|
|
Health
Child Out of School is a
Laborer
By Malvika Kaul
Magsaysay Award winner
Shantha Sinha believes that all children out of school are laborers. The
86th Amendment to the Constitution of India - which recognizes education
as a fundamental right of the child - has, therefore, breathed new life
into her endeavors.
Sinha and her
organization, the Mamidipudi Venkatarangaiya Foundation (MVF), have
challenged the Child Labor (Prohibition and Regulation) Act
1986 in a public interest litigation. They allege that an Act that
prohibits child labor in some sectors, and actually regulates it in
other sectors, rationalizes the continuation of child labor. The Court,
on its part, responded in February 2006 by asking all states and union
territories to respond to Sinha's petition within six weeks. "Children
have to be in school and there cannot be a place other than schools for
them," the Court said.
Sinha explains the
thinking behind her petition and what it will take for India to
eradicate child labor.
Q. Let us start with a little background
on the public interest litigation (PIL) you filed...
A. The 86th Amendment to the Constitution of India guarantees Right to
Education as a fundamental right. But we notice that the Child Labor
(Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 is in fact in violation of this
amendment. It does not prohibit all forms child labor. In fact, while it
prohibits child labor in certain industries, it regulates the conditions
of work in other sectors. At the same time, if the child renders work in
his own family then it is not listed as a prohibitive occupation nor can
that work be regulated. Since all children are not covered under law,
the Act is regressive and, in a way, offers rationalization for the
continuation of child labor. This is the thinking behind our PIL, filed
in the Supreme Court in July 2005 (WP 318/2005), to demand that all
forms of child labor be prohibited in consonance with Article 21A of the
Constitution.
Q. But isn't defining child labor
tricky, especially when it is sanctioned by parents?
A. MVF believes that child labor encompasses every non-school going
child, irrespective of whether the child is engaged in wage or non-wage
work, or whether he/she is working for the family or others. We believe
that a child out of school will sooner than later join the labor force
and so is a potential child laborer. Our experience has also shown that
poor children do not survive in school up to class 10 even. Many
children are pushed out of school as they are unable to overcome the
barriers of discrimination that they encounter while they are in school.
In this regard, we also feel that every child attending a government
school is a potential child laborer. This is also why I feel that the
State cannot be authorized to question parents until such time that they
make it possible for every child to attend school.
Q. Is it possible for the State to
intervene where families hire children as domestic help?
A. If the middle class and the elite stop hiring domestic help, it would
set an example for the rest of the society to emulate their behavior. It
is in this context that the State has to intervene in firming up the
laws on child labor. Under the present Act, domestic child labor is not
even regarded as child labor. It is important that there is consensus
among the elite favoring universalisation of education. As long as the
elite remain isolated from the issue, programs and their implementation
would remain half-hearted. They must understand that democracy involves
not just voting rights but also equity among citizens.
Q. What impact has the Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan (SSA) had in preventing child labor?
A. In several states, due to the SSA's intensive enrolment drives, norms
of demand for education have been created. However, since it has not
planned continuance of these children in schools after class V, many of
them have dropped out and joined the labor force. So, there is a need
for comprehensive planning in SSA.
Q. And what about the National Child
Labor Program (NCLP)?
A. MVF believes NCLP has not been effective. The program is based upon
the 1986 Act, and so a critique of the program is as such a critique of
the Act as well. We believe that the government's division of child
labor into 'hazardous' and 'non-hazardous' occupations is inadequate.
For one, all children out of school are in a hazardous condition. For
another, the child labor market is very fluid. A child could be engaged
in both hazardous and non-hazardous industries on different days of the
week. So, a survey would never be able to adequately understand the
situation.
Also, this division of the market leaves many girl children - who are
fetching water or fuel wood or carrying siblings - out of the benefits
of the NCLP. Their relentless activity goes unnoticed and unrecognized.
Many hundreds of thousands of girls work for 12-13 hours in farms,
inhaling pesticides and chemicals. MVF has also noticed that many such
girls were subject to physical and sexual abuse by outsiders and family
members even at the age of 10-12 years. If we are confined to
'hazardous' occupation as defined by the government, these girls have no
hope.
Another set of children invisible in the present scheme of things are
the hundreds of thousands of children - traditionally only boys, but now
many girls - engaged in bonded labor. Also invisible are the girls who
are married by 12 years of age and are mothers by the time they are 14.
A child should not be a parent. The relation between early child
marriage (and the consequent dropping out of school) and child labor
must be understood and recognized.
Finally, it is impractical to target children working in so-called
'hazardous' industries alone. The absence of a social norm that no child
must work in any form of labor will result in a new set of children
taking the place of those who have been withdrawn from work. The focus
must be on total abolition and in addressing the rights of children who
are out of school. In doing so, children engaged in any form of child
labor - including those in hazardous industries - would be covered.
April 2, 2006
By arrangement with
Women's Feature Service
Top
| Health
The Week of April 2, 2006
In Indira's Footsteps: Will History Repeat Itself?
by Rajinder Puri
Wardrobe Malfunction - of Splits, Slips and More!
by Usha Kakkar
Weakness & Selfishness – Reluctant Parents of Virtue
by Gaurang Bhatt, MD
Freedom by Naira Yaqoob
How to Overcome Failure? by Sugandha
Indulkar
The First Line of Defense by Michael Levy
Helping Your Unpopular Child by Garima
Gupta
Is Your 8 - 10 Year Old Crazy? by Gary
Direnfeld
Why do we have Kids! by Meera Chowdhry
Child out of School is a Laborer by Malvika
Kaul
The Water Bridge A Short Story by NS Murty
And, The Bell Rang A Story by Raghvendra Singh
Saving our Life-Support System by William C.
Gladish
Will the Creation of One World Solve the Problems
of Today? by TA Ramesh
Neo Imperialism at its Best by Tahir Raj
Bhasin
Homeopathy: In a Realm of Its Own by
Rajgopal Nidamboor
The Homeopathic Treatment of Asthma by Dr.
Muneeb Faraaz
The Omega 3 Code by Neeta Lal
Risky Reconstruction & Breast Cancer by Elayne
Clift
Human Rights and Criminal Justice System by
Dr. Shanker Adawal
Panch-Kanya: The Five Virgins of Indian Epics
by Dr. Prema Nandakumar
Bheel Mahabharata: Kunti and the Birth of the Sun
God's Child by Satya Chaitanya
Sadaat Hasan Manto : A Profile compiled by
Aparna Chatterjee
Tamil Nadu, Here I Come! by Usha Kakkar
Mothers Without Strings by Tripat Kaur
Shaking Up the Diaspora by Crespo Sebunya
Looking Through Water by Darryl D'Monte
One Woman Army : A Profile of Zakia Arshad
Epic Adventure by Anjum Wasim Dar
Crowning Glory: An Interview with Manoj Bajpai
by MH Ahsan
Pakistan Calling: An Interview with Akbar Khan
by MH Ahsan
|
|
