CRY's take on the Child Labor Law

This is in continuation with my previous post on the subject of child labor. CRY needs no introduction. I happened to chance upon CRY's take on the implementation of the law and this is what I liked about it:

Even within the notification's limited ambit, there are gaps:

The prohibition is restricted to servants at home, hotels, dhabas and other recreation centres. It is not clear whether this applies to the household manufacturing sector, where a vast number of children are employed in similar working conditions.

The conviction rate for the already existing Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986 is abysmally low - so low, that it is hardly a deterrent for employers. Without strengthening both enforcement mechanisms and provisions for rehabilitation, this step has little meaning.

The notification is premised on the belief that that child labour needs to be prohibited in hazardous occupations only. This totally ignores children's right to safe and facilitating environment for development, including health, nutrition and education needs.

Combined with the failure to table and pass legislation enabling the fundamental right to education and the likelihood that this notification is no more than an attempt to pre-empt the anticipated Supreme Court move to prohibit all forms of child labour, it is hard to imagine that this move will achieve significant impact.

The National Sample Survey 2000, reported 16.4 million Indian children aged 5-14 years were 'engaged in economic activities and domestic or non-remunerative work'. Another 46 million children of school-going age are unaccounted for, neither enrolled in school nor officially working.
Giving India at least one reason to be Number 1- home to the largest number of child labourers on the planet.

27 years of CRY's work with 2,500 marginalised communities across 20 states across India , has shown that the piece-meal, scheme-based, relief-oriented approach adopted by both governmental and NGOs has limited impact and practically no sustainability. This is because they fail to address the underlying causes of deprivation. Causes related to gender, caste, ethnicity, religion and class keep over 100 million Indian children hungry, unschooled and vulnerable to the worst forms of abuse and exploitation imaginable.

To read the entire article click here.

Ban on Child Labor

On October 10, 2006 the ban on child labor came into effect. There is a lot to cheer about. Right? ..... No, wrong.

My reasons for saying so is based on the certain facts that none of us will be able to contradict nor ignore. Firstly, the law is restricted to only children working in places like dhabas and homes. Children working on farms are exempted from this law. One wonders why? Are'nt they children or are'nt they entitled to the same priviliges as other children?

Maybe some people would try to justify this kind of a restriction by saying that children working in the farms help in fulfilling the basic necessties that life demands. Without them it would be impossible to keep some families above the poverty line. The age old reasoning .. more hands means more work and more work means better income.

As I see it, its a vicious circle. There is no gaurantee on the minimum wages that the adults in the family can earn. This leads to mass exploitation... economical, social, sexual. And the children are also brought into the mess. And it is much easier to exploit children. Plus, according to Maslow's theory of needs, until and unless the basic needs of food, clothes and shelter are not met the family does not think about its other needs. And the child's right to education and a playful childhood is higher up in the pyramid provided by Maslow.

It is difficult to convince a family that is struggling to gather together the basic necessities in life that educating their children will elevate their social and financial conditions beacuse the child will be equipped to get a better paying job. But the point remains that the family will only get returns 15-20 years down the line. Immediate affects of providing a child with a childhood that he deserves will not be visible to the family. Therefore, it is so difficult to convince them.
But inspite of all this the question still remains ... how right is it to exclude the farm child labor from the purview of this law. Should'nt the goverment really do something about them too?

The second reason why I dont think that the law will bring cheer is that the society has invented another proverb based on the proverb 'Where there is a will there is a way' - 'Where there is a law there is a workaround around it'. As long as the menatlity of the people who actively employ child laborers still remain intact fighting for a child's rights is really fruitless. There is a strong need to change their point of view and that would take some very bold and very drastic steps.

And I would probably choke this blog site if I start writing about the law and child sex workers. So I will simply point out that they are also on my mind when I say that this law is not something to cheer about.

It is great that the government is considering the issues ... but the laws were there and are still pending implementation. So if a strong group of people really come foward and enforce the implementation of the law then it really would be something to cheer about. Maybe.... just maybe then it can be extended to the other type of child laborers.