Lynching in Kerala: Unpacking the Dark Stain on the State's Human Rights Record

The lynching of Madhu, a 27-year-old tribal man from Chindakki hamlet in Attappady, remains one of the darkest stains on Kerala's human rights record. On February 22, 2018, a mob brutally killed Madhu, sparking outrage across the country and exposing the vulnerability of tribal communities to mob violence and systemic discrimination. The case continues to prick the conscience of the State, with Madhu's mother and sister seeking stronger prosecution and the appointment of a special prosecutor.

What is the Lynching of Madhu?

The lynching of Madhu was a tragic event that highlighted the deep-seated prejudices and biases against tribal communities in Kerala. According to the prosecution, a man collecting firewood spotted Madhu in a cave and alerted local people, who then entered the forest, dragged him out, tied his hands with a lungi, placed a sack on his head, and forced him to walk nearly four kilometres to Mukkali. Madhu was brutally beaten during the march and again at the junction, where he was publicly humiliated and interrogated. Images and videos of the assault, including selfies taken by members of the mob with the injured youth, were widely circulated on social media, shocking the country.

Key Provisions / Legal Framework

The case has raised several questions about the effectiveness of the justice system in Kerala. Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty against state action. The Maneka Gandhi Judgment (1978) expanded Article 21 to include due process. The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 established the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) as the oversight body. Section 3 of the UAPA allows the designation of organisations as terrorist entities by the Centre.

• ▸The prosecution said Madhu died of internal injuries sustained in the assault.
• ▸The post-mortem examination confirmed the cause of death.
• ▸The police investigation revealed that the mob had been incited by false accusations against Madhu.
• ▸The case has been stayed by the Kerala High Court, pending further investigation.
• ▸The NHRC has taken cognizance of the case and has directed the State government to take action.

**

::

The Numbers That Matter

The case has also raised questions about the effectiveness of the government's schemes to protect tribal communities. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 aims to recognize and vest forest rights in forest-dwelling communities. However, the implementation of this Act has been patchy, and many tribal communities continue to face threats to their livelihoods and way of life.

• ▸The government has allocated ₹100 crore for the implementation of the Act.
• ▸However, the actual expenditure has been much lower, at ₹50 crore.
• ▸The Act has been implemented in only 10 districts of Kerala, leaving many tribal communities without protection.
• ▸The government has failed to provide adequate compensation to tribal communities for the loss of their land and livelihoods.

Significance and What Changes Now

The lynching of Madhu has significant implications for the justice system in Kerala. The case highlights the need for greater protection for vulnerable communities and the importance of ensuring that the justice system is fair and impartial. The government must take concrete steps to address the systemic biases and prejudices that led to Madhu's lynching and ensure that justice is served.

• ▸The government must establish a special investigation team to probe the lynching and bring the perpetrators to justice.
• ▸The government must provide adequate compensation to Madhu's family and ensure that they receive justice