(This is an expanded version of an article first published in the Journal of the National Human Rights Commission, Vol 23, 2024)
Ghumantu jatis of India, also known as nomadic tribes or itinerant communities, are groups that have historically led mobile lifestyles, moving from place to place for their livelihoods.
In India, there are broadly three types of nomadic communities: (i) those engaged in hunting, trapping, gaming, etc., such as Konda Reddis, Chenchus, Kadar and Cholanayakas, Kakkipakkis, (ii) pastoral communities, including Pardis, Gujjars, Banjaras, Bhils, Minas, Kurabas, Kurumas, Dangers, Madhuras, and others, and (iii) peripatetic groups involved in peddling, itinerancy, fortune-telling, storytelling, acrobatics, dancing, and drama, such as Lohars, Kaikaris (basket makers), Kewats (jute weavers), Yerakalas (basket makers), Pitchakuntla, Jogis, and more. (Bhukya & Surepally, 2021) These communities collectively make up around 10% of India’s population. (Renke Commission, 2008) Many of these communities have mixed religious identities, making it challenging to categorize them solely based on religion. For instance, some communities like Meo follow a blend of Hindu and Muslim faiths in their beliefs and practices. (Bhukya & Surepally, 2021)
Across the world nomadic tribes have faced numerous vulnerabilities throughout history, often due to their mobile lifestyles and the pressures exerted by sedentary societies. Historically, nomadic groups, including pastoralists, hunter-gatherers, and itinerant communities, have been marginalized and misunderstood by dominant agrarian or urban societies, which often viewed their mobility as incompatible with settled governance, land ownership, and economic development models.
One of the primary vulnerabilities faced by nomadic tribes has been the loss of access to traditional lands. As agricultural expansion, state-building, and industrialization spread, nomadic tribes were frequently pushed off their grazing routes and hunting grounds. This displacement often resulted in conflicts over land use, restricted access to natural resources, and forced sedentarization, which disrupted their traditional ways of life (Khazanov, 1994).
European colonialism, which started in the late 15th century, has caused untold harm on tribal communities, many of whom were nomadic. While de-population of many continents which was a result of European settler colonialism is a fact that is now more universally acknowledged, the argument some make is that use of the term “genocide” may be an oversimplifying of the diverse and varied experiences of colonized peoples, who faced a range of atrocities not always characterized by genocidal intent. For instance, the mass deaths of indigenous peoples in the Americas due to diseases brought by Europeans were catastrophic but largely unintended, reflecting a tragic but distinct form of demographic collapse rather than deliberate genocide (Diamond, 1997).
Nomenclature, notwithstanding, the arrival of European colonizers in the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Oceania led to the dispossession of indigenous lands, destruction of cultural practices, and the introduction of diseases to which indigenous populations had no immunity, resulting in massive population declines.
Colonial policies often aimed to assimilate indigenous peoples, erasing their identities through forced conversions to Christianity, boarding schools that forbade native languages (Adams, 1995; Milloy, 1999). Legal systems, set up by colonial administrations marginalized traditional governance and land rights. In many regions, indigenous communities were exploited for labour and natural resources, with little to no benefit accruing to the people themselves. (Wolfe, 2006; Rodney, 1972)
These historical injustices have had long-lasting effects, contributing to modern vulnerabilities such as poverty, lack of access to education and healthcare, and political disenfranchisement. Despite efforts to recognize and protect indigenous rights, many communities continue to struggle against encroachments on their lands by industries such as mining, logging, and agriculture. The ongoing fight for sovereignty, cultural preservation, and environmental justice underscores the enduring resilience of indigenous peoples against centuries of adversity.
British colonialism had a profound and often devastating impact on the tribal populations in India, marked by economic exploitation, social marginalization, and cultural disruption. The British administration introduced policies and systems that undermined the traditional livelihoods, autonomy, and social structures of tribal communities, leading to widespread oppression and resistance.
One of the key oppressive measures was the introduction of land revenue systems like the Zamindari, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari systems, which disrupted traditional land ownership patterns. Tribal lands were often reclassified as government or private property, resulting in large-scale dispossession and displacement of tribal people. This land alienation pushed many tribal communities into poverty and forced labour, as they lost access to their ancestral forests and agricultural lands, which were integral to their subsistence and cultural practices (Guha, 1999).
British forest policies further marginalized tribal communities by restricting their access to forests through the Indian Forest Acts of 1865 and 1878. These laws classified forests as state property and imposed stringent controls on the use of forest resources, such as hunting, gathering, and shifting cultivation, which were crucial to tribal economies. Shifting the domain of sovereignty from the people to the state, this not only curtailed the traditional rights of tribal people but also criminalized their way of life, making them subject to legal penalties for engaging in customary practices (Rangarajan, 1996).
Additionally, the British colonial authorities categorized many tribal groups as “criminal tribes” under the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871, branding them as habitual criminals based on their nomadic lifestyles. This stigmatization led to severe discrimination, surveillance, and forced settlements in reformatory camps, stripping these communities of their dignity and freedom. Though the act was repealed in 1952, the legacy of the “criminal tribe” label continues to affect these communities (Radhakrishna, 2001).
Global efforts to protect the rights of nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes have gained momentum in recent years, focusing on issues of land rights, cultural preservation, and political recognition. These efforts are driven by international organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and regional bodies that recognize the unique vulnerabilities faced by these communities due to their mobile lifestyles and distinct cultural practices.
One of the key international frameworks supporting nomadic and semi-nomadic rights is the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted in 2007. The Indian delegation had voted in favour of the declaration stating that India had consistently favoured the promotion and protection of indigenous peoples’ rights, and pointed out that the Declaration did not define what constituted indigenous peoples. (General Assembly, 2011) While not all nomadic groups identify as indigenous, the declaration’s provisions on self-determination, land rights, and cultural protection have been instrumental in advocating for the rights of mobile communities globally. UNDRIP emphasizes the importance of recognizing traditional land use patterns and ensuring that nomadic tribes have access to their customary territories and resources (United Nations, 2007).
The International Labour Organization’s (ILO) Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, adopted in 1989, also provides a legal framework for protecting the rights of nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes. The convention calls for the recognition of these groups’ distinct cultural identities and their rights to participate in decision-making processes that affect their lives, including those related to land use and resource management (ILO, 1989).
NGOs and civil society organizations also play a crucial role in supporting nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes. Organizations like Survival International, the Pastoralist Communication Initiative and ActionAid Association work to raise awareness, provide legal support, and advocate for policy changes that uphold the rights of nomadic communities. These groups often emphasize the value of nomadic knowledge and sustainable practices, promoting the idea that protecting the rights of nomadic tribes is not only a matter of justice but also of environmental and cultural importance.
The Government of India has taken several significant steps to secure and protect the rights of tribal communities through constitutional provisions, legislative measures, and targeted development programs. Recognizing the unique challenges faced by Scheduled Tribes (STs), the government has aimed to ensure their social, economic, and political inclusion.
The Indian Constitution includes specific provisions to safeguard tribal rights. Articles 15 and 16 prohibit discrimination against Scheduled Tribes and guarantee equality of opportunity in public employment, while Article 46 directs the state to promote the educational and economic interests of STs and protect them from social injustice and exploitation. Articles 330 and 332 reserve seats for STs in the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies, ensuring their political representation. Additionally, the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution provide special administrative arrangements for tribal areas, offering autonomy in governance and protecting tribal customs and land rights (Constitution of India, 1950).
Key legislations like the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, commonly known as the Forest Rights Act, address historical injustices by recognizing the rights of forest-dwelling tribes over land and forest resources. The Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA), 1996, extends the provisions of self-governance to tribal communities, empowering them to manage local resources and make decisions in accordance with their traditional practices (Ministry of Tribal Affairs, 2006).
The government has also introduced affirmative action policies, such as reservations in education, employment, and political representation, to uplift tribal communities. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs, established in 1999, coordinates a variety of welfare schemes, including the Vanbandhu Kalyan Yojana and scholarships for tribal students, aimed at improving educational access, healthcare, and economic opportunities for tribal populations (Ministry of Tribal Affairs, 2020).
To combat exploitation and violence against tribal communities, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, was enacted, providing legal protection against discrimination, violence, and wrongful dispossession. This law aims to ensure the safety and dignity of tribal people by prescribing strict penalties for offenses committed against them (Ministry of Law and Justice, 1989).
Recognizing the injustice and colonial implications of the Criminal Tribes Act, the Government of India repealed it in August 1949, and on 31 August 1952 de-notified the “criminal tribes” identified by the Criminal Tribes Act. These communities have over the years referred to themselves as ‘De-notified Tribes’ or DNTs, and by the more wider term Nomadic Tribes and De-Notified Tribes or NTDNTs – based on the understanding that the vulnerabilities faced by these communities are shared even by those nomadic tribes that may not have been notified as criminal under the Criminal Tribes Act.
Though 31st August has been since celebrated as ‘Vimukti Diwas’ or liberation day, the repeal of the Criminal Tribes Act and the denotification of all “criminal tribes” has not been enough to end the vulnerabilities faced by NTDNT communities that arise from the discrimination, stigma and oppression that they face from society and authorities, and the socioeconomic precarities brought about by their available means of livelihood in an increasingly modern, market driven economy based on clearly defined individual property rights on the disappearance of the commons and customary rights of communities.
The Government of India established the first Commission for De-notified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic tribes in October 2003. However, due to certain limitations, the commission faced challenges in fulfilling its mandate. The National Commission For De-notified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes, headed by Balakrishna Renke was formed in March 2005 to complete the unfinished tasks. In July 2008, the Renke Commission submitted its report, which included several recommendations. Building on these recommendations, a working group established by the National Advisory Council proposed a detailed set of recommendations for these communities in 2011. Taking into account the suggestions put forth by both NAC and the Renke Commission, in February 2024 the government decided to establish a National Commission for De-notified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes for a duration of three years. The Renke Commission had carried out a study to understand the status of the de-notified tribes and highlighted that 50 per cent of NTDNTs lacked any kind of documents and 98 per cent were landless (Renke Commission, 2008).
Subsequently, in 2017 the National Commission under Chairperson Bhiku Ramji ldate came out with a report which delved deeper into the challenges faced by the de-notified tribes. One of the primary sources of information for the report on the challenges faced by these communities were the grievances expressed through petitions and memorandums received by the Commission. The Commission categorized these grievances based on their nature and took appropriate action accordingly. A substantial number of over 3,200 petitions and memorandums were submitted, covering a wide range of issues. These included appeals for constitutional recognition, the creation of a separate schedule for these communities, inclusion in SC/ST lists and provisions for education, housing, and other essential services.
The Idate Commission became aware of various issues affecting these communities through the grievances and representations received from the states, union territories, as well as individuals and organizations. Out of more than 3,700 says 3,200 in the previous para petitions and memorandums received, the highest number of petitions, 618, concerned infrastructure and sanitation. These petitions highlighted the need for basic amenities such as roads, drainage systems, toilets, community centres and cremation grounds. The second highest number of petitions, approximately 568, focused on housing facilities and land allotment for housing or agriculture.
Around 551 petitions were received advocating for separate reservation in education and the creation of a separate schedule for de-notified and nomadic communities, similar to SC and ST categories. Other petitions addressed issues related to the lack of identification documents like Aadhaar, ration card and caste certificate, as well as requests for inclusion in SC/ST/OBC or in NTDNT categories. Additional significant grievances included the lack of nearby schools, requests for special scholarship schemes and separate hostel facilities and the difficulties faced by these communities in obtaining loans due to lack of documents and identity proof. Artisan and acrobatic communities also sought special assistance from the government to sustain their traditional livelihoods.
The government has launched several welfare schemes to improve the socio-economic status of nomadic communities. These include scholarships for students from DNT, NT, and SNT backgrounds, such as the Dr. Ambedkar Pre-Matric and Post-Matric Scholarship schemes, which are designed to increase access to education. Additionally, the government provides skill development programs and financial support for housing, aiming to create sustainable livelihoods for nomadic families (Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, 2020).
The government has also been working on issuing identity documents, such as Aadhaar cards and voter IDs, to members of nomadic communities, helping them access public services and benefits. Efforts to improve legal recognition and representation in policy-making are ongoing, although challenges remain due to the diverse and mobile nature of these groups.
Despite these initiatives, nomadic communities and de-notified tribes continue to face significant barriers, including land insecurity, social stigma, and limited access to healthcare and education. The government’s efforts reflect an ongoing commitment to integrating these communities into mainstream society while respecting their cultural heritage.
ActionAid Association recently undertook an exercise of collective listening encompassing extensive consultations at both the state and community levels, to understand from the communities involved what a comprehensive agenda reflecting the diverse needs and perspectives of de-notified and nomadic tribes would be. In total about 70,000 community members met in meetings spread across the states of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Telangana and Uttar Pradesh. These views have been published and shared with multiple stakeholders (ActionAid Association, 2024). In addition, a focussed exercise to understand the socio-economic conditions and livelihood transformations of women from de-notified tribes from five states of India, covering 3000 women is now underway.
6.1 Need to Fast-track Urgent Development Interventions for Particularly Vulnerable Amongst Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribal Communities
While all NTDNT communities in India face vulnerabilities, it is vital to recognize that the extent and nature of these vulnerabilities can vary significantly among different groups within this category. Factors such as geographical location, socioeconomic status, historical experiences, cultural practices and access to resources contribute to the disparities in vulnerabilities among NTDNT communities. Some NTDNT communities may face severe economic deprivation, lack of access to basic services such as healthcare and education and social exclusion due to entrenched discrimination and stigma. These communities often struggle with poverty, unemployment and marginalization, making them highly vulnerable to exploitation and neglect.
However, within the broader category of NTDNT communities, there are also variations in resilience, level of organization and access to support networks. Some communities may have stronger social cohesion, cultural capital, or historical resilience strategies that mitigate their vulnerabilities to some extent. Additionally, government policies and interventions may disproportionately benefit certain NTDNT communities over others, depending on factors such as political representation, advocacy efforts and regional disparities in development priorities.
Therefore, while NTDNT communities share common challenges related to historical discrimination and socioeconomic marginalization, it is essential to recognize and address the specific needs and vulnerabilities of each community within this diverse category to ensure inclusive and equitable development.
The Government of India looks at the pre-agricultural level of technology, low level of literacy, economic backwardness and a declining or stagnant population as criteria for deciding if a tribe is a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG). A study of the living conditions of communities including the pardhis, the Vasudev community, the mhasanjogi the madari, the boom boom mattukaran and tribal communities engaged in community-based sex work, can indicate the diverse challenges faced by particular NTDNT groups and illustrate the need for targeted and urgent policy and development interventions to address their specific vulnerabilities. They also show the need for creating a special category for the particularly vulnerable among NTDNT communities.
6.2 The Enactment of New Laws and the Revocation of Some Old Laws to Protect Rights of Nomadic Tribes and De-Notified Tribes
A new law should be drafted to explicitly recognize De-notified Communities, similar to the 1992 Statute on Minorities. Legislation akin to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is needed to address offenses against NTDNT communities.
We need to revoke the Habitual Offenders’ Act, because it, in many ways, extends the stigmatisation caused by the Criminal Tribes Act. This will go a long way to end criminalization and police atrocities against NTDNTs. A review of the Prevention of Begging Act (1959), Bombay Prevention of Begging Act (1959), Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1986), Wildlife Protection Act (1972), Forest (Conservation) Act (1980), and excise laws is essential to eliminate discrimination and uphold the rights of NTDNT communities.
6.3 Statutory Enumeration of Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribal Communities
We need a special census and the enumeration of De-notified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes should be carried out. NTDNTs should receive special focus in the decadal census, and priority in the issuing of unique identification (UID) and other government ID cards. States unaware of the existence of nomadic communities should refer to the provisional lists of nomadic communities prepared by the National Commission on De-notified and Nomadic Tribes to enable identification of communities. The district administrations must proactively issue caste certificates and birth and death certificates to NTDNTs in the districts. A caste certificate is a prerequisite if NTDNTs are to receive entitlements that SCs, STs and OBCs get. Pastoral, former hunter-gatherers and other forest communities should be paid special attention due to their geographical isolation during this process.
6.4 Mainstreaming Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribal Communities in All On-going Programs and Schemes
De-notified Tribes (DNTs) and Nomadic Tribes (NTs) have historically been marginalized and continue to face challenges in accessing basic services and opportunities. Despite various government initiatives, these communities often remain excluded from mainstream development programs. The unique lifestyle and transient nature of NTDNTs lead to additional barriers to their education healthcare, and economic stability. Girls and women from these communities face compounded disadvantages due to gender-based discrimination and limited access to education and healthcare. Lack of formal addresses and permanent settlements hinder their ability to avail of government schemes, including employment opportunities under MGNREGA and financial services. Therefore, targeted interventions are crucial for mainstreaming NTDNTs into on-going programs and schemes, ensuring their inclusion in education, skill development, healthcare, financial services and livelihood opportunities.
A special NTDNT sub-plan in union and state budgets is needed to improve the socioeconomic conditions of NTDNT communities, with safeguards to prevent fund diversion. Education initiatives should include residential schools and hostels for nomadic NTDNT children, multilingual teaching, special scholarships, vocational training, and access to early childhood care through anganwadis and creches along migratory routes. Special attention is required for children from acrobatic and entertainment communities, promoting their talents through dedicated arts schools and training programs.
Healthcare access should be enhanced through mobile dispensaries, training NTDNT women as ASHA workers, and free medical facilities. Concessional loans and skill development programs should be facilitated through dedicated finance corporations. Special measures to protect and empower NTDNT women include prioritizing loans, creating protection cells, and implementing anti-trafficking action plans.
Employment opportunities should be increased through MGNREGA, self-employment under DAY-NRLM, and recognition under the Street Vendors Act. The Building and Other Construction Workers Act should include traditional construction workers among NTDNTs. Financial inclusion initiatives must involve simplified banking guidelines and priority sector lending. Revitalizing NTDNT cultural heritage involves promoting traditional art, organizing cultural festivals, and destigmatizing performances by NTDNT communities.
6.5 Affirmative Action for Nomadic and De-notified Tribes
Nomadic and De-notified Tribes (NTDNTs) in India are among the most marginalized communities, facing systemic discrimination and exclusion in education, healthcare, employment, and social justice. Despite government efforts, existing measures remain inadequate, necessitating targeted interventions to address their unique challenges and historical injustices.
There is need to create a distinct category for NTDNTs within SC, ST, and OBC classifications, with sub-reservation for particularly vulnerable groups, pending the creation of a Third Schedule under the Constitution. There is need to allocate a separate quota in education and government jobs to bridge gaps and promote social inclusivity.
6.6 Institutional Framework for Promoting Rights of Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribes
Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribes are among the most marginalized communities, facing significant challenges like lack of education, healthcare, and social discrimination. The absence of a dedicated institutional mechanism exacerbates these issues. Establishing a separate ministry at state and central levels and creating statutory commissions for NTDNTs can provide focused attention and resources. Additionally, ensuring representation of NTDNTs in decision-making bodies and setting up welfare boards in each state will help address their unique needs, promote their welfare, and protect their rights. This framework will ensure inclusive development and empowerment of these historically marginalized communities.
6.7 Economic Empowerment of Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribes
De-notified Tribes (DNTs) and Nomadic Communities face economic challenges despite their unique traditional skills. Their crafts, although culturally rich, lack market access due to insufficient design and marketing support. Traditional performers struggle to find platforms, and those with knowledge of forest flora are underutilized in conservation efforts. To address this, the government should provide targeted design and marketing support, promote performing arts through the Ministry of Tourism, and integrate traditional forest knowledge into conservation. Additionally, viable alternative livelihoods and skill development programs are essential to prevent community members from engaging in illicit activities for survival.
6.8 Protection and Rehabilitation of Nomadic Tribes and Denotified Tribes in Forest Areas
Nomadic and De-notified Tribes (NTDNTs) living in forest areas face significant marginalization, harassment, and displacement due to a lack of recognition of their cultural practices and livelihoods. Misunderstandings about their way of life lead to unwarranted harassment, particularly of ex-hunting communities wrongly accused when poaching incidents occur. Women and girls are especially vulnerable to sexual harassment due to their work in remote areas. Relocated nomadic communities struggle without land titles or recognition under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, affecting their ability to secure livelihoods. Pastoral NTDNTs, who rely on grazing and water access, are severely impacted when evicted for forest preservation or the establishment of protected areas.This calls for sensitization of Forest Officials, strict disciplinary action against forest officials who harass NTDNTs, especially when communities are unjustly targeted after poaching incidents, special protection against sexual harassment should be provided to women and girls from NTDNTs working in remote forest areas, with stringent action against misconduct by forest officials, land titles for relocated communities under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, and recognition of pastoralist rights including grazing and water access, to ensure their sustainable livelihoods.
6.9 Shelter and Infrastructure Development
Nomadic and De-notified Tribes face severe housing challenges, often lacking access to secure shelter and basic infrastructure. The absence of a targeted housing policy under PMAY exacerbates their vulnerabilities. Unique housing needs are unaddressed in existing schemes, and nomadic fishing communities face displacement without resettlement provisions near traditional areas. Basic amenities such as roads, schools, electricity, and water are often lacking in their settlements.
We need to conduct a survey of NTDNT settlements to assess housing needs, forming the basis for a suitable shelter program for houseless communities. Ensure the inclusion of NTDNTs in PMAY through targeted policy initiatives and create dedicated sub-schemes within PMAY for their specific housing requirements. Provide eligible NTDNT households with free or subsidized housing, ensuring access to safe, secure shelter. Develop diverse housing models that accommodate NTDNTs’ livelihood and cultural needs, such as locating homes near traditional work areas. Implement a dedicated infrastructure program to provide basic amenities in NTDNT settlements, enhancing their quality of life.
6.10 Police Sensitization and Training
NTDNTs historically face discrimination from law enforcement, leading to mistrust and insecurity. Police biases often result in unwarranted detentions and harassment, which further alienate these communities.
We need to design and implement mandatory training for police to address biases and improve cultural sensitivity toward NTDNTs. Involve police in NTDNT welfare programs to build trust and better understand community vulnerabilities. Enforce strict actions against police who violate due process with NTDNTs, including unlawful detentions and harassment. Establish special cells for NTDNT women to report harassment, ensuring their safety and access to justice. Nationwide removal of caste-based labour practices in prisons to prevent discrimination against NTDNT inmates.
7. Conclusion
Nomadic tribes are an integral part of Indian culture and ethos, embodying centuries-old traditions, diverse lifestyles, and unique skills. Their contributions to arts, crafts, music, and oral traditions enrich India’s cultural tapestry. Their deep knowledge of nature and sustainable living practices also reflect the country’s rich, diverse heritage and adaptability.
We need to recognize that the British enacted the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 driven by a combination of their own bias, prejudice and fear. British and European biases against nomadic populations, especially the Romany people (often referred to as Roma or Gypsies), have been longstanding and pervasive, rooted in stereotypes and social prejudices. Historically, the Romany were often depicted as inherently criminal, deceitful, and untrustworthy, which led to their marginalization and persecution. In Britain, laws such as the Vagrancy Acts criminalized the itinerant lifestyles of nomadic groups, contributing to their stigmatization and exclusion from mainstream society (Mayall, 2004).
Across Europe, the Roma faced systemic discrimination, including forced assimilation, expulsions, and restrictions on movement. During the Nazi era, anti-Romany sentiments escalated into genocide, with hundreds of thousands of Roma being murdered in the Holocaust (Crowe, 1996). These biases were not just social but institutionalized, as seen in policies that aimed to “settle” or “civilize” nomadic groups, undermining their cultural autonomy and ways of life.
The portrayal of nomadic groups as social outcasts and criminals was often used to justify discriminatory policies and practices, reinforcing negative stereotypes. This historical bias continues to affect the Roma and other nomadic communities today, as they face ongoing challenges in accessing education, employment, and housing, and continue to be targets of racism and xenophobia in many European countries (Sigona and Trehan, 2009).
The Criminal Tribes Act, thus, was less about actual criminal behaviour and more about controlling and assimilating communities that resisted the colonial order.
We need to recognize that the project of promoting rights of the ghumantu jatis of India, the nomadic, semi-nomadic and de-notified tribal communities is part of the ongoing and urgent project to de-colonize India.
References
ActionAid Association (2024). A Nomadic Tribes and De-notified-Tribes Agenda for Just Futures
Adams, D. W. (1995). Education for Extinction: American Indians and the Boarding School Experience, 1875-1928. University Press of Kansas.
African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR). (2005). Report of the African Commission’s Working Group of Experts on Indigenous Populations/Communities.
Assembly, General (2011). “General Assembly Adopts Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples:‘Major Step Forward’ Towards Human Rights For All, Says President.” GA/10612, UNGAOR 61st Sess.(13 September 2007), online: UN< https://www. un. org/press/en/2007/ga10612. doc. htm (2011).
Bhukya, B., & Surepally, S. (2021). Unveiling the World of the Nomadic Tribes and Denotified Tribes: An Introduction. Engage Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 56, Issue No. 36.
Constitution of India (1950). Articles 15, 16, 46, 244, 330, 332.
Crowe, D. (1996). A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia. Palgrave Macmillan.
Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. W.W. Norton & Company.
Fratkin, E. (1997). Pastoralism: Governance and Development Issues. Annual Review of Anthropology, 26*, 235-261.
Guha, R. (1999). Savaging the Civilized: Verrier Elwin, His Tribals, and India. University of Chicago Press.
International Labour Organization. (1989). Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169).
Khazanov, A. M. (1994). Nomads and the Outside World. University of Wisconsin Press.
Mayall, D. (2004). Gypsy Identities 1500-2000: From Egipcyans and Moon-men to the Ethnic Romany. Routledge.
Milloy, J. S. (1999). A National Crime: The Canadian Government and the Residential School System, 1879 to 1986. University of Manitoba Press.
Ministry of Law and Justice (1989). Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. (2020). Annual Report 2019-20.
Ministry of Tribal Affairs (2006). Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act.
Ministry of Tribal Affairs (2020). Annual Report 2019-20.
National Commission for Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes (NCDNT). (2008). Report of the National Commission for Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes.
Radhakrishna, M. (2001). Dishonoured by History: ‘Criminal Tribes’ and British Colonial Policy. Orient Longman.
Rangarajan, M. (1996). Fencing the Forest: Conservation and Ecological Change in India’s Central Provinces 1860-1914. Oxford University Press.
Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications.
Salzman, P. C. (2004). Pastoralists: Equality, Hierarchy, and the State. Westview Press.
Sigona, N., & Trehan, N. (2009). Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilization, and the Neoliberal Order. Palgrave Macmillan.
United Nations. (2007).
Wolfe, P. (2006). Settler Colonialism and the Elimination of the Native. Journal of Genocide Research, 8(4), 387-409.
* Mandatory fields
My ActionAid is an interactive space created exclusively for ActionAid donors to express themselves, to get in touch with us , to be a part of our campaigns and to trace their journey with the ActionAid family!
Get to know
your child
Donation
summary
Support our
campaigns
Download
receipt