), Public Health Centres (PHCs) and others are less than required in the areas inhabited by the tribal peoples.

NFHS-I, II and III data show trends of deteriorating health indicators and socio-economic status of the tribal peoples in comparison to National Statistics. According to NFHS-III, the most commonly reported reasons for not using government facilities is poor quality of care, distance of the facility and long waiting time in these facilities. Medical and Health personnel posted in tribal areas are unwilling to work due to inadequacies of basics such as delivery tables, beds, mattresses, linen, running water, electricity backup, residence, equipments and sometimes their own ethnocentric attitudes towards tribal peoples, etc. Despite lowering of the population norms for seeing up of Sub-Centers and PHCs in tribal areas relative to other areas, about 15 to 20 villages fall under the jurisdiction of one ANM (Auxiliary Nurse Mid-Wife) due to the tribal population generally being scared in difficult terrains. This situation heavily constrains the ANMs from providing adequate services to the people for ANC, and post-natal care, etc. (ibid, p.25).

The situation regarding the Number of Sub-Centres, PHCs & CHCs in tribal areas, as on March, 2008, depicts a very disheartening status. The maximum deficit in the number of Sub- Centres is seen in the State of Rajasthan where in spite of the existence of 1221 Sub Centres; there is a shortfall of 1018 Centres. Next is the State of West Bengal with a shortfall of 933 Sub Centres. On the other hand, the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Kerala, Karnataka and Orissa are leading by having more than the required number of Sub-Centres. The same is the situation with the PHCs and CHCs in these states. Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and West Bengal have a shortage of a large numbers of PHCs and CHCs. As it can be seen that Madhya Pradesh has a shortfall of 223 PHCs and 58 CHCs and Rajasthan has a shortfall of 175 PHCs and 45 CHCs (ibid, p.25).

Nutrition, access to safe drinking water and sanitation, and education are the three most important proximate determinants of health status that have an impact on both infectious disease and vital health statistics. It is, therefore, not surprising that poor performing States are those with the highest levels of poverty and the highest levels of malnutrition, among children and adult women. Female literacy rates, school enrolment rates, and rates of households with safe drinking water and sanitation are all distinctly lower (Annual Report to the People on Health, 2011, pp.35-36).

In his study about the Tharus of Uttar Pradesh, Singh (2007, p.184) has noted that the presence of A.N.M. centre in every village has provided some relief to the mothers and their new born children but only one A.N.M. who has vast area of network dealings in all the villages gets opportunity to visit a village only 2 or 3 times in a month. Government machineries as regard to the health awareness seem quite unsatisfactory; it is up to the people who most of the times rely on ‘jhola Chhap’ doctors (barefoot doctors). Most of the places are facing the problems of shortages of health workers at respective Government Health Centres.

The positions of female Health Workers/ ANMs at Sub-Centres were found to be vacant in some of the states, especially in Madhya Pradesh with 1110 positions, Chhattisgarh with 809 positions, Maharashtra with 489 positions and Gujarat with 425 positions lying vacant. A similar status was noticed in the case of male Health Workers working in tribal areas. A large number of positions were vacant in the States of Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. A shortfall of 1901 male health workers in Madhya Pradesh, 1403 in Chhattisgarh and 1019 in Maharashtra is indicated (Statistical Profile, 2010, p.26).

Basic Amenities: As per the NSS 58 Round (2001-02), only 24.4 % of Scheduled Tribe households have permanent houses, 15.2% have drinking water source within premises, 36.5% have access to electricity, 17.0% have latrine facility and 21.8% have connectivity for waste water outlet. Table(3) below depicts availability of basic amenities to Scheduled Tribe (ST) households as compared to all Social Groups.

Table 3- Availability of basic Amenities to ST Households

Source: Census of India, 2001
Regarding availability of sufficient drinking water, it is seen from table below that in both rural and urban areas, highest proportion of ST households did not get sufficient drinking water from the major source: nearly 24 percent of rural ST households and 16 percent of urban ST households(ibid, p.39). The following table (4) depicts the status of households who do not get sufficient drinking water throughout the year.

Table 4- Availability of Drinking Water

Conclusive Remarks

The indigenous peoples and tribal peoples are facing the problems including one the problems relating to access to health facilities as mentioned in aforesaid paragraphs. Though various efforts have been done at national and international level as well and these are continue to minimize the inequalities related to basic needs of these people. Even the human rights jurisprudence has played major role in protecting the basic rights of these people. The health rights need immediate attention by the policy planners to adopt such measures that can reduce the health disparity of the people. There is a need of developing advocacy skills among the people of these sections of the society. The time has come where these people are supposed to be cautioned in treating the health issues based on their ethico-religious beliefs. States are supposed to be equipped with health resources covering employment, deployment and transfer of its personnel according to the desired need of health facilities.

The arrangement must be made for regular training and placement of trained personnel as designated centre for their effective utilization. There is an urgent need to review the National Health Policy 2002 as well as other existing health schemes/programmes/laws especially National Rural Health Mission, Bharat Nirman and National Food Security Act, 2010 for better, healthy and progressive India. The Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 creates a regulatory framework to bring about standardization of health care facilities in all clinical establishments including Government institutions. The aims of this act must be implemented at the field levels to bridge the gaps of health disparities among the people. Health education must be made as a compulsory subject in school –curriculum from the primary level of schooling. Nutritional rights of the children must be given priority to avoid any future health problems by creating the health conscious atmospheres through the sensitization, counseling and organizing various health awareness programmes, and highlighting those issues of hygiene and health where minimal support is required from outside agencies.

References

Chapman, Audrey R., & Carbonetti, Benjamin. (2011) . Human rights protections for vulnerable and disadvantages groups: The contribution of the UN committee on economic, social and cultural rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 33, 682-732.

Chatterjee, Chandrima & Sheoran, Gunjan. (2007, May) . Vulnerable Groups in India, Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes, Mumbai.

Constitution of the World Health Organization. (2006. October) . Basic documents, Forty-fifth edition, supplement, October 2006. Retrieved 10 January 2013.

Cunningham, Myrna (n.y) . State of the world’s indigenous peoples, chapter v. Health. Retrieved 5 December 2012 from www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/SOWIP_chapter5.pdf

Das, J.K. (2001) . Human rights and indigenous peoples. New Delhi: A.P.H. Publishing Corporation.

Esobar, Arturo. (1995) . Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the third world . New Jersey: Princeton University Press, New Jersey.

General Comment No. 14. (2000) . The right to the highest attainable standard of health, adopted 11 May 2000, U.N. Doc. E/C.12/2000/4 (2000).

Government of India. (2011, December) . Annual report to the people on health. Ministry of Health and Family.

Government of India. (2011-12) . Annual report. Ministry of Tribal Affairs.

Government of India. (2010) .Statistical profile of the scheduled tribes in India.2010. Ministry of Tribal Affairs. Retrieved 16 August 2012 from www.tribal.nic.in

Gready, P., & J. Ensor (Eds.) . (2005) . Reinventing development? Translating rights-based approaches from theory into practice. London: Zed Books.

Harsh, Bhanwar Lal. (2008) . Human rights law in India: Protection and implementation of the human rights act, 1993. (Reprinted 2011). New Delhi: Regal Publications.

International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) & Macro International. (2007) . National family and health survey(NFHS-3), 2005-06. Mumbai: IIPS.

IACHR. (2009, December 30) . Democracy and human rights in Venezuela. Doc.OEA/Ser. L/V/II. Doc.54. 30 December 2009, pars. 1076-1080). Retrieved December 6, 2012 from
www.oas.org/en/iachr/indigenous/docs/pdf/AncestralLands.pdf

I/A Court H.R., case of Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005, Series C No. 125, par.168. Retrieved December 6, 2012 from www.oas.org/en/iachr/children/decisions/ia_court_hr.asp.

Jacson, R. (2000) . The global covenant: Human conduct in a world of states. Oxford University Press

Justice Dharmadhikari, D.M. (2010) . Human values and human rights. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Kar, R.K. (2004) . Ethnomedicine and tribal health: An illustrative appraisal. In Kalia, A.K., & Joshi, P.C. (Eds.), Tribal health and medicines (pp. 376-390). New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.

Landy, D. (Ed.). (1977) . Culture, disease and healing: Studies in medical anthropology. New York: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Malinowski, B. (1944) . The scientific theory of culture and other essays. The University of North Carolina Press.

McDougal, Myres S., & Chen, Lung-chu. (1981) . Introduction: Human Rights and Jurisprudence. Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 2660. Retrieved 25 December 2012 from
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu.//fss_papers/2660

Roy Burmon, B.K. (1997) . Tribal and indigenous people: A global overview. The Eastern Anthropologist, 50(1) , 17-25.

Report of the UN Seminar on the Effect of Racism and Racial Discrimination on the Social and Economic Relations between Indigenous Peoples and States, Geneva, 1989. UN.Doc.HR/PUB/895.

Sharma, P. Dash. (2004) . Nutrition and health among the tribes of India. In Kalia, A.K., & Joshi, P.C. (Eds.) . Tribal health and medicines (pp. 71-98). New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.

Shelton, D. (2002) . Human rights, health & environmental protection: Linkages in law & practice. Health and Human Rights Working Paper Series No.1. Retrieved 3 January 2013 from www.who.int/hhr/Series_1%20%20Sheltonpaper_rev1.pdf

Singh, Bir Pal. (2007) . The Dynamics of Health Culture Among the Tharus. Madhya Bharti, 58, 177-185.

Sonowal, C.J. (2008) . Indian Tribes and Issue of Social Inclusion and Exclusion. Retrieved 15 September2012 fromhttp://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/T%20&%20T/T%20%20T-06-0-000-000-2008 web/T%20&%20T-06-2-000-000- 2008-Abst-PDF/T%20&%20T-06-2-123-08-162-Sonowal-C-J/T&T-06-2-123-08-162- Sonowal-C-J-Tt.pdf, 123-134.

The Indigenous World. (2006) . International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA), ECOSOC Consultative Status.

The health of Indigenous peoples-WHO?SDE/HSD/99.1

• UN. (1990) . The human rights fact sheet no.9. Geneva: Centre for Human Rights. UNDP in India. (2012) . Retrieved 14 September 2012 from http://www.undp.org/content/dam/india/docs/UNDP_in_india_2012_final_artwork.pdf
• Vidyarthi, L.P., & Rai, B.K. (1976) . The tribal culture of India. Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.
• United Nations Environment Programme. (1972) . Declaration of the United Nations conference on the human environment. Retrieved. 11 January 2013 from
  http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?documentid=97&articleid=1503