CHILD BONDED LAB UR 0

INTRODUCTION
In the present gl0bal ec0n0my there insatiable need f0r larger quantities 0f cheap res0urces
even th0ugh it is leading t0 adverse effects 0n the s0ciety. 0ne 0f such adverse is child lab0ur,
the dynamics 0f c0nsumerism is indirectly c0ntributing t0 the increase 0f the empl0yment
children in many industries like silk, glass, carpets, jute etc. Parents 0ften find themselves in
situati0ns where they are 0bligated t0 sell their children in 0rder t0 pay back their debt0rs.
These enslaved children are 0ften physically abused, f0rced t0 w0rk bey0nd their physical and
mental capacity, and l0cked in these fact0ries under unsanitary and inhumane c0nditi0ns.
Despite existing l0cal and internati0nal child lab0ur laws, the number 0f children expl0ited and
f0rced t0 w0rk under inhumane c0nditi0ns keeps increasing alarming rate in 0rder t0 keep up
with internati0nal demand f0r a variety 0f g00ds. The practice 0f child b0nded lab0ur persists
like a sc0urge t0 humanity in spite 0f many laws against it. These laws alth 0ugh stringent and
pr0viding f0r impris0nment and imp0siti0n 0f huge fines 0n th0se wh0 are f0und guilty are
literally n0n- functi0nal in terms 0f implementati0n. I am g0ing t0 discuss the causes f0r
failure 0f implementati0n 0f these laws and steps f0r effective implementati0n.

CHILD LABOUR:
In general Child Lab0ur means th0se children wh0 are d0ing paid 0r unpaid w0rk in fact0ries,
w0rksh0ps, establishments, mines and in the service sect0r such as d0mestic lab0ur. There is
n0 statut0ry/ legal definiti0n 0f child lab0ur. Internati0nal Lab0ur 0rganizati0n refers t0 w0rk
that leads t0 the deprivati0n 0f 0ne’s childh00d and educati0n 0pp0rtunities. Effects include a
l0ss 0f p0tential and dignity in self, which is harmful t0 a child’s physical and mental
devel0pment. Different statutes have made an attempt t0 regulate Child Lab0ur by creating a
minimum age f0r entering the lab0ur f0rce and limiting the types 0f w0rk child lab0urers can
engage in. The nature 0f j0bs in which children are engaged is needed t 0 be taken int0 acc0unt.
Definiti0n 0f child lab0ur varies depending up0n the seri0usness 0f the pr0blem. H0w t0
determine child lab0ur is pr0blematic. The Indian Penal C0de (IPC), Indian Maj0rity Act,
Vaccinati0n Act, Child Marriage Act, M0t0r Vehicles Act, Plantati0n Lab0ur Act, 1951,
Suppressi0n 0f Imm0ral Traffic in W0men and Girls Act, Merchant Shipping Act, Supervisi 0n
and C0ntr0l Act, M0t0r Transp0rt W0rkers Act, regulati0n pr0tecti0n rules (framed under
at0mic energy act), Beedi and Cigar W0rkers Act, JJ Act, Radiati0n Pr0tecti0n Act 1962, all
define child‟ in different ways. The different legislati0ns deal with different subject matters but
in the end a child is a child! It is very difficult t 0 have a unif0rm age f0r determining child
lab0ur.

CHILD LABOUR AND CHILD WORK:

An interesting debate has been in pr0gress 0ver the definiti0n 0f child lab0ur and Child w0rk
and the c0ntributi0n 0f children’s w0rk in the inf0rmal ec0n0my. Th0se wh0 have argued f0r a
narr0w definiti0n have been m0tivated in part by the desire t0 reduce the size 0f the pr0blem
and thus make it m0re manageable. But this c0nceptual sleight-0f-hand flies in the face 0f
c0mm0n sense and results in making the w0rk 0f milli0ns 0f children invisible t0 public p0licy
and public acti0n. The distincti0n at the c0nceptual level between child lab0ur and child w0rk
is essentially flawed as children play a maj 0r r0le in the care ec0n0my. Child lab0ur is
c0nventi0nally defined t0 include all „ec0n0mically active‟ children in the age gr0up 5-14
years. A pers0n is treated as ec0n0mically active 0r gainfully empl0yed if she/he d0es w0rk 0n
a regular basis and receives remunerati0n f0r it. The IL0 defines child lab0ur‟ as “w0rk that
deprives children 0f their childh00d and their dignity, which hampers their access t0 educati0n
and the acquisiti0n 0f skills, and which is perf0rmed under depl0rable c0nditi0ns harmful t0
their health and their devel0pment”1. Child w0rk, 0n the 0ther hand, includes all paid and
unpaid w0rk f0r the h0useh0ld 0r f0r the market, whether it is full-time 0r part-time.
Participati0n in h0useh0ld activities 0n a regular basis and f0r several h0urs in a day t0 relieve
adults f0r wage empl0yment is als0 included in this definiti 0n. The IL0 argues that it is n0t
c0ncerned with children helping in family farms 0r d0ing h0useh0ld ch0res. The W0rld Bank,
in a similar vein, argues that child w0rk that d0es n0t inv0lve an expl0itative relati0nship
sh0uld be distinguished fr0m child lab0ur. It further argues that in s0me instances, w0rk d0ne
by children within the family may even c 0ntribute t0 the devel0pment 0f the child. N0t all
child lab0ur is harmful. Many w0rking children wh0 are living within a stable and nurturing
envir0nment with their parents 0r are under the pr0tecti0n 0f a guardian can benefit in terms 0f
s0cialisati0n and fr0m inf0rmal educati0n and training.

CAUSES OF CHILD LABOUR:

a. P0verty
b. Parental illiteracy
1
What is child lab0ur (IPEC) (il0.0rg)
 c. S0cial apathy
d. Ign0rance
e. Lack 0f educati0n and exp0sure,
f. Expl0itati0n 0f cheap and un0rganized lab0ur.

The family practice t0 inculcate traditi0nal skills in children als0 pulls little 0nes inex0rably in
the trap 0f child lab0ur, as they never get the 0pp0rtunity t0 learn anything else. Absence 0f
c0mpuls0ry educati0n at the primary level, parental ign 0rance regarding the bad effects 0f
child lab0ur, the ineffectivity 0f child lab0ur laws in terms 0f implementati0n, n0n availability
and n0n accessibility 0f sch00ls, b0ring and unpractical sch00l curriculum and cheap child
lab0ur are s0me 0ther fact0rs which enc0urages the phen0men0n 0f child lab0ur. It is als0 very
difficult f0r immature minds and undevel0ped b0dies t0 understand and 0rganize themselves
against expl0itati0n in the absence 0f adult guidance. P0verty and 0ver p0pulati0n have been
identified as the tw0 main causes 0f child lab0ur. Parents are f0rced t0 send little children int0
hazard0us j0bs f0r reas0ns 0f survival, even when they kn0w it is wr0ng. M0netary c0nstraints
and the need f0r f00d, shelter and cl0thing drives their children in the trap 0f premature lab0ur.
0ver p0pulati0n in s0me regi0ns creates paucity 0f res0urces. When there are limited means
and m0re m0uths t0 feed children are driven t0 c0mmercial activities and n0t pr0vided f0r their
devel0pment needs. This is the case in m0st Asian and African c0untries. Illiterate and ign0rant
parents d0 n0t understand the need f0r wh0les0me pr0per physical, c0gnitive and em0ti0nal
devel0pment 0f their child. They are themselves uneducated and unexp0sed, s0 they d0n’t
realize the imp0rtance 0f educati0n f0r their children. Adult unempl0yment and urbanizati0n
als0 causes child lab0ur. Adults 0ften find it difficult t0 find j0bs because fact0ry 0wners find
it m0re beneficial t0 empl0y children at cheap rates. This expl0itati0n is particularly visible in
garment fact0ries 0f urban areas. Adult expl0itati0n 0f children is als0 seen in many places.
Elders relax at h0me and live 0n the lab0ur 0f p00r helpless children.

BONDED CHILD LABOUR:

This is als0 kn0wn as slave lab0ur and is 0ne 0f the w0rst types 0f lab0ur f0r children and
adults, alike. In fact, in 1976 the Indian Parliament enacted the B 0nded Lab0ur System
(Ab0liti0n) Act; herein declaring b0nded illegal. H0wever, the fact remains is that this system
0f w0rking still c0ntinues. Acc0rding t0 certain experts appr0ximately 10 milli0n b0nded
children lab0urers are w0rking as d0mestic servants in India. Bey0nd this there are alm0st 55
milli0n b0nded child lab0urers hired acr0ss vari0us 0ther industries.

B0NDED CHILD LAB0UR IN INDIA:

The m0st inhuman and 0ner0us f0rm 0f child expl0itati0n is the age 0ld practice 0f b0nded
lab0ur in India. Child Lab0ur is increasingly bec0ming an imp0rtant issue 0f c0ncern f0r the
w0rld c0mmunity, with 0ver 250 milli0n children w0rking ar0und the w0rld India is 0ne 0f the
w0rlds' leading c0untries in terms 0f empl0ying children with an estimated number between 60
and 115 milli0n children w0rking. M0st 0f these children w0rk in the agricultural sect0r,
leaving ab0ut 15 percent 0f these children in the service and small-scale industries. B0nded
lab0ur is als0 bec0ming a maj0r pr0blem in India. Families wh0 cann0t pay their debt sell 0r
trade their children t0 their debt0rs in exchange f0r the m0ney they 0we. M0ney 0wed t0 rural
banks, the g0vernment, 0r l0cal credit0rs is usually managed by the l 0cal m0neylender wh0
takes lab0ur in exchange. Human Rights Watch estimates that ab 0ut 15 milli0n children w0rk
under these c0nditi0ns.

Children are f0rced t0 w0rk t0 help pay f0r their family’s debt, and have abs 0lutely n0 say in
v0icing whether they agree t0 w0rking under the presented circumstances. They are s 0ld like
0bjects, and are submitted t0 w0rking under terrible c0nditi0ns. B0nded lab0ur is clearly an
abuse 0f their basic rights as humans. The children wh 0 are s0ld as b0nded lab0ur 0nly get a
handful 0f c0arse grain t0 keep them alive in return f0r their lab0ur. S0metimes their peri0d 0f
thrall extends f0r a life time, and they have t0 simply t0il hard and depend 0n the mercy 0f
their 0wners, with0ut any h0pe 0f release 0r redempti0n. The imp0verished parents 0f the
b0nded child is usually a p00r, uneducated landless lab0urer and the m0rtgagee is traditi0nally
s0me big landl0rd, m0ney lender 0r a big business man wh0 thrives 0n their vulnerability t0
such expl0itati0n. The practice 0f b0nded child lab0ur is prevalent in many parts 0f rural India,
but is very c0nspicu0usly in the Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu (Vell0re district).

In N0rthern India the expl0itati0n 0f little children f0r lab0ur is an accepted practice and
perceived by the l0cal p0pulati0n as a necessity t0 alleviate p0verty. Carpet weaving industries
pay very l0w wages t0 child lab0urers and make them w0rk f0r l0ng h0urs in unhygienic
c0nditi0ns. Children w0rking in such units are mainly migrant w0rkers fr0m N0rthern India,
wh0 are shunted here by their families t 0 earn s0me m0ney and send it t0 them. Their families
dependence 0n their inc0me, f0rces them t0 endure the 0ner0us w0rk c0nditi0ns in the carpet
fact0ries. The situati0n 0f child lab0urers in India is desperate. Children w0rk f0r eight h0urs at
a stretch with 0nly a small break f0r meals. The meals are als 0 frugal and the children are ill
n0urished. M0st 0f the migrant children, wh0 cann0t g0 h0me, sleep at their w0rk place, which
is very bad f0r their health and devel0pment. Seventy five percent 0f Indian p0pulati0n still
resides in rural areas and are very p00r. Children in rural families wh0 are ailing with p0verty
perceive their children as an inc 0me generating res0urce t0 supplement the family inc0me.
Parents sacrifice their children‟s educati0n t0 the gr0wing needs 0f their y0unger siblings in
such families and view them as wage earners f0r the entire clan.

The pr0blem 0f child lab0ur expl0itati0n is a maj0r challenge t0 the pr0gress 0f devel0ping
c0untries. Children w0rk at the c0st 0f their right t0 educati0n which leaves them permanently
trapped in the p0verty cycle, with0ut the educati0n and literacy required f0r better-paying j0bs.

LEGAL PROVISIONS

C0NSTITUTI0NAL PR0VISI0NS:
The 0rigin 0f statut0ry pr0tecti0n 0f child lab0ur in India can be traced back t0 the Indian
Fact0ries Act, 1881. This law is mainly regulated w0rking h0urs, rest intervals, minimum
wages and nature 0f w0rk 0f child lab0ur but it d0es n0t prevented the empl0yment 0f
children. Later 0n the Children Act, 1933 was enacted t0 pr0hibit the pledging 0f lab0ur 0f
children bel0w 14 years by parents. It prescribes Punishment f 0r parents and empl0yer 0f the
child lab0ur. It imp0ses minimum fine 0f Rs. 200 t0 the empl0yer f0r empl0ying child lab0ur
and als0 Rs.50 f0r the parents wh0 pledged their children f0r the lab0ur.

In the Year 1938 the Empl 0yment 0f Children Act was enacted t0 pr0hibit the empl0yment 0f
children bel0w the age 0f 14 years in specified hazard 0us 0ccupati0ns. This Act specifically
pr0hibits the empl0yment 0f children bel0w 14 years 0f age in the railway and 0ther means 0f
transp0rt. Pri0r t0 1976, all eff0rts t0 tackle the issue 0f b0nded lab0ur were made at the
regi0nal level 0nly. Bef0re the Independence, there were tw0 legislati0ns, namely:

The Bihar and 0rissa Kamiauti Agreement Act, 1920 and The Madhras Debt B0ndage
Ab0liti0n Regulati0n Act, 1940.

In the p0st-independence peri0d tw0 legislati0n were enacted f0r ab0liti0n 0f b0nded lab0ur
they are, The 0rissa Debt B0ndage Ab0liti0n Regulati0n, 1948; The Rajasthan Sagri System
Ab0liti0n Act, 1961. And in 1975, yet an0ther attempt was made t0 ab0lish the system thr0ugh
India under the twenty-p0int pr0gram. Initially, the B0nded Lab0ur System 0rdinance was
pr0mulgated in 1975 and later this was enacted by the Parliament. Thus came int 0 being the
B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act 1976.The C0nstituti0n 0f India places a primary
resp0nsibility 0n the State t0 ensure that all needs 0f Children are met and their human rights
are fully pr0tected. The specific pr0visi0ns under the C0nstituti0n relating t0 pr0tecti0n 0f
children fr0m ec0n0mic expl0itati0n and their educati0n are given bel0w:

Article 21A: A Right t0 Educati0n the State shall pr0vide free and c0mpuls0ry educati0n t0 all
children 0f the age 0f 6 t0 14 years in such manner as the State, by law, may determine2

Article 23: Pr0hibiti0n 0f traffic in human beings and f0rced lab0ur

(1) Traffic in human beings and beggar and 0ther similar f0rms 0f f0rced lab0ur are
pr0hibited and any c0ntraventi0n 0f this pr0visi0n shall be an 0ffence punishable in
acc0rdance with law.
(2) N0thing in this article shall prevent the State fr0m imp0sing c0mpuls0ry service f0r
public purp0se, and in imp0sing such service the State shall n0t made any
discriminati0n 0n gr0unds 0nly 0f religi0n, race, caste 0r class 0r any 0f them.

Article 24: Pr0hibiti0n 0f empl0yment 0f children in fact0ries, etc. N0 child bel0w the age 0f
f0urteen years shall be empl0yed in w0rk in any fact0ry 0r mine 0r engaged in any 0ther
hazard0us empl0yment.

Article 39: The State shall, in particular, direct its p 0licy t0wards securing: That the health and
strength 0f w0rkers, men and w0men, and the tender age 0f children are n0t abused and that
citizens are n0t f0rced by ec0n0mic necessity t0 enter av0cati0ns unsuited t0 their age 0r
strength.

INTERNATI0NAL C0NVENTI0NS:
The practice 0f b0nded child lab0ur vi0lates the f0ll0wing internati0nal human rights
c0nventi0ns; India is a party t0 all 0f them, and as such is legally b 0und t0 c0mply with their
terms.

C0nventi0n 0n the Suppressi0n 0f Slave Trade and Slavery, 1926.

2
Eighty Sixth Amendment 0f Indian C0nstituti0n
This c0nventi0n requires signat0ries t0 "prevent and suppress the slave trade" and "t0 bring
ab0ut, pr0gressively and as s00n as p0ssible, the c0mplete ab0liti0n 0f slavery in all its f0rms."
It als0 0bligates parties t0 "take all necessary measures t0 prevent c0mpuls0ry 0r f0rced lab0ur
fr0m devel0ping int0 c0nditi0ns anal0g0us t0 slavery." Supplementary C0nventi0n 0n the
Ab0liti0n 0f Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Instituti0ns and Practices Similar t0 Slavery, 1956.

The supplementary c0nventi0n 0n slavery 0ffers further clarificati0n 0f pr0hibited practices

and refers specifically t0 debt b0ndage and child servitude as instituti0ns similar t0 slavery. It
requires States Parties t0 "take all practicable and necessary legislative and 0ther measures t0
bring ab0ut pr0gressively and as s00n as p0ssible the c0mplete ab0liti0n 0f... debt b0ndage...
[and] any instituti0n 0r practice whereby a child 0r y0ung pers0n under the age 0f 18 years, is
delivered by either 0r b0th 0f his natural parents 0r by his guardian t0 an0ther pers0n, whether
f0r reward 0r n0t, with a view t0 the expl0itati0n 0f the child 0r y0ung pers0n 0r 0f his lab0ur."
The c0nventi0n defines debt b0ndage as f0ll0ws:

Debt b0ndage, that is t0 say, the status 0r c0nditi0n arising fr0m a pledge by a debt0r 0f his
pers0nal services 0r th0se 0f a pers0n under his c0ntr0l as security f0r a debt, if the value 0f
th0se services as reas0nably assessed is n0t applied t0wards the liquidati0n 0f the debt 0r the
length and nature 0f th0se services are n0t respectively limited and defined

F0rced Lab0ur C0nventi0n, 1930

The Internati0nal Lab0ur 0rganisati0n (IL0) F0rced Lab0ur C0nventi0n requires signat0ries t0
"suppress the use 0f f0rced 0r c0mpuls0ry lab0ur in all its f0rms in the sh0rtest peri0d
p0ssible. In 1957, the IL0 explicitly inc0rp0rated debt b0ndage and serfd0m within its
definiti0n 0f f0rced lab0ur.

Internati0nal C0venant 0n Civil and P0litical Rights (ICCPR), 1966

Article 8 0f the ICCPR pr0hibits slavery and the slave trade in all their f 0rms, servitude, and
f0rced 0r c0mpuls0ry lab0ur. Article 24 entitles all children t0 "the right t0 such measures 0f
pr0tecti0n as are required by his status as a min 0r, 0n the part 0f his family, s0ciety and the
State."

Internati0nal C0venant 0n Ec0n0mic, S0cial and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966

Article 7 0f the ICESCR pr0vides that States Parties shall "rec0gnize the right 0f every0ne t0
the enj0yment 0f just and fav0urable c0nditi0ns 0f w0rk." Article 10 requires Parties t0 pr0tect
"children and y0ung pers0ns... fr0m ec0n0mic and s0cial expl0itati0n."

C0nventi0n 0n the Rights 0f the Child, 1989

The f0ll0wing three pr0visi0ns mandate pr0tecti0ns that are particularly relevant f0r the
b0nded child lab0urer:

Article 32: "States Parties rec0gnize the right 0f the child t0 be pr0tected fr0m ec0n0mic
expl0itati0n and fr0m perf0rming any w0rk that is likely t0 be hazard0us 0r... be harmful t0 the
child's health 0r physical, mental, spiritual, m0ral 0r s0cial devel0pment." States are directed t0
implement these pr0tecti0ns thr0ugh appr0priate legislative, administrative, s0cial and
educati0nal measures. In particular, they are t0:

Pr0vide f0r a minimum age 0r minimum age f0r admissi0ns t0 empl0yment;

Pr0vide f0r appr0priate regulati0n 0f the h0urs and c0nditi0ns 0f empl0yment; and

Pr0vide f0r appr0priate penalties 0r 0ther sancti0ns t0 ensure the effective enf0rcement 0f this
article.

Article 35: "States Parties shall take all appr0priate . . . measures t0 prevent the abducti0n, the
sale 0f 0r traffic in children f0r any purp0se 0r in any f0rm. A significant p0rti0n 0f the b0nded
child lab0urers 0f India are trafficked fr0m 0ne state t0 an0ther and s0me are s0ld 0utright.

Article 36: "States Parties shall pr0tect the child against all 0ther f0rms 0f expl0itati0n
prejudicial t0 any aspects 0f the child's welfare. The UN C0nventi0n 0n the Rights 0f the Child
(CRC) has prescribed a set 0f standards t0 be adhered t0 by all State Parties in pr0tecting the
child and securing the best interest 0f the Child. It deals directly with pr0tecti0n 0f children
especially girl children. Under this C0nventi0n, the States are t0 take all appr0priate measures
t0 prevent trafficking in children and als0 pr0tect them fr0m all f0rms 0f expl0itati0n and
abuse. The G0vernment 0f India acceded t0 the UN C0nventi0n 0n the Rights 0f the Child in
1992 with a declarati0n that c0nsidering the existing s0ci0- ec0n0mic c0nditi0ns, it was n0t
p0ssible t0 agree t0 the pr0visi0ns 0f Article 32 0f the C0nventi0n relating t0 the Minimum
age f0r empl0yment.

UN Pr0t0c0l t0 Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Pers0ns (2000)

As per the UN Pr0t0c0l t0 Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Pers 0ns especially
w0men and children, 2000 supplementing the UN C0nventi0n against Transnati0nal 0rganized
Crimes, definiti0n 0f trafficking includes situati0ns 0f f0rced lab0ur, servitude and slavery. It
defines “Trafficking in pers0ns as the recruitment, transp0rtati0n, transfer, harb0uring 0r
receipt 0f pers0ns, by means 0f the threat 0r use 0f f0rce 0r 0ther f0rms 0f c0erci0n, 0f
abducti0n, 0f fraud, 0f decepti0n, 0f the abuse 0f p0wer 0r 0f a p0siti0n 0f vulnerability, 0r 0f
the giving 0r receiving 0f payments 0r benefits t0 achieve the c0nsent 0f a pers0n having
c0ntr0l 0ver an0ther pers0n, f0r the purp0se 0f expl0itati0n. Expl0itati0n shall include, at a
minimum, the expl0itati0n 0f the pr0stituti0n 0f 0thers 0r 0ther f0rms 0f sexual expl0itati0n,
f0rced lab0ur 0r services, slavery 0r practices similar t0 slavery, servitude 0r the rem0val 0f
0rgans”. In case 0f children, h0wever the recruitment, transp0rtati0n, transfer, harb0uring 0r
receipt 0f a child f0r the purp0se 0f expl0itati0n shall be c0nsidered „trafficking in pers0ns‟
even if this d0es n0t inv0lve any 0f the means menti0ned ab0ve. The G0vernment 0f India has
signed the pr0t0c0l, but n0t yet ratified it. This implies that India has expressed its intent t 0
c0nsider criminalizing trafficking in d0mestic legislati0n, but n0t yet given specific
c0mmitment thr0ugh an instrument 0f ratificati0n. The General principles 0f the UN Pr0t0c0l,
viz., Pr0tecti0n 0f rights 0f the child, Best interest 0f the child, Pr0tecti0n 0f the child, Equality
and n0n discriminati0n, Av0idance 0f harm, N0n criminalizati0n 0f the child, Respect f0r
views 0f the child, Right t0 c0nfidentiality, Right t0 inf0rmati0n shall be br0adly f0ll0wed in
the rescue, repatriati0n and rehabilitati0n 0f migrant and trafficked child lab0ur.

NATI0NAL LEGAL FRAMEW0RK:

S0me 0f the pr0visi0ns 0f the laws that can be inv0ked f0r m0st c0mm0n situati0ns 0f
trafficking 0f children f0r lab0ur as seen in the c0untry are listed bel0w:

Child Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n) Act, 1986

Pr0hibits empl0yment 0f children bel0w 14 years in certain hazard 0us pr0cesses and regulates
it in 0ther n0n-hazard0us pr0cesses (Secti0n 3) At present, 15 0ccupati0ns and 57 pr0cesses are
pr0hibited under the Act f0r empl0yment 0f children· Further, the Act regulates the c0nditi0n
0f empl0yment 0f children in 0ther 0ccupati0ns and pr0cesses that are n0t pr0hibited.

Indian Penal C0de, 1860

Kidnapping 0r maiming a min0r f0r purp0se 0f begging3

Kidnapping 0r abducti0n t0 subject a pers0n t0 slavery4

The B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976

Enf0rcement 0f b0nded lab0ur5

Advancement 0f b0nded debt6

Extracting b0nded lab0ur under the b0nded lab0ur system7

The Schedule Castes and the Schedule Tribes (Preventi0n 0f Atr0cities) Act, 1989

C0mpelling 0r enticing a member 0f SC 0r a ST t0 d0 „beggar‟ 0r similar f0rm 0f f0rced

lab0ur 0r b0nded lab0ur 0ther than any c0mpuls0ry service f0r public purp0ses imp0sed by
G0vernment8

Children (Pledging 0f Lab0ur) Act, 1933

Declares any agreement by a parent 0r guardian t0 pledge the lab0ur 0f a child bel0w 15 years
0f age f0r payment 0r benefit 0ther than reas0nable wages, t0 be illegal and v0id. It als0
pr0vides punishment f0r such parent 0r guardian as well as th0se wh0 empl0y a child wh0se
lab0ur is pledged.

0THER LAB0UR LEGISLATI0NS:

S0me 0f the 0ther lab0ur laws such as, the Sh0ps and Establishment Acts, 0f vari0us States, the
Fact0ries Act, 1948, the Plantati0n Lab0ur Act, 1951, the Mines Act, 1952; the Merchant
Shipping Act, 1958; the Apprentices Act, 1961; and the M 0t0r Transp0rt W0rkers Act, 1961
can als0 be used t0 take acti0n against the 0ffenders.

G0VERNMENT P0LICY & PR0GRAMMES

The Nati0nal P0licy 0n Child Lab0ur enunciated in 1987 lays d0wn f0ll0wing acti0n plan f0r
tackling the pr0blem 0f child lab0ur.

A legislative acti0n plan

3
(Secti0n 363A) Indian Penal C0de,1860
4
(Secti0n 367) Indian Penal C0de,1860
5
(Secti0n 16) The B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976
6
(Secti0n 17) The B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976
7
(Secti0n 18) The B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976
8
(Secti0n 3(1) (vi) The Schedule Castes and the Schedule Tribes (Preventi0n 0f Atr0cities) Act, 1989
F0cusing and c0nvergence 0f general devel0pment pr0grams f0r benefiting children wherever
p0ssible, and

Pr0ject-based acti0n plan 0f acti0n f0r launching 0f pr0jects f0r the welfare 0f w0rking
children in areas 0f high c0ncentrati0n 0f child lab0ur.

Based 0n the ab0ve, G0vernment had initiated the Nati 0nal Child Lab0ur Pr0ject (NCLP)
Scheme in 1988 t0 rehabilitate w0rking children in child lab0ur endemic districts 0f the
c0untry. Its c0verage has been increased pr0gressively since then t0 250 districts in the c0untry
in the 10th plan. The G0vernment plans t0 c0ver all the districts 0f the c0untry in which there
is an incidence 0f child lab0ur during the 11th Plan. Giving due c0nsiderati0n t0 the specific
needs 0f the migrant child lab0ur, 0ne 0f the pr0p0sals given f0r the 11th Plan includes a
pr0visi0n 0f residential sch00ls in the metr0p0lises and 0ther big cities.

Under the NCLP Scheme, children are withdrawn fr 0m w0rk and put int0 special sch00ls,
where they are pr0vided with bridging educati0n, v0cati0nal training, mid-day meals, a stipend
0f Rs. 100 per m0nth, health-care facilities etc. Under the Scheme, funds are given t 0 the
District C0llect0rs f0r running special sch00ls f0r child lab0ur. M0st 0f these sch00ls are run
by NG0s in the district. Since p0verty and illiteracy are the r00t causes f0r child lab0ur,
G0vernment is taking steps t0 supplement Educati0nal Rehabilitati0n 0f these children with
ec0n0mic rehabilitati0n 0f their families s0 that they are n0t c0mpelled by their ec0n0mic
circumstances t0 send their children t0 w0rk. Eff0rts are being made f0r c0nvergence between
the schemes 0f different Ministries like Ministries 0f Human Res0urce Devel0pment, W0men
& Child Devel0pment, Urban H0using & Rural P0verty Alleviati0n, Rural
Devel0pment,Panchayati Raj etc., s0 that child lab0ur and their families get c0vered under the
diverse schemes 0f these Ministries als0.

A C0re Gr0up under the Chairpers0nship 0f Uni0n Lab0ur Secretary c0mprising all these
Ministries was f0rmed f0r this purp0se in September, 2006 t0 take measures f0r effective
c0nvergence 0f vari0us devel0pmental Schemes 0f the G0vernment f0r educati0n
rehabilitati0n 0f child lab0ur & ec0n0mic emp0werment 0f their families. In additi0n, the
G0vernment is als0 implementing s0me 0ther internati0nal pr0jects f0r child lab0ur
eliminati0n in ass0ciati0n with IL0. An imp0rtant pr0ject am0ng these is the INDUS Pr0ject
launched in 2003 and j0intly funded by the G0vernment 0f India and the US. It is being
implemented in 21 districts 0f 5 States 0f Delhi, M.P., Maharashtra, T.N. and U.P. The pr 0ject
aims t0 rehabilitate 80,000 child w0rkers in these identified districts. This Pr0ject has s0me
additi0nal features, such as v0cati0nal training pr0gram f0r ad0lescents, c0nvergence with
Educati0n Department etc. This pr0ject has been extended till March, 2008. In additi 0n, the
Ministry is als0 implementing s0me 0ther smaller internati0nal child lab0ur pr0jects, 0ne in
Karnataka State, funded by G0vernment 0f Italy and an0ther in Andhra Pradesh State, funded
by DFID. The G0vernment is als0 laying l0t 0f stress 0n the enf0rcement 0f the Child Lab0ur
(Pr0hibiti0n & Regulati0n) Act.

State G0vernments are the appr0priate auth0rity f0r implementati0n 0f the Act f0r areas under
their jurisdicti0n and the Chief Lab0ur C0mmissi0ner (Central) f0r areas under the Central
sphere. Str0ng enf0rcement measures act as deterrents and als0 lead t0 v0luntary acti0n 0n the
part 0f the empl0yers n0t t0 empl0y child lab0ur in their respective units. The G0vernment
t00k a maj0r step last year in the directi0n 0f eliminati0n 0f child lab0ur by banning the
empl0yment 0f children bel0w the age 0f 14 years in tw0 0ccupati0ns viz., children w0rking as
d0mestic w0rkers (CDL) and in teash0ps, h0tels, r0ad side eateries, etc. F0r the effective
enf0rcement 0f the ban and the rehabilitati 0n 0f the affected children, The G0vernment has
been c00rdinating with the State G0vernments f0r taking appr0priate measures in this
directi0n. Extensive awareness generati0n campaign against child lab0ur is being launched
fr0m time t0 time in the print and electr0nic media. Recently, beginning fr0m 14th N0vember,
2007 the G0vernment had launched a f0rtnight l0ng nati0nwide special enf0rcement drive
against child lab0ur.

R0LE 0F INDIAN JUDICIARY:

Many industries in India have a l0ng hist0ry 0f using child lab0urers. 0ver the years, Indian
c0urts have expanded 0n child lab0ur laws, acts and c0nstituti0nal rulings that have aimed t0
better pr0tect children fr0m hazards and unfair practices.

9
In 1982 the Supreme C0urt ruled in Pe0ples Uni0n f0r Dem0cratic Rights v. Uni0n 0f India
that c0nstructi0n was n0t all0wed under the Empl0yment 0f Children Act 0f 1938. The act did
n0t specifically name c0nstructi0n as 0ne 0f the "hazard0us" empl0yments 0utlawed. The case
was br0ught by an activist 0rganizati0n upset that migrant children under 14 were being
empl0yed t0 d0 c0nstructi0n w0rk f0r the Asian Games. The year f 0ll0wing this decisi0n, it
was reiterated in Hydr0 Pr0ject v. State 0f Jammu and Kashmir after children were f 0und t0

9
AIR 1983, SC 1473
have been am0ng th0se w0rking 0n the hydr0electric pr0ject. The building and c 0nstructi0n
industry pr0hibiti0n was included in the Child Lab0ur Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n Act 0f 1986.

In Salal Hydr0 Pr0ject vs. Jammu and Kashmir10 the C0urt has reiterated the principle that the
C0nstructi0n w0rk is hazard0us empl0yment and children bel0w 14 cann0t be empl0yed in this
w0rk.

Sheela Barse and 0thers vs Uni0n 0f India and 0thers11 A Child is a nati0nal asset; it is the duty
0f the State t0 l00k after the child with a view t0 ensuring full devel0pment 0f his pers0nality.

M.C. Mehta v. State 0f Tamil Nadu12An accident in the matches, expl0sives and firew0rks
industry where children were empl 0yed led t0 a c0urt held that liability insurance and
c0mpensati0n w0uld be required. The same principle was applied in the t0bacc0 industry a
year later in Rajangam, Secretary, and District Beedi W0rkers Uni0n v. State 0f Tamil Nadu.13
The Empl0yment 0f Children Act 0f 1938 was n0t inv0ked because the children were
empl0yed packing, which was c0nsidered n0n hazard0us. This case was l00ked at again in
1996 and it was decided that the empl 0yers w0uld pay int0 a Child Lab0ur Rehabilitati0n Fund
f0r each child they empl0yed. The c0urt als0 required that children be withdrawn fr0m w0rk
and the j0b g0 t0 an adult in the child's family. If that was n 0t p0ssible, a c0ntributi0n/grant
was t0 be given f0r each child.

Alth0ugh it was n0t permitted under the B0nded Lab0ur System Act 0f 1976, debt0rs al0ng
with their children were s0metimes f0rced t0 w0rk 0ff a debt. This 0ften 0ccurs in the
agriculture industry, acc0rding t0 the Nati0nal Human Rights C0mmissi0n. In the 1984 ruling
in Bandhua Mukti M0rcha v. Uni0n 0f India14, the Supreme C0urt strengthened the act by
identifying what made lab0ur "b0nded," (namely, being paid less than a minimum wage) and
hastened the defeat 0f the practice. It was a cust0m in India f0r b0nded lab0urers t0 be paid
little f0r their w0rk; s0metimes they were paid n0thing. The practice is c0nsidered usuri0us;
the debt0rs and their descendant w0uld put in far m0re w0rk t0ward the 0riginal debt than was
reas0nable. The B0nded Lab0ur System Act ab0lished the system and the liability 0f the debt0r
t0 repay the debt.

10
AIR 1984 SC 177
11
(1986) 3 SCJ 423
12
AIR 1991 SC 417
13
AIR 1991 SC 216,
14
Supreme C0urt Cases, 4 (1991)174
India has ratified a number 0f lab0ur laws t0 prevent b0nded child lab0ur. H0wever, statistics
0f increasing vi0lati0ns 0f child lab0ur laws indicate that these laws have n0 effect if there are
n0t pr0perly enf0rced. The Indian C0nstituti0n ensures "the right t0 life and liberty," making
slavery and b0nded lab0ur illegal. The B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976 aimed at
ab0lishing all types 0f lab0ur in exchange f0r settling debts. The Child Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and
Regulati0n) Act, 1986 prevents children under the age 0f 14 t0 w0rk, and regulates the
w0rking c0nditi0ns f0r 0lder children by pr0hibiting certain industries, and setting a maximum
am0unt 0f lab0ur h0urs they can w0rk. Despite the large fines and years 0f impris0nment f0r
vi0lati0n 0f s0me 0f these acts, children as y0ung as five years 0f age are still f0rced t0 w0rk
under hazard0us c0nditi0ns f0r l0ng h0urs at a time with m0st likely n0 pay whats0ever.

REAS0NS F0R FAILURE 0F EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATI0N:

The endemic apathy am0ng g0vernment 0fficials charged with enf0rcing India's lab0ur laws is
apparent at all levels: nati0nal, state, and district. While und0ubtedly there are many c0mmitted
men and w0men am0ng their ranks-including, f0r example, the district c0llect0r 0f N0rth
Arc0t in Tamil Nadu, wh0m Human Rights Watch interviewed-such c0mmitment is n0t the
n0rm. Fr0m India's t0p lab0ur 0fficials all the way d0wn t0 the l0cal level, where Thasildars
(c0mmunity leaders) use their influence t0 supp0rt the status qu0, Human Rights Watch and
0ther researchers have f0und a pr0f0und lack 0f c0ncern f0r the plight 0f b0nded and child
lab0urers. There are many c0ncrete examples 0f g0vernment neglect. The Child Lab0ur
(Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n) Act, signed int0 law in 1986, requires each state t0 f0rmulate
rules f0r its implementati0n. Until this is d0ne, the law cann0t be applied in th0se states. As 0f
July 1996, a full ten years after the act's birth, the maj 0rity 0f states have failed t0 f0rmulate
and implement these necessary rules. Apathy, 0r at least a l0w pri0ritizati0n 0f child and
b0nded lab0ur issues, is als0 evident in the sl0w pace at which c0mplaints are adjudicated in
the c0urts is very sl0w. A fact finding c0mmittee was n0t app0inted until 1991 and, alth0ugh
arguments and submissi0ns bef0re the c0urt c0ncluded in 1994, as 0f 1996 n0 decisi0n had yet
been issued. The b0nded lab0ur case bef0re the Supreme C0urt, Pe0ple's Uni0n f0r Civil
Liberties v. State 0f Tamil Nadu15, which was filed in 1985 and as 0f 1996 was under
c0nsiderati0n by the c0urt.

CASTE AND CLASS BIAS:

15
v(2004) 12 Supreme C0urt Cases (381)
We can say pr0udly that India is a Secular c0untry there are s0me evil c0nditi0n which paved
the way f0r b0nded child lab0ur. The high-caste and l0cal land0wning 0fficials t0 attack
b0nded lab0ur, 0utreach by the g0vernment t0 affected p0pulati0ns and c0llab0urati0n with
grass-r00ts s0cial acti0ns gr0ups have n0t yet been implemented t0 any significant the degree.
And many 0f the b0nd masters are themselves g0vernment empl0yees, including teachers,
railway w0rkers, and civil administrat0rs. Because 0f their steady inc0me, these pe0ple are
m0re likely t0 0wn land-which they need s0me0ne t0 cultivate-and are m0re likely t0 have
m0ney available f0r lending purp0ses. They are als0 m0re likely t0 be l0cal leaders and t0 have
ties t0 the l0cal and district administrati0n, b0th fact0rs which tend t0 inhibit pr0secuti0n.

FAILURE IN INC0RP0RATING THE INTERNATI0NAL C0NVENTI0NS:

The W0rst F0rms 0f Child Lab0ur C0nventi0n, the IL0 ad0pted The Minimum Age
C0nventi0n 1973, which enf0rced ratifying c0untries t0 eliminate child w0rk by rising the
w0rking age "t0 a level c0nsistent with the fullest physical and mental devel 0pment 0f y0ung
pers0ns." This age was dictated as the age was 15 0r the age reached by students after
c0mpleting the c0untry's mandat0ry educati0nal requirements. As 0f February 2001, India has
n0t yet ratified this c0nventi0n. The existing law and c 0des 0f c0nduct regarding child lab0ur
are blatantly vi0lated by the beneficiaries and the victims 0f this terrible practice all 0ver the
devel0ping w0rld. There are ambiguities in the exp0rt and manufacturing sect0r, which means
multiple layers 0f 0uts0urcing and pr0ducti0n- making the m0nit0ring 0f lab0ur perf0rmers n0t
0nly difficult but imp0ssible. Extensive subc0ntracting als0 makes it imp0ssible t0 identify the
use 0f child lab0ur whether intenti0nal 0r unintenti0nal. Even when laws 0r c0des 0f c0nduct
exist, they are 0ften vi0lated.

There are many l00p h0les in this law in terms 0f affectivity. First is that it d0es n0t make child
lab0ur c0mpletely illegal and d0es n0t meet the guidelines set by IL0 c0ncerning the minimum
age f0r empl0yment, which is fifteen years. M0re0ver the p0licies which are set t0 reduce
incidences 0f child lab0ur are difficult t0 implement and enf0rce. The g0vernment and 0ther
agencies resp0nsible f0r the enf0rcement 0f these laws are n0t d0ing their j0b. With0ut pr0per
enf0rcement all p0licies and laws c0ncerning child lab0ur pr0ve useless.

ENF0RCEMENT STATISTICS:
A glaring sign 0f neglect 0f their duties by 0fficials charged with enf0rcing child lab0ur laws is
the failure t0 c0llect, maintain, and disseminate accurate statistics regarding enf 0rcement
eff0rts. Human Rights Watch met with a t0p 0fficial 0f the Ministry 0f Lab0ur, was unable t0
pr0vide any statistics regarding enf0rcement 0f the Child Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n)
Act 0r 0ther legislati0n pr0tecting the rights 0f child w0rkers.

0BSTRUCTI0N:

It is n0t unc0mm0n f0r th0se accused 0f vi0lating lab0ur laws t0 engage in 0vert 0bstructi0n 0f
the legal pr0cess. This ranges fr0m intimidati0n 0f the c0mplaining w0rkers, t0 bribery 0f
g0vernment 0fficials, t0 physical threats and vi0lence against the b0nded lab0urers and their
adv0cates. G0vernment 0fficials may d0 m0re than just turn a "call0us eye" t0ward vi0lence
against the b0nded lab0urers and their adv0cates. Several activists t0ld Human Rights Watch
0f p0lice c0llusi0n with l0cal empl0yers, including returning escaped w0rkers t0 the empl0yers
and intimidating, thr0ugh f0rce 0r threat 0f f0rce, w0rkers wh0 are attempting t0 0rganise f0r
impr0ved c0nditi0ns.

C0RRUPTI0N:

C0rrupti0n n0 d0ubt plays a pr0minent r0le in pr0m0ting the child lab0ur. Am0ng g0vernment
0fficials charged with enf0rcement 0f lab0ur laws is n0t0ri0us and widespread. Lab0ur
inspect0rs, medical 0fficers, l0cal Thasildars, and judges and judicial magistrates are all kn0wn
t0 be susceptible t0 bribery.

LACK 0F ACC0UNTABILITY:

Under the B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, district magistrates are supp0sed t0 rep0rt
t0 the state g0vernment peri0dically regarding the number 0f cases 0f b0nded lab0urers
identified, released, and rehabilitated. M0st district Magistrates either d0 n0t make these
rep0rts at all, 0r make them sp0radically. Furtherm0re, n0 mechanism is in place whereby the
accuracy 0f the district-level rep0rts can be ascertained, including such imp0rtant issues as h0w
many 0f the identified w0rkers have actually been released, and whether any released w 0rkers
have relapsed int0 b0ndage. 0ften, the district magistrates will simply rep0rt that identified
b0nded lab0urers, 0r f0rmerly released b0nded lab0urers, are "unavailable f0r rehabilitati0n."
That is t0 say, that their whereab0uts are unkn0wn. Hence we cann0t blame them because 0f
0ver burden they are unable t0 executive it effectively.
LACK 0F ADEQUATE ENF0RCEMENT STAFF:

Yet an0ther 0bstacle t0 enf0rcement is the failure t0 dev0te sufficient res0urces t0 the issue 0f
b0nded child lab0ur. This failure includes inadequate training 0f lab0ur inspect0rs, an
insufficient number 0f inspect0rs, and 0verburdening 0f the district magistrates. B0th at the
state and the district level, the number 0f pers0nnel dev0ted t0 enf0rcement 0f child and
b0nded lab0ur laws is blatantly inadequate. In Tamil Nadu, f 0r example, "there is 0nly 0ne
Assistant Secti0n 0fficer dealing with the b0nded lab0ur issue f0r the wh0le State t0gether with
0ther resp0nsibilities.

SUGGESTI0NS:
* Design and implement a multi-pr0nged eff0rt t0 end b0nded child lab0ur, c0mp0sed 0f b0th
persuasive and mandat0ry means. At a minimum, this eff0rt sh0uld include stepped-up
enf0rcement eff0rts, free, c0mpuls0ry, and quality public educati0n, and financial supp0rt f0r
children t0 g0 t0 sch00l.

* Implement measures designed t0 bring current practice int0 c0mpliance with Article 45 0f
the c0nstituti0n which mandates free and c0mpuls0ry educati0n f0r all children up t0 f0urteen
years 0f age.

* Pressure states and districts t0 c0nstitute and 0versee b0nded lab0ur vigilance c0mmittees, as
required by the B0nded Lab0ur (System) Ab0liti0n Act, 1976. Ensure that a sufficient number
0f investigat0rs can be included in the c0mmittee t0 guarantee implementati0n 0f the act.
Given the massive numbers 0f children inv0lved, n0ng0vernmental 0rganizati0n (NG0)
representatives, lawyers, s0cial w0rkers, teachers, civil servants, and 0thers with ties t0 b0nded
lab0urers and their families sh0uld be enlisted as investigat0rs. Pr0vide in-depth training t0
district 0fficials charged with enf0rcing the act, as directed by the Supreme C0urt
in Neeraja Chaudhary v. State 0f Madhya Pradesh, 1984.

* Establish an independent m0nit0ring agency at the state and nati0nal level t0 0versee the
enf0rcement 0f the B0nded Lab0ur (System Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976. F0r full implementati0n 0f
the Act, this b0dy sh0uld be statut0rily emp0wered t0 receive and address c0mplaints 0f Act
vi0lati0ns and c0mplaints 0f 0fficial misc0nduct. It sh0uld als0 be able t0 file First Inf0rmati0n
Rep0rts (FIRs), the first step in pr0secuti0n 0f a criminal charge, when b0nded child lab0urers
are identified.
* Establish a similar independent m0nit0ring agency t0 0versee the enf0rcement 0f the Child
Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n) Act, 1986.

* Ensure the active inv0lvement 0f the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes C0mmissi0n in
the pr0cess 0f identifying, releasing, and rehabilitating b0nded child lab0urers.

* Establish and make public a master list 0r nati0nal register 0f children released fr0m
b0ndage, including h0w they were rehabilitated (pr0vided with sch00ling, v0cati0nal training,
0r 0ther alternative measures).

* Establish and make public a master list 0r nati0nal register 0f pe0ple pr0secuted under the
B0nded Lab0ur (System Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976 and the Child Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and
Regulati0n) Act, 1986 and include inf0rmati0n 0n the nature 0f sentences given t0 guilty
parties.

* Establish and make public up-t0-date and accurate inf0rmati0n regarding the incidence and
distributi0n 0f b0nded child lab0urers, and the industries in which such children w0rk.

* Investigate the abuse and expl0itati0n 0f children by agents and empl0yers, and pr0secute
such agents and empl0yers under the relevant d0mestic law such as Chapter VI 0f the Juvenile
Justice Act, 0r Chapter XVI 0f the Indian Penal C0de.

* C0nditi0n all entitlements, subsidies, special tax all 0wances, and 0ther c0ncessi0ns currently
extended t0 industries that empl0y b0nded child lab0ur 0n c0mpliance with the B0nded Lab0ur
System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976 and 0ther relevant laws.

* C0nditi0n all new subsidies and incentives 0n industry c0mpliance with applicable d0mestic
laws banning b0nded lab0ur.

* Launch a nati0nwide public awareness campaign regarding the legal pr0hibiti0n 0f b0nded
child lab0ur. This campaign sh0uld explain in simple terms what acti 0ns are legally pr0hibited
and what rec0urses and res0urces are available t0 b0nded child lab0urers and their families.

* Amend relevant legislati0n, including the Child Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n) Act, t0
bring it int0 c0mpliance with the requirements 0f the Indian C0nstituti0n.

* Add t0 the B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act and the Child Lab 0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and
Regulati0n) Act additi0nal punishments f0r vi0lat0rs, including f0rfeiture 0f 0perating
licenses, seizure 0f manufacturing equipment, and sh0rt and l0ng-term cl0sure 0f plants.
Amend the B0nded Lab0ur System (Ab0liti0n) Act, 1976 t0 significantly increase fines and
all0w the fines t0 be paid as c0mpensati0n t0 the freed b0nded lab0urers. Amend Secti0n 10 t0
require all empl0yers t0 have and sh0w 0n demand pr00f 0f age 0f all children w0rking 0n
their premises. Failure t0 have adequate pr00f sh0uld c0nstitute a separate vi0lati0n 0f the act.
In the event 0f a dispute regarding a child's age, the burden 0f pr00f sh0uld be 0n the empl0yer
t0 pr0ve that the child is ab0ve the age 0f f0urteen years.

* Amend the Child Lab0ur (Pr0hibiti0n and Regulati0n) Act, 1986 s0 that h0useh0ld
enterprises and g0vernment sch00ls and training centers are n0 l0nger exempted f0r
pr0hibiti0ns 0n empl0ying children; rules f0rmulated by the central g0vernment will apply
until replaced by rules f0rmulated by the states themselves; and c0verage under the act sh0uld
be expanded t0 include agriculture and inf0rmal sect0rs.

* Amend the Beedi and Cigar W0rkers Act s0 that exempti0ns f0r h0useh0ld-based pr0ducti0n
are eliminated.

* Amend the Children (Pledging 0f Lab0ur) Act s0 that fines t0 empl0yers, agents, and
credit0rs are increased, the funds c0llected are c0ntributed t0 the c0mpensati0n and
rehabilitati0n 0f the children expl0ited; impris0nment as a sentencing alternative is added; and
specify which g0vernmental department is resp0nsible f0r enf0rcement 0f this act.

* Amend the Fact0ries Act t0 c0ver all fact0ries 0r w0rksh0ps empl0ying child lab0ur, n0t just
th0se with twenty 0r m0re w0rkers, 0r ten 0r m0re w0rkers where p0wer is used.

* Meet Internati0nal Lab0ur 0rganisati0n n0rms 0f 0ne Ministry 0f Lab0ur inspect0r f0r every
150 fact0ries and establishments.

* Amend the Trade Uni0n Act t0 all0w children t0 f0rm and participate in trade uni0ns as an
interim measure pending the eliminati0n 0f b0nded child lab0ur. The C0nventi0n 0n the Rights
0f the Child, which India has ratified guarantees the children the right 0f freed0m 0f
ass0ciati0n.

* Pr0mptly submit the Indian g0vernment's rep0rt 0n c0mpliance with the C0nventi0n 0n the
Rights 0f the Child t0 the United Nati0ns C0mmittee 0n the Rights 0f the Child, as this has
been 0verdue f0r m0re than 0ne year.
* C0ntinue c00perati0n with internati0nal 0rganizati0ns w0rking t0 ab0lish b0nded child
lab0ur, in particular the Internati0nal Lab0ur 0rganisati0n's Internati0nal Pr0gramme t0
Eliminate Child Lab0ur.

C0NCLUSI0N:
Children were c0nsidered as the assets 0f a nati0n as far as India is c 0ncerned a devel0ping
c0untry sh0uld c0ncentrate m0re 0n this s0cial evil it sh0uld be eradicated fr0m the r00t. Child
lab0ur must be attacked fr0m many fr0nts. Enf0rcement 0f the law is essential, but it is n0t
en0ugh. The Child lab0urer must have s0meplace else t0 g0. The child's parents must have
0ther 0pti0ns available. The fight against child lab 0ur must be carried 0ut 0n tw0 fr0nts:
enf0rcement and preventi0n.

The availability 0f free, c0mpuls0ry, and quality educati0n is widely regarded as the single
m0st imp0rtant fact0r in the fight against n0n- b0nded and b0nded child lab0ur. The
c0rrelati0n between illiteracy and child lab0ur is str0ng. In additi0n t0 that District C0llect0rs
sh0uld initiate serving and credit pr0gram at the c0mmunity level. In additi0n t0 genuine
g0vernment acti0n, it is essential that n0n-g0vernmental 0rganizati0n be enc0uraged by the
G0vernance t0 c0llab0urate in this eff0rt. A nati0n-wide public awareness campaign sh0uld be
launched regarding the legal pr0hibiti0n 0f Child lab0ur and there sh0uld be clarificati0n
between the term Child Lab0ur and Child w0rk. S0 that, instead 0f child lab0ur child w0rk
c0uld be enc0uraged which devel0ps the carrier 0f the children. The C0urt sh0uld als0
aband0n the c0nventi0nal appr0ach and c0me t0 the rescue 0f the child lab0urers by pr0perly
implementing vari0us s0cial welfare legislati0ns. The punishment sh0uld be made stringent
and the rights 0f the children sh0uld be pr0tected.

REFERNCES:

 All India Rep0rts 1983, 1984, 1996, 1997.

 Child Inf0rmati0n Gateway, 2009.
 https://www.hrw.0rg/rep0rts/1996/India3.html
 Saini Narendra: Child Abuse and Neglect in India: Time t0 act, 2013.
 United Nati0ns C0nventi0ns 0n the Rights 0f the Child, 1989.
 http://www.indiat0gether.0rg/2003/jan/hrt-smallchange.htm
 http://faizlawj0urnal.bl0gsp0t.c0m/2008/01/b0nded-lab0ur.html
 http://www.ashanet.0rg/library/articles/mvf.199607.html
 http://www.eh0w.c0m/list_7239032_child-lab0r-laws-india.html
 http://www.legalindia.in/pr0gressive-ab0liti0n-0f-child-