A/HRC/15/20* 72. Caste-based discrimination, found in various cultural contexts, and domestic servitude are linked. In South Asia, so-called “untouchables” (dalits) and certain indigenous communities make up the vast majority of people in domestic bonded labour, which is a form of domestic servitude. Moreover, specific types of degrading domestic chores are specifically associated with lower castes and linked to exploitative conditions. In certain States in India, despite a long-standing Government campaign to eradicate the practice, many dalit women reportedly still have to engage in “manual scavenging”: because of their caste they are expected to take care of scraping human excrement from dry toilets in private households or public places.33 3. Lack of State protection 73. The vast majority of victims of domestic servitude would not be in this position, if States provided them with adequate protection in line with their obligations under international law. 74. States have to criminalize all forms of slavery and servitude, investigate and prosecute the perpetrators with due diligence and assign penalties that fit the severity of the crime. Nevertheless, many countries still lack specific criminal provisions on slavery and servitude and therefore have to rely on prosecuting some of the individual acts involved, which often does not capture the severity of the crime. The European Court of Human Rights was confronted with this problem in the landmark case of Siliadin v. France, concerning a Togolese girl who was subjected to domestic servitude. Given that France, at the time, did not have specific criminal provisions on slavery and servitude that would have afforded the victim specific and effective protection, the Court found a violation of the right not to be subjected to servitude.34 Furthermore, States often fail to prosecute crimes accompanying domestic servitude, such as forced confinement or assault. 75. Many States do not afford domestic workers the equal protection of labour law, which invites exploitation, leading, in extreme cases, to domestic servitude. In a number of States, domestic work is excluded from the scope of application of relevant labour laws. At best, parallel regimes are set up that provide lesser standards of protection. It is very common to exclude domestic workers from essential social benefits such as health care, compensation in case of invalidity, pensions or maternity leave and labour rights such as paid vacations, rest days or maximum work hours. 76. A recent study of the laws of ten Asian countries with large numbers of domestic workers found that only three countries included domestic workers in their labour legislation and only one provided full labour protection to domestic workers, including migrant domestic workers.35 Middle Eastern States with the same legislative shortcoming have long been contemplating to extend their existing labour laws to domestic workers or adopt specific legislation for them. In recent years, however, only Jordan has successfully reformed its labour law to include domestic workers. In some European countries, the domestic work aspect of au pair arrangements is not recognized, leading to regulatory protection gaps. 77. There are positive examples of States adopting specific norms to protect domestic workers and thereby discouraging domestic servitude. South Africa, for instance, has introduced a minimum wage for domestic workers. Labour legislation in Hong Kong, 33 34 35 GE.10-15169 Office for Arab States, 2004), p. 18. WaterAid India, “Burden of Inheritance: Can we stop Manual Scavenging?” (New Delhi, 2009). Siliadin v. France, paras. 141 ff. Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, “Advance Domestic Workers Rights: Recognise Their Right to Collective Representation” (2010). 15