Sajjan > Zafaryab Ahmad > Articles > Sangat

  • Child Labourers: Individuals with rights - December, 1997

Mankind owes to a child the best it has to give...The child shall enjoy special protection and shall be given special opportunities and facilities, by law and by other means…to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually and socially in a healthy and normal manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity.… The child shall be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty and exploitation.…

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Child, adopted in 1959 Let us read in unison this commitment that we made almost three decades ago and ask ourselves if we have ever tried to make it a reality. If we try to make only this commitment and try to eradicate the conditions that predicate its realisation, we will be able to construct a just society.

The appeal is universal and "mankind" does not mean the people of Pakistan only. After the internationalisation of markets there is not a single problem that is country-specific or can be addressed at one level only. If the West is serious in helping countries like Pakistan to resolve such issues then it will have to change its attitude "we have done it, you have to follow us". The need is to first understand what sustains child labour, not to say that the developed countries decided to eliminate it a century ago.

It is no longer to be a traitor to talk about child labour. Not very long ago those who pointed at the illegal and inhuman practice were incarcerated for treason. In one such case the First Information Report (FIR), the document on which depends the fate of an accused in this country, reads: "…information has been received that the Indian intelligence agency RAW had set up a plan to exploit the murder of Iqbal Masih with a view to cause recurring huge financial loss to Pakistan business interests abroad, tending to pave the way for economic warfare against Pakistan."

Then there are names of the accused who were going to "prepare a documentary in Rome, Italy, on human rights and maltreatment towards the minorities in Pakistan.…the said persons' activities have since been watched closely by the sensitive agencies in Pakistan and some foreign countries as well," which according to the FIR were intended to "excite disaffection against the central/provincial governments in Pakistan.…"

For some the charge-sheet was hilarious, but there were also those who felt it was outrageous. However, it exposed the official double standards on the issue, which was to deny the prevalence of child labour in Pakistan . No one can deny that a child at work is a child at risk. He is being denied childhood, days of innocence and ease when there are to be no obligations but just rights. However, over the last two years or so it has become rather elitist to talk about the child. One hears even the respectable hinting at their ancestors having worked as a child.

There is a conference every second day and almost every "grass roots" organisation has a project or two in its basket aiming at elimination of child labour, or something to do with alleviation of conditions of children who are denied their right to childhood. None of the organisations riding the child labour bandwagon have made even a rudimentary effort to improve conditions for the child. All kinds of government and non-governmental initiatives are being carried out without ever questioning the nature and magnitude of the problem.

The heightening of interest in child labour gave birth to its apologist "intellectuals". Children, they said, were not being exploited for they were part of the family labour, where they acquire skills as apprentices. Moreover, poor families need labour and the income of their children and cannot be coerced to send their wards to school. Schools are often irrelevant to their needs. Also, small-scale industries need low-wage labour to survive if they are to compete with large and more efficient firms. The tragedy is that today many averse to child labour accept these arguments without ever questioning their validity.

Research projects were launched that show that children themselves want to work; they are helping hands to their families; they enjoy work; it is better to work than be a street child. Those campaigning for a child's right to childhood were told to listen to the child. Irrespective of the fact that as a child does not choose the place of his birth, he doesn't know what the world owes to him. Children do not know the difference between work and a gymnasium. They do not know what modern civilisation can offer them. It is all up to those who are aware and conscientious to stand up for them.

Despite the campaign the crusaders against child labour fritter over the meaning of child labour. Without ever taking the pain to decide whether child labour is a disease or a symptom of a disease they have accepted it as an epidemic. They have not bothered to find out whether the issue can be addressed in isolation from its other related causes and effects.

No one is sure if poverty is the cause of child labour or vice versa. The role of the employer by most child labour activists is seen as that of a poverty alleviator. What do the ones who believe in elimination of child labour mean? Why does a family produce children if it cannot feed them or provide parental love?

Unfortunately, a large section of the Pakistani middle class, which includes policy makers, continues to argue that child labour cannot be eliminated while poverty exists. Moreover, government programs operate on the periphery of the problem. Instead of addressing the problem at all levels and working out a comprehensive strategy, the government promotes unsuccessful campaigns like literacy, non-formal education and, in certain cases, providing free school lunches to encourage children to remain in school. As if it is only food that a child needs, whatever education he may be getting and however discouraging it may be.

The liberal and enlightened sections of the middle class need to ask themselves questions on child labour. Their attitude to the issue seems to be premised on a differentiation between the children of the poor and their own children. A distinction between children who are born to work and children who are born to learn and reflect. Hence they propose solutions like non-formal education and vocational training as the answer to child labour.

This, unfortunately, is not the answer as it aims at teaching the poor to work. All that the economic planners need to realise is that child labour creates an economic climate that encourages unemployed and underemployed parents to be dependent on their children. Checks on employment of child labour is also a way to check the fertility rate. Doing so the majority of children, instead of being treated as an economic asset, will regain their status of human beings: individuals with rights.