Rehabilitation of Rescued Children from Worksites in India

Rehabilitation of Rescued Children from

Worksites in India

Sanjai Bhatt and Atul Pratap Singh

A large number of children in India still work under highly exploitative working

conditions. In spite of magnificent efforts, the problem of child labor has compounded

into more complex issues intertwined with child trafficking, forced labor, missing

children, and many other worst forms of childhood struggles. There is a general

postulation that in reality the rehabilitation measures are not so effective. The

phenomenon of the recycling of child labor divulges that the rescued children again join

the workforce after a small gap either at the same place in the same city or at different

places in different cities. The paper is aimed to study the realities of rehabilitation in

order to understand intertwined issues relating to rehabilitation of rescued children from

worksites as well as the present state of affairs. The paper has specifically explored the

process of rescue challenges, the mechanisms devised and implemented for rehabilitation

of these children, and the effectiveness of initiatives intended for reintegrating rescued

children in societal mainstream. It discovered that the realities of rehabilitation are

quite painful and a sad commentary on our efforts of rehabilitation. The compensation,

back wages, or rehabilitation money has passes through different layers before reaching

the rescued child. Once received, it is generally used for different purposes –such as

buying animals, construction/repair of house, daughter’s marriage, and repaying to

contractor who provided the employment. In some cases, cut/convenience money is also

paid to the person responsible for releasing compensation. The time frame for receiving

compensation/rehabilitation money varies from 6 to 36 months. As an estimate,

approximately one-fifth of the rescued children never join school after rehabilitation

because of poor economic conditions of their families, and many drop out to rejoining

workforce. The paper has also explored various gaps in their rehabilitation and suggested

Sanjai Bhatt, MA, is Professor, Department of Social Work, University of Delhi, Delhi (India). Atul

Pratap Singh, MA, is Associate Professor, Department of Social Work, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College,

University of Delhi, Delhi (India). Sanjai Bhatt can be contacted at [email protected], and

Atul Pratap Singh can be contacted at atulprata[email protected]

Bhatt and Singh 55

recommendations for more efficient, effective, and efficacious rehabilitation of children

freed from worksites.

Keywords: rescued children, rehabilitation, National Child Labour Project, CLPR Act

Introduction

The issues related to children at work have received wide attention in 1973

when the International Labour Organization (ILO) adopted a convention con-

cerning minimum age for admission to employment (ILO Convention 138). The

Government of India (GoI) constituted Gurupadswamy Committee to find out

ways and means to tackle child labor. Since labor has been a subject matter in

the concurrent list provided in the Constitution of India, it is a matter on which

both central and state governments can pass legislations and make programs and

schemes of welfare. A number of legislations have been enacted and a good num-

ber of government initiatives have been taken to resolve issues relating to work-

ing children. Judicial interpretations and efforts by nongovernmental (NGO) and

international organizations have added value to the actions taken for the overall

wellbeing of children in and out of workplaces. In spite of magnificent efforts, the

problem of child labor has become more complex as issues intertwined with child

trafficking, forced labor, missing children, and other worst forms of child struggles

have emerged in past two decades. The term “rehabilitation” normally refers to

“the process of helping somebody to have a normal, useful life again after they

have been very ill or in prison for a long time” (Oxford Dictionary), or “the pro-

cess of returning to a healthy or good way of life” (Cambridge Dictionary). In

the context of children rescued from worksites, it means to provide a normal and

useful life to children to fulfill their basic, social, and developmental needs related

to physical, financial, and social requirements and emotional support, including

trauma-counseling and social support.

Rehabilitation of Rescued Children

Researchers have explored different aspects related to children at work such

as concept, causation, consequences, and concerted efforts by government and

NGOs. However, there have not been many scientific investigations, evaluations,

or impact studies on the rehabilitation measures undertaken for rescued children

from worksites. The study conducted by Satpathy et al. (2010) could be considered

as the first large level, path-breaking study on the subject, but this too was limited

to the National Child Labour Projects (NCLPs). Jaya and Vezhavendan (2018) also

studied the current status of the NCLP and thoughts of people on the scheme.

A few other studies (Bhatt, 2011, 2015; Sekar, 2002; Zutshi & Dutta, 2004) on

rehabilitation are praiseworthy. However, there is a general postulation that reha-

bilitation measures are not so effective in reality. The phenomenon of the recycling

of child labor divulges that rescued children again join the workforce after a certain

56 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

gap either at the same place in the same city or at different places in different cit-

ies. Those who are concerned with the rights of children univocally agree that the

right place for a child is in school, not the workplace. Consequently, our commit-

ment to rescue children from work places to break the phenomenon of recycling

of child labor gets stronger and propels to ensure the best of their rehabilitation

and social integration. There are measures taken by the government to support

rescued and released children under judicial interpretation and pronouncements.

As early as in 1987, the GoI declared the National Policy on Child Labour con-

taining the action plan for tackling the problem of child labor. It brought a specific

legislation called “Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986” (CLPRA)

to prohibit the engagement of children in certain occupations, and to regulate the

conditions of child labor in other occupations. While state governments have been

given responsibility to enforce the provisions of CLPRA, the central government

has promoted convergence of its various welfare schemes to ensure that the fam-

ilies of working children are given priority in their upliftment. CLPRA has provi-

sions of inspection and raids to identify and rescue children from worksites. The

legislation also recognizes the provision related to repatriation and rehabilitation

measures in case of migrant working children. Since education is the core area,

there are meaningful efforts toward bridge education for mainstreaming it into

the formal system of education, pre-vocational training, mid-day meals, food, and

shelter, and likewise other initiatives for the children withdrawn from work.

The three “Rs—rescue, repatriation, and rehabilitation” are essentially

required to withdraw children from work. The rescuing of child labor comprises

gathering all the relevant information, as much as possible, about the employer,

child, and the area where the child is working, and ascertaining his/her age, and

the nature of engagement—hazardous or non-hazardous factory, as mentioned in

CLPRA. This leads to raid and rescue. The second stage is repatriation, in which the

child is taken to a temporary shelter home, provided basic necessities such as food,

clothing, and security. Child’s medical check-up is done within 24 hours of res-

cue and they are produced before Child Welfare Committee (CWC) under Juvenile

Justice Act. Later on, proper investigation is undertaken; lodging First Information

Report (FIR) with police; and monitoring of child by the nodal agency till their

restoration to the family. Finally, the process of rehabilitation of the child starts

with admission to NCLP school or elsewhere for educational benefits. For the first

time, the GoI has recognized the need of the convergence of programs of vari-

ous ministries for rehabilitating rescued children. Besides Ministry of Women and

Child Development, GoI and Ministry of Education, GoI, the convergence process

has added ministries of rural development, urban housing, poverty alleviation,

and Panchyati Raj for covering these children under their various income- and

employment-generation schemes for their economic rehabilitation. In 1988, the

GoI initiated the NCLP Scheme to rehabilitate working children in more than 266

child labor endemic districts of the country.

The Supreme Court of India (1996), in its path-breaking judgment in MC Mehta

vs State of Tamil Nadu and Others, has given pinpointed directions on the issue of

Bhatt and Singh 57

elimination of child labor, which include survey for the identification of working

children, withdrawal of children working in hazardous industries, ensuring their

education in appropriate institutions, and contribution of Rs. 20,000 per child to

be accrued by offending employers to a welfare fund established for this purpose.

Besides these measures, the Supreme Court has also directed financial assistance

to the families of the rescued children to be paid from the interest earned on the

corpus of Rs. 20,000/25,000 deposited in the welfare fund for as long as the child

is sent to a school. The Apex Court further directed to provide employment to one

adult member of the family of the rescued child. If this is not possible, then a con-

tribution of Rs. 5000 is made by the state government to the welfare fund. The

Ministry of Labour (MoL) has been made responsible to monitor the compliance

of these directions. One can feel happy and contended with such elaborate and

thoughtful process for the rehabilitation of children rescued from worksites.

It is a well-established fact that children from poor families are generally

engaged in manifold economic activities unaware of its nature and consequences.

Satpathy et al. (2010, p. 24) have reported in their study that socioeconomic vul-

nerabilities of population groups are often reflected in extreme discrimination

(overt and covert) at workplaces—access to jobs, wage disparity, nature of work,

and lack of social and employment security. Therefore, it is a common knowledge

that children hailing from economically deprived groups are more likely to join

the workforce than their counterparts from affluent groups due to distressed eco-

nomic conditions and poor enrolment in schools. These children sell their raw

labor at the cost of their childhood for meager returns right from their early life

to satisfy themselves and to supplement income of their families. Poor children

always live under the wheels of hard work and are robbed of their childhood. Lack

of awareness of child and workers’ rights, and the problem of law enforcement,

aggravates the muddle all the more.

Children in India are engaged as labor in different occupations and sectors—

agriculture, manufacturing, services, and mainly in the unorganized jobs of

informal economy. Data from the GoI’s 2009–2010 National Sample Survey indi-

cate that four-fifths of child workers reside in rural areas. Children who belong

to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes are also more likely than other children

to be engaged in child labor (Dhanya, 2013). Children engage in the manufac-

turing of goods, many in the informal economy and increasingly in home-based

production (Phillips, Bhaskaran, Nathan, & Upendranadh, 2011). Sahu (2013)

reported that the regression results reveal that family income has significant neg-

ative impact on the working hours of child labor. Family size is a noneconomic

factor that significantly affects the working hours of child labor. Children’s desire

to work has a positive and significant effect on the employment of working chil-

dren. Child workers are from poor and larger families who are forced to join labor

force to supplement their family income.

Ecological theory suggests that there are several levels of interaction that

are important to be distinguished in understanding risk factors. The first is

between the child and his/her immediate family, and the second is between

58 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

various social systems in the child’s environment that give meaning and sig-

nificance to the child’s experience, such as schools or community events. This

level becomes increasingly significant as child passes into school-age years. The

third level of social system is represented by the larger forces, such as govern-

ment, cultural values, or legal systems, which define the climate of child’s envi-

ronment (Bronfenbrenner, 1993). The theory of vulnerability talks about how

parents and children are influenced with the surrounding environment of sus-

tenance. A model of exploitative child labor is essential for understanding both

how to target policies and their likely effects. Basu and Chau (2003) developed

a model in which the only way for rural families to smooth consumption across

lean and harvest seasons is through an interlinked credit-labor contract (bonded

labor). The authors observed that if bonded child labor occurs in equilibrium,

then households would have been better off had parents made a commitment to

keep their children out of work. An effective commitment would have led to much

higher parental wages. On this basis of this implication for household welfare,

Basu and Chau (2003) classified bonded child labor as exploitative. In this theory,

parents must decide whether to keep their child at home or to send them out for

work. If the child stays at home, the parents contribute to the child’s consumption

(Basu & Chau, 2003). Ahmad (2012) stated that child labor is commonly asso-

ciated with poverty. It is generally assumed that as household wealth increases,

children would be progressively withdrawn from labor activities in favor of school-

ing. Being out of school and deprived of education, the world of prospects, possi-

bilities, and opportunities is closed to them. Any work that denies children their

right to education must, therefore, be regarded as hazardous (Ahmad, 2012).

In a qualitative study on Child Labour in District Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh, India,

Prasad and Ali (2015) stated that family members do not reveal the exact situa-

tion of their children when they are working outside the state. After rehabilita-

tion, it is assumed that children are back safely and would stay with parents and

continue their education. The study points that it was rather difficult to ascertain

exactly the number of children gone back to work, as it was reported that of the

81 children interviewed, 54 were present in the village. Therefore, it can be pre-

sumed that the rest had gone back to work. However, almost none of them could

read or write. About 67% rescued children reported that they went to very dis-

tant places through prospective employer or his agent. As far as the rehabilitation

fund is concerned, the report states that 5% of the children reported as receiving

financial assistance, while an overwhelming 95% reported as not receiving any

financial assistance (Prasad & Ali, 2015).

Child labor is one of the major problems that takes place due to responses to

economic problems faced by vulnerable children. Mendelievich (1980) presented

framework for studying different aspects of child labor. The study conducted by

Narayana (2014) in a few selected districts of Andhra Pradesh, India, found the

root cause as being the connection with globalization and economic progress

of the country, which affect the rural areas as well as poor families of the state.

In spite of globalization of Indian economy, the poor households in considered

Bhatt and Singh 59

villages could not find better alternative source of income and employment except

farm operations. Source of income of rural poor is restricted to daily wage labor

in agriculture and Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee

Act (MGNREGA). The findings of the study highlight that the growth of small,

micro, and medium industries is almost negligible in villages. As a result, the

pace of rural–urban migration of distressed families is accelerating year after

year because nonavailability of gainful employment except MGNREGS and sea-

sonal agricultural operations. Therefore, the poorest of poor, disturbed families,

and helpless rural households are making a beeline to migrate to sub-urban and

urban areas, mostly district headquarters. As a result, children hither admitted in

schools are shifted to urban areas, but ultimately their education is discontinued

and they are tagged with “out of school children” or child labor, which is a major

cause of concern. Mobilization of support from parents, civil society organiza-

tions, Red Cross, employers, and convergent departments is lacking.

The rehabilitation of working children withdrawn from hazardous occupa-

tions and processes in the age group of 9–14 years through special schools is the

single most important activity of the NCLP and a direct responsibility of district

project authority. NCLP school teachers are putting all their efforts along with

NGOs to run NCLP schools. The initial enthusiasm and collective responsibility

of convergent departments is gradually getting evaporated since inception of the

program (Narayana, 2014). Barman and Barman (2014) observed in their study

that the age of working children affects the growth and development of their

life, the works effected by boys and girls differ in financial terms. The study states

that very young children (aged 5–7 years), both boys and girls, mainly indulge in

unpaid work for someone who is not a member of their household. The older boys,

aged 12–14 years, are mainly engaged in paid work and family work, whereas

girls in this age group are involved mainly in household chores and family work.

To conclude, it can be said that children are engaged in different work settings

for extensively long working hours. While there are pathetic working conditions,

their working conditions are undefined, arbitrary, and unfortunate. Most of the

working children are living in unhygienic conditions. Poverty is really the most

important reason for child labor and consequently low school participation.

According to Bhatt (2015), the “Grate Three Lacks”—lack of livelihood oppor-

tunities, lack of parental motivation for education, and lack of strong socio-legal

environment are the main determining factors for high incidents of child labor.

Despite the clearly laid down rehabilitation measures by GoI and the Supreme

Court, the issue of rehabilitation has still not become the main issue, especially in

the rhetoric of emotional and saleable aspects of the life of child labor.

The Study

The main aim of the study was to analyze the features, extent, and delivery of

welfare mechanisms devised and implemented by GoI to rehabilitate rescued chil-

dren from worksites. The study aimed to understand realities of rehabilitation

60 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

intertwined issues relating to rehabilitation of rescued children from worksites as

well as the present state of affairs. The study has specifically explored the process

of rescue challenges, the mechanisms devised and implemented for rehabilitation

of these children, and the effectiveness of initiatives intended for reintegrating

rescued children in societal mainstream. The study also explored various gaps in

their rehabilitation and suggested recommendations for more efficient, effective,

and efficacious rehabilitation of children freed from child labor. The “exploratory

research design,” which is used for a research problem where the researcher has

no past data but only a few studies for reference, was adopted. The study was con-

ducted in the state of Bihar, which is characterized as labor-supplying state to

other parts of the country. Since two districts, namely Sitamarhi and Kishanganj,

have received maximum number of rescued children from different parts of the

country, these were selected for the study. Both these districts are known for their

migration of workforce in the state. Situated in the northern part of Bihar, district

Sitamarhi is also flood-prone and known for the river Bagmati’s wrath, which reg-

ularly inundates this district. Almost 94% of the population lives in rural areas.

Its topographic and socio-demographic characteristics, as well as low economic

development indicators, speak volumes that the inhabitants are more vulnera-

ble putting a good number of children into vicious circle of poverty, work, and

child labor. District Kishanganj is dominated by Muslims and is also known for

its labor supply. The district shares inter-state and international boundaries, as

it is surrounded by district Araria in the west, district Purnia in the south-west

(both districts are in Bihar), Uttar Dinajpur district of West Bengal in the east, and

Darjeeling district of West Bengal and Nepal in the north. District Kishanganj has

similar development indicators as Sitamarhi, with high migration pattern.

There were three categories of rescued children: (a) Children who have been

awarded compensation and rehabilitation scheme; (b) children who have only

been declared bonded laborers and have only received release certificates; and

A sample of 100 rescued child laborers was drawn from these two districts

purposively. Representation of all geographical regions and all three predeter-

mined categories of children was ensured. The following steps were taken in

this regard:

(a) Step 1. A list of rescued and rehabilitated children was prepared with the

assistance of Bachpan Bachao Andolan’s (BBA) local staff members who

were personally known to these children and their families.

(b) Step 2. All the listed children were divided into four geographical regions

covering villages from all four directions of these selected districts.

included in the study.

Of the 94 respondents selected, 52 were actually rescued children and the remain-

ing were their parents. Finally, 56 respondents were from district Sitamarhi and

Bhatt and Singh 61

38 were from Kishanganj district. In addition, researchers also included view

points of government officials and members of NGOs.

Findings of the Study

Respondents interviewed for this study were chosen in three predetermined cat-

egories. First, children who have received rehabilitation benefits as a result of

receiving release certificates; second, children who have only received release cer-

tificates; and the third category comprised children have not been benefited from

statutory rehabilitation program after their rescue. Researchers presented the fol-

lowing data related to profile of respondents, their work details, and details related

to rescue and rehabilitation:

(a) Profile of respondents: Most of the children (74.47%) were in the age

group of 16–21 years. The average age of children at the time of interac-

tion was 15.67 years. In the case of majority of children (69.15%), their

father worked as a laborer and all except 3.19% mothers were engaged in

domestic chores; hence, this lead to the conclusion that most of the tar-

geted children were from weaker economic background. More than half

of the children (55.32%) were available at the time of interaction. How-

ever, a sizeable number of children were not available at the time of inter-

view and on probing their family members, it was found that some of them

had gone back to work. Interestingly, family members were at unease with

such probing. The researchers interacted with a senior officer of labour

department in Sitamarhi and a labour inspector in Kishanganj districts.

Both of them were of the opinion that

out of total 38 districts of Bihar, 8 districts, including Sitamarhi and

Kishanganj, share their borders with Nepal. These are flood prone

districts and usually affected by Kosi, Burhi Gandak, and Ghagra

rivers. The deprivation of the people of these districts is caused by

natural calamity and geographical reasons; as a result, people are

forced to move for livelihood outside the area. These circumstances

cultivate [sic] the vicious circle of poverty, vulnerability, and margin-

alistion. In such a situation, parents themselves send their children

for remunerative work with the help of middle men or employers

own in many cases.

A 17-year aged child who was rescued and rehabilitated with his family

revealed the following:

I belong to a marginal farmer family having 8 beegha (measurement

of land in local dialect) agricultural land. My father was missing

since 2008 and finally our family got some factual evidences about

62 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

confirmation of his death. My family is consisting of grandfather,

widow mother, and four brothers younger to me. They were study-

ing when I joined work. I have no option.

Child labor is a socioeconomic phenomenon arising essentially from

poverty and lack of development. There have been increasing evidences

to show that parents or guardians do not like to make their children work

unless compelled by circumstances (Grootaert & Patrinos, 1999). The

“circumstances,” however, range from simple factors such as pecuniary

position of the family to more complex social, political, and infrastructural

situations at a particular point of time (Satpathy et al., 2010, p. 2).

(b) Details related to work: Most of the children (82.98%) went to work at a

very minor age during 2003–2011. Almost 9.57% children went to work

in last 3 years, that is, during 2012–2015. The overwhelming majority of

children (88.30%) were rescued from Delhi and Jaipur (6.38%). “Poverty”

has been the most important factor to push children into exploitative and

remunerative work. In case of the majority of respondents (74.47%),

poverty was solely responsible for their vulnerability, whereas in case of

a small group of children (7.45%), they joined work force as they were

not interested in studies. More than half of the children (61.70%) were

engaged in Zari (embroidery) work and another significant number of

children were found working in button manufacturing factory (23.41%).

They were largely working in groups, doing specific Zari work or making

buttons on machines. In the case of more than half of the selected chil-

dren (64.89%), about 1–20 other children were also working with them.

As far as the duration of child’s engagement in such works is concerned,

in the majority of cases (70.21%) it was less than a year before they were

rescued. However, few of them (4.26%) had worked for more than 3 years

before they were rescued. Researchers found that in more than half of

the cases (64.89%) no one from the family was working with these chil-

dren. However, there was a large group of children (29.79%) whose fam-

ily members, relatives, or known persons were also working with them; of

these, in most of the cases (67.86%), real brothers were working together.

In almost one-fourth of the cases (27.66%), the employers were connected

with working child as a family member. In an informal interview, a young

child who was rescued and rehabilitated, made an important remark:

I was sent to Delhi with my uncle who was already engaged in zari

work in Kardampuri, Delhi, known as a hub of such type of work,

in order to learn some hand work and earn some money through it.

No one asked my consent or desire; I have to go because of [sic] my

circumstances demanded.

children were rescued (44.68%) during 2011–2013, whereas 35.10%

Bhatt and Singh 63

children were rescued during 2009–2011 and few of them (3.20%) before

2009. Some of the children (11.70%) were also rescued in past 3 years.

The overwhelming majority of these children (74.16%) were rescued by

BBA workers. Although it is generally the joint responsibility of district

authorities in whose jurisdiction children work (deputy commissioner/

district magistrate, police, Child Welfare Committee [CWC], and the spe-

cifically established District Task Force [DTF]) to rescue children engaged

in work, it was found that NGOs/BBA have always played a very important

role in all such cases. In addition to acting as a whistle-blower after receiv-

ing information about the presence of child labor, BBA was involved in

the complete process of rescue even after the rescue-related work such as

short-term stay arrangement, production before CWC, issue of the release

certificate, repatriation process, ascertaining release of compensation

money under rehabilitation process. However, a few children reported that

they were rescued by Police (31.46%) and government official (16.85%).

After rescue from workplace, most of them (71.28%) stayed at BBA’s Mukti

Ashram in Delhi, India. As many as 19.15% children were even did not

know the place of their stay after rescue and a few others mentioned the

names of Child Line, Prayas, and Narela Sanskar Ashram. More than half

of children spent less than 1 month (61.70%), followed by 2–3 months in

some cases (21.28%). Some of the rescued children (21.28%) confessed

that they were struck by the place of stay and its activities in terms of

motivation toward importance of education.

On enquiring any unforgettable incidence during the period of their

engagement at work place, about half of the children (53.33%) reported

“beating” (physical thrashing), extra work (40.00%), and improper food

(6.67%). A rescued child’s remarks revealed the raid outcomes:

In June 2013, I was sent to Delhi with my aunt and uncle who were

engaged in belt making work in a resettlement colony named Nand

Nagari, Delhi, so that I could learn some work and earn some money

through it. In September 2013, a raid for rescue was conducted by

BBA with the help of police and other Govt. officials in nearby area

through which I was rescued and sent to Bal Ashram (Children

Home of BBA) for one-and-a-half month. In November 2013, I was

rehabilitated and sent back to my home. After that, I was enrolled

with the school situated in the village and still continued with the

same.

(d) Rehabilitation-related information: Before the process of rehabilita-

tion is started, a rescued child has to pass through complicated legalities

of the process. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) in whose jurisdic-

tion children were found working issues a “release certificate” under the

provision of Bonded Labour Act, 1976 to rescued children. After this,

rehabilitation money is provided to each child through the office of the

64 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

District Magistrate of child’s native place. The Ministry of Labour has pro-

vided guidelines for rehabilitation of the released bonded laborers. As per

these guidelines, out of the approved package of Rs. 20,000 per released

laborer, Rs. 1000 should be provided at the time of release and remain-

ing Rs. 19,000 should be paid at the time of grounding the scheme. More

than half of the children (53.20%) said that they had received release cer-

tificate. However, a large number of children (35.10%) had not received

release certificate and they were not aware of any reason for the same.

The compensation money/rehabilitation package was not received by half

of the rescued children (50%). Children and their parents practically had

no knowledge of laws, rules, or procedures related to their rehabilitation.

Half of the rescued children (50%) had no personal bank accounts, which

simply meant that they would not receive rehabilitation money. Most of

the rescued children (66.67%) reported delay in receiving money. The

rehabilitation money was generally used for different purposes such as

buying animal, construction/repair of house, daughter’s marriage, and

giving back to contractor who provided them employment. In some cases

(23.81%), cut/convenience money was also paid to the person involved in

releasing rehabilitation money. The duration in receiving such rehabilita-

tion money varied from 6–36 months. A group of children (21.28%) did

not join school after rehabilitation because of poor economic condition of

their families.

Of the total number of children who joined school, more than half

(60.29%) had dropped from school after some time. In such cases, some

of the children were forced by parents to rejoin work, even after rehabil-

itation, whereas others (20.21%) rejoined the work voluntarily. As far

as the present engagement of these rehabilitated children is concerned,

more than half of the children (57.45%) are engaged in some income-

generating activities. While interviewing and interacting informally with

a rehabilitated boy, the researchers encountered the following remarks:

My family has received release certificate as well as rehabilitation

money through cheque provided for this purpose as per the pre-

scribed guidelines in this regard. I don’t want to say anything about

Govt. officials and other concerned ones. I think education should

be provided to all the children.

The realities of rehabilitation are quite painful and a sad commentary on the

efforts of rehabilitation. Compensation, back wages, or rehabilitation money

passes through many layers before it reaches the rescued child. A group of chil-

dren (one-fifth approximately) did not join school after rehabilitation because of

poor economic condition of their families and many reported to be dropping out

from school and rejoining workforce. India’s noted child rights activist and Nobel

Bhatt and Singh 65

laureate Kailash Satyarthi (2019) has remarked that “India’s policy for economic,

social, psychological and educational rehabilitation of children freed from the

child labor or slavery is very strong, Of course, corruption, apathy and delay are

the issues we have to continue to address.”

Analysis and Discussion

Mechanism Developed by the Government to Ensure Rehabilitation

Government of India’s Ministry of Labour has provided guidelines for rehabili-

tation of released bonded labors. The Ministry also provides guidelines about the

types of income-generating activities that the rehabilitated bonded labor should

be helped to start with. The Ministry of Labour’s guidelines suggest land-based,

non-land-based, and skill-based schemes (income-generating activities/enter-

prises) for rehabilitation. Ministry of Labour sanctions and releases its share of

rehabilitation grants upon request from respective state governments. It is the

responsibility of state governments to identify, get released, and rehabilitate the

released laborers as per the guidelines. State governments may confer powers to

District Magistrates to ensure that the provisions of the Bonded Labour Act, 1976

are properly carried out. District Magistrates and the officers specified by them

shall take such actions as may be necessary to eradicate the enforcement of forced

labor. Ministry of Labour has also asked the state governments to constitute a vig-

ilance committee in each district and sub-division as it may deem fit and notify

it in official gazette. District Magistrate or a person nominated by him/her shall

be the chairperson of the vigilance committee. Similarly, there will be a vigilance

committee at sub-division level. Unfortunately, there is a delay in formation and

functional operations.

Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Initiatives

Owing to lack of livelihood options and opportunities, the problem of child labor

has aggravated. Government agencies also have limited resources. Moreover, the

government has insufficient agencies to rehabilitate rescued child workers. Con-

sequently, it is difficult to break the vicious cycle of vulnerability. Further, it gets

complicated due to lack of coordination between different government depart-

ments. For instance, the benefit of Indira Awas Yojana (IAY) should be given to the

family of rehabilitated rescued child on a priority basis through Block Develop-

ment Office (BDO), but there is no simple mechanism of information-sharing of

such cases between government departments. It was found during the study that

in both the districts, Child Protection Unit (CPU) has been looked after by Asst.

Director, Department of Social Justice/Security as an additional task. Moreover,

Child Protection Officers (institutional and non-institutional) in both districts

were performing additionally. An interaction with a BDO in Sitamarhi revealed

66 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

that most of the rural poverty alleviation schemes and programs are implemented

through BDO. He was of the opinion that:

Information pertaining to the rehabilitated child withdrawn from worksites

is not provided to us at block level. Moreover, delay in getting information

from other concerned Govt. agency is also a problem which delays the entire

process and defeats the purpose of rehabilitation”.

Role of Concerned Government Officials in the Process of Rehabilitation

As per the guidelines for rehabilitation, concerned government officials are

responsible for rehabilitation of rescued child in proper sense and also get him/her

admitted to school. Many schools do not admit such children and some of them

wait for orders in writing. A section of government official strongly believes that

rehabilitation means providing Rs. 20,000/- per released child worker. It is evi-

dent that there is no clarity of roles and responsibilities, and standard operating

procedures are also not known to most of the officials.

Mechanism to Check and Stop the Rejoining of Remunerative Work

by Rescued Child

There is no such an effective mechanism to check and stop the rejoining of remu-

nerative work by rescued children. Generally, it has been found that rescued and

rehabilitated children are again engaged in remunerative work. More often, chil-

dren from a single family join such remunerative work at different periods of a

particular year with the same employer or contractor; this shows acceptance by

family members, especially parents, for rejoining remunerative work. It seems

to be happening due to lack of understanding about importance of education.

However, the District Child Protection Unit (DCPU) and Anti-Human Trafficking

Committee (AHTC) have been set up in each district. The main functions of DCPU

are to monitor all government homes, such as children’s home, to assess the needs

of vulnerable children and do mapping of need for additional anganwadi centers

for such children. The main function of AHTC is to remove all types of human

trafficking. This Committee is headed by District Magistrate (DM) as its chairper-

son. It organizes seminars, workshops, and awareness-generation campaigns in

order to create sensitivity in population toward such inhuman practices prevailing

in the society. Hence, DCPU and AHTC work on preventive and curative aspects,

respectively. No such devise/mechanism is evident that can stop the rejoining of

remunerative work by rehabilitated children. A police officer in Kishanganj dis-

trict opined the following:

More often, the efforts related to anti-child labor do not move in the right

direction because all the respective agencies are not doing what they are

Bhatt and Singh 67

supposed to do. Besides, Department of Social Welfare, Department of

Education, Department of Women and Child Welfare, etc. must be involved

inclusively and share their resources mutually with each other at every level.

Role of Voluntary Organizations (NGOs) in Post-rehabilitation Phase

NGOs have a greater role to play in rehabilitation process. Right from identifying

family to placement of child in the school, an NGO has a role to play. It can act as

a bridge between government and family of the rescued child. NGOs can take up

vulnerability mapping of source areas of child labor, which could be essentially

used for developing prevention plans. There is a need for coordination between

NGOs within and across the states. It is essential to set up a national integrated

grid of NGOs on anti-trafficking/child labor, which should be linked with NGO

groups across the border in Nepal. The role of NGOs has been found commendable

in securing the future of such children, as they provide educational services along

with residential facilities. Inexpensive schools, more resources, educating the par-

ents, in particular mothers, can make a huge difference in educating children.

Gaps in Rehabilitation Initiatives

There are five major gaps from policy to implementation. These at different lev-

els are identified as gaps in policy, knowledge, procedures, resources, and institu-

tional framework.

1. Policy gap: Most of the provisions related to the protection of children

spring from the Constitution of India as its Directive Principles of the State

Policy declare that the state shall provide opportunities and facilities to all

children to develop up to the age of 14 years. A number of legislative initia-

tives have been undertaken at both levels. Moreover, in 1989, UN Conven-

tion on Rights of the Child (CRC) provided a base for the rights of children

all over the world. It is noteworthy that in the last three decades, several

major policies and action plans have been announced for improving the sta-

tus of children. Unfortunately, it is to be noted that in India no comprehen-

sive policy, including the constitutional and legislative, has been introduced

which could completely prohibit all forms of child labor and lay down pro-

visions for educational opportunities for the rehabilitated children. There

is an urgent need to provide convergence between Bonded Labour System

(Abolition) Act, 1976 and CLPRA 1986 because both legislations are sup-

portive and complementary to each other.

2. Knowledge gap: Owing to lack of education and awareness in different

stakeholders, they are unable to stop child labor. On the other hand, lack

of awareness in people deprive them from availing the benefits of various

developmental and poverty alleviation schemes and programs and are

forced to send their children for remunerative work.

68 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

3. Procedural gap: In 2008, the Ministry of Labour & Employment, GoI,

brought out a Protocol on Prevention, Rescue, Repatriation and Rehabilita-

tion of Trafficked & Migrant Child Labour. The protocol provides practical

guidelines to key stakeholders on crucial issues relating to prevention, res-

cue, repatriation, and rehabilitation of trafficked and migrant child labor.

Although this attempt of GoI was praiseworthy, there was no seriousness

on the implementation of this protocol.There was a lack of coordination

between different government agencies concerned with the rescue and

rehabilitation of child labor. Neither the roles of different stakeholders nor

their accountability mechanism were clearly defined. As a result, the issue

of child labor has not been taken seriously in the absence of standard oper-

ating procedure (SOP).

4. Resource gap: Government agencies alone are unable to perform the

rescue operation because they do not have separate infrastructure and

adequate resources. Presently, they have an additionally added task and

responsibility of rescuing and rehabilitation of children based on Hon’ble

Court’s recent directives, but without any specific arrangements. Moreover,

there is a huge gap between rehabilitated child laborers and various devel-

opmental and poverty alleviation schemes and programs, like MGNREGA,

IAY, Swarnjayanthi Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY), Sampoorna Grameen-

Rozgar Yojana (SGRY), etc. Thus, the families of rehabilitated child labor-

ers are unable to change their economic status of deprivation to stop their

children from rejoining remunerative work in the future. It also reflects

that government agencies have failed to ensure the optimum utilization of

resources available to them.

5. Institutional framework gap: Owing to lack of good institutional frame-

work, things do not move in the right direction because the respective agen-

cies do not function as they are supposed to do. Besides, Departments of

Social Welfare, Education, Women and Child Welfare, etc. are not involved

intensively and effectively to share their resources at every level. Hence, a

bigger framework to plan and implement the entire rescue and rehabilita-

tion procedures in an integrated manner is missing. For example, accord-

ing to a legal provision, the employers should be prosecuted in the Hon’ble

Court. However, there is always a mismatch between the number of child

laborers rescued and rehabilitated and the number of cases registered

against employers.

Delay at each step stems out clarity of roles and responsibilities. It is desirable

that released child laborers are rehabilitated as early as possible. However, in real-

ity, a large number of children or their parents (sometimes even NGOs) do not

receive release certificates, which are essential for receiving rehabilitation money.

This gap between release and distribution of rehabilitation money is too acute in

most of the cases. Failing action in stipulated time defeats its purpose. Generally,

it is found that after rescue and rehabilitation, children are again engaged in

Bhatt and Singh 69

remunerative work. Thus, this leads to the conclusion that rescue of a child is a

huge achievement, but it is diluted in the absence of pro-active approach in releas-

ing certificates and distributing rehabilitation money.

Social Work Response on Realities of Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation is a complex process requiring engagement of multiple stake-

holders, ranging from parents and family, school authorities, villagers, various

government officials, panchayats, and NGOs. The task of rehabilitation requires

understanding of convoluted socioeconomic and politico system on the one hand

and understanding of human relations and child behavior on the other. Such jobs

cannot be carried out by someone not having professional skills, sensitivity, empa-

thy, realities of rehabilitation, and its societal context. Since inception, social work

has been recognized across the globe as a human service profession that focuses

on basic understanding of human relationships and social environment and their

dynamic interplay. It is based on universal human values and democratic ideals

as an emerging human service profession. Considering the sustainable social

development as its major goal, social work ensures the engagement of people,

institutions, and systems at different levels, not only for protecting and promot-

ing social justice and human rights but also ensuring dignity of human beings

and their overall wellbeing through specifically designed interventions suitable to

their socio-cultural milieu (Bhatt and Sanyal, 2019). The National Association of

Professional Social Workers in India (NAPSWI, 2018) states the following:

Professional social work is based on democratic values, humanitarian phi-

losophy with central focus on the human relationships and human dignity.

In India, the profession of social work draws its strengths from indigenous

wisdom, constitutional commitment for equality, social justice and human

rights, and scientific knowledge base. Its professional practice contributes to

macro- level understanding and policy change while continuing to focus on

people at individual, group, and community levels. As a practice-based pro-

fession, its interactions enrich institutions and systems at all levels through

culturally responsive interventions [and] that aim at individual and social

wellbeing. Its central concerns are empowerment of vulnerable, oppressed,

and marginalized sections of our communities, and as a practice it endeav-

ors to partake in social change [and] sustainable development through par-

ticipatory and collaboratory processes with people in need, institutions, and

the state.

The problem of child labor is within the purview of the definition of profes-

sion of social work. It recognizes that issues of child labor require more serious

interventions to address this problem as violation of human rights, and welfare

approach alone is not sufficient. The commonly prevalent paternalistic “law and

order perspective” and the predominantly moralistic “welfare perspective” have

70 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

to be substituted by a “human rights perspective.” The convergence approach

demands a better coordination between government’s various poverty-alleviating

schemes and rehabilitation measures. The rehabilitation of rescued child victims

should be monitored by external independent agencies with the help of NGOs.

The vulnerability mapping of source areas of child labor could be useful for plan-

ning, prioritization, and coordinated efforts. Mapping and micro studies have to

be done keeping in view all parameters and dimensions, including law and order

perspective. It should be participatory and involve the community and Panchayati

Raj Institutions (PRIs). In nutshell, rehabilitation process should be built on the

“rights-based approach,” rather than a narrow “welfare approach.” This task

should be accepted by social work professionals to develop a model similar to a

child line for arresting the problem of child labor.

Acknowledgments

We express our deep sense of gratitude and appreciation for the grassroots

workers and officials of Bachpan Bachao Andolan (BBA), in general, and to

Bhuwan Ribhu for his valuable inputs, in particular. We are also grateful to

Dhanajay Tingle, director; Diljeet Singh, manager; and Paramshree Padmakar,

programme coordinator (research) of BBA for their amazing cooperation and

support.

References

Ahmad, A. (2012). Poverty, education and child labour in Aligarh City–India.

Studies on Home and Community Science, 6(3), 165–172. Retrieved from

http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/S-HCS/HCS-06-0-000-12-

Web/HCS-06-3-000-12-Abst-PDF/S-HCS-06-3-165-12-201-Ahmad-A/S-

HCS-06-3-165-12-201-Ahmad-A-Tt.pdf

Barman, B., & Barman, N. (2014). A study on child working population in India.

IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 19(2), Ver. I,

February 01–05. Retrieved from http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/

papers/Vol19-issue2/Version-1/A019210105.pdf

Basu, Arnab K., & Chau, Nancy H. (2003). Targeting child labour in debt bond-

age: Evidence, theory, and policy implications. World Bank Economic Review,

17(2), 255–281. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/

en/964301468149965902/pdf/774110JRN020030argeting0Child0

Labor.pdf

Bhatt, B. (2011). Rehabilitation of child labour: Problems and prospects with special

reference to Kashmir. New Delhi, India: Shipra.

Bhatt, S. (2015). Assessing sustainability and effectiveness of government’s rehabil-

itation initiatives for trafficked child labourers in Bihar. A study commissioned

by Bachpan Bachao Andolan (BBA). New Delhi, India: Delhi School of Social

Work Society.

Bhatt and Singh 71

Bhatt, S., & Sanyal, S. (2019). Definitions of social work in past hundred years: A

review. Journal of Social Work, Education, Research and Action, 5(1), 5–27.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1993). Ecological system theory. In R. Wozniak & K. Fisher

(Eds.), Specific environments: Thinking in contexts (pp. 3–44). Hillsdale, NY:

Erlbaum.

Dhanya, M.B. (2013). Fundamental principles and rights at work and informal econ-

omy in India: Trends, initiatives and challenges. Noida, India: V.V. Giri National

Labour Institute. Retrieved from http://www.vvgnli.org/sites/default/files/

publication_files/NLI-SERIES-105-F.pdf

Grootaert, C., & Patrinos, H. (Eds.) (1999), The policy analysis of child labour.

New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

Jaya Surian, B., & Vezhavendan, D. (2018). An empirical study on the status of

child labour before and after the implementation of National Child Labour

Project Scheme in India. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics,

119(17), 247–267.

Mendelievich, E. (Ed.) (1980). Children at work. Geneva, Switzerland: International

Labour Office (ILO).

Narayana, Venkat K. (2014). Combating child labour in India: An empirical study

in Andhra Pradesh. New Delhi: Planning Commission, Government of India.

Retrieved from http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/sereport/ser/ser_

childlabour2801.pdf

National Association of Professional Social Workers in India (NAPSWI). (2018).

Definition of professional social work. Retrieved from https://www.napswi.

org/definition.html

Phillips, N., Bhaskaran, R., Nathan, D, & Upendranadh, C. (2011). Child labour in

global production networks: Poverty, vulnerability and “adverse incorporation” in

the Delhi garments sector. Working paper No, 177. New Delhi, India: Chronic

Poverty Research Centre. Retrieved from http://sa.indiaenvironmentportal.

org.in/files/child percent20labour percent20in percent20delhi percent-

20garment percent20factory.pdf

Prasad, S., & Ali, R. (2015). A qualitative study of child labour in district Bahraich,

Uttar Pradesh. The Labour Commissioner Organisation, Government of Uttar

Pradesh, India. Retrieved from http://uplabour.gov.in/MediaGallery/Child

percent20Labour percent20in percent20Bahraich percent202015.pdf

Sahu, K. K. (2013). An empirical study of determinants of child labour.

International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 2(3), 423–433.

Retrieved from http://www.ijset.net/journal/115.pdf

Satpathy, A. K., Sekar H. R. & Karan, A. K.(2010). Rehabilitation of Child Labour

in India: Lessons Learnt from the Evaluation of NCLPs. NOIDA, India: V.V. Giri

National Labour Institute.

Satyarthi, K. (2019). Rehabilitation of children freed from child labour improves in India.

Press Trust of India (PTI). Retrieved from https://www.business-standard.

com/article/pti-stories/rehabilitation-of-children-freed-from-child-

labour-improves-in-india-satyarthi-119020300292_1.html

72 Social Development Issues, 43(2) 2021

Sekar, Helen R. (2002). Impact of rehabilitation programmes on child labour. New

Delhi, India: Commonwealth.

Supreme Court of India. (1996). Mehta MC vs State of Tamil Nadu and Others,

RD-SC 1576. Supreme Court cases, full judgement. Retrieved from http://

www.rishabhdara.com/sc/view.php?case=13526

Zutshi, B., & Dutta, M. (2004). Child labour: Rehabilitation in India. New Delhi,

India: Bhavan Books.