“ Indian bill allowing children to work for their families attacked by activists
By REUTERS
Published: 17:30 GMT, 20 July 2016 | Updated: 17:30 GMT,
20 July 2016
By Anuradha Nagaraj
CHENNAI, India, July 20 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) -
I ndian activists have criticised a bill that bans the employment of
children under 14 in more than a dozen occupations, but allows them to
work for their family businesses, saying the legislation justified child labour.
India's upper house of parliament passed an amendment to the Child Labour Act late on Tuesday,
which would allow children under 14 to help their parents with home-based work, including farming, after school
hours and during holidays.
The bill also introduces heftier penalties of between six months to two
years for those found guilty of breaking the law, and a fine
of up to 50,000 rupees ($740).
"The law is being changed after 30 years and yet it has found a way to justify some form of child labour," said Enakshi
Ganguly, a founder of the charity, HAQ: Centre for Child Rights.
The bill, which is expected to be passed
by the lower house of parliament, also allows children aged
between 14 and 18 to be employed in other professions not designated as
"hazardous".
For example, children working as artists in the entertainment industry,
including advertisement, films, television serials have been granted
an exemption to work under the new law as long as it does not affect their
schooling.
India is home to 5.7 million child workers aged between five and 17, according to the International
Labour Organization, which estimates there are 168 million child
workers globally.
More than half of India's child workers labour in the fields, and over a quarter in manufacturing - embroidering
clothes, weaving carpets or making matchsticks. Children also work in restaurants and hotels, and as domestic
workers.
Defending the bill, India's labour minister Bandaru Dattatreya
told parliament the new law was stringent and would reduce child labour in the country.
He also said that a family-run business would be less exploitative because it did
not pit employer against employee.
"It is very difficult to establish who is not part of family in our social fabric," HAQ's
Ganguly told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
"Everyone is an uncle and who is going to check the validity when a rescued child labourer says he worked for his uncle."
Parliamentarians opposed to the amendments argued that allowing children to work in the
family business undermined the
"Would we even dream of allowing our children at home to come back from school and assist us or work for us? What is not right for our children is not right for a child from an economically weaker background," lawmaker Kanimozhi Karunanidhi told parliament.
During the debate in parliament, questions were also raised about exposing children to pesticides used in farming
or other hazards in home-based business like carpet-weaving, bangle-making and rolling beedis.
($1=67.188 Indian rupees) (Reporting by Anuradha Nagaraj, Editing by
Katie Nguyen.; Please credit the Thomson Reuters Foundation,
the charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, that covers humanitarian news,
women's rights, trafficking and climate change.
Visit website bill allowing children to work for their families attacked b... ”