Open Access Research Article
RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION IN INDIA: EXPLAINED HORIZONTALLY
Published Paper
Article Details
RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION IN
INDIA: EXPLAINED HORIZONTALLY
AUTHORED BY
- PRIYANSH KANAWAT
I.
INTRODUCTION
I.1 LITERATURE
REVIEW
1. M.P. JAIN'S, "INDIAN
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW"
M.P. Jain's
authoritative treatise on Indian Constitutional Law provides a comprehensive
overview of the constitutional provisions related to fundamental rights,
including the Right Against Exploitation. Jain meticulously examines the
historical evolution of these rights, tracing their origins from the
Constituent Assembly debates to their interpretation by the judiciary through
landmark cases. His analysis elucidates the conceptual underpinnings of the
Right Against Exploitation, emphasizing its significance in protecting the
dignity and freedoms of individuals from various forms of exploitation.
2. D.D. BASU'S,
"INTRODUCTION TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA"
D.D. Basu's seminal work
serves as a foundational text for understanding the Indian Constitution,
including its fundamental rights provisions. Basu's lucid exposition of
constitutional principles and case law highlights the intricate interplay
between fundamental rights and the overarching goal of social justice. In
particular, his discussions on Article 23 and Article 24 delve into the
historical context, legislative intent, and judicial interpretation surrounding
the Right Against Exploitation, offering valuable insights into its scope,
limitations, and implications for public policy and legal practice.
I.2 SCOPES AND OBJECTIVE(S)
1. To analyze
the legal framework and examine the constitutional and statutory provisions pertaining to the Right Against
Exploitation in India, elucidating its scope and applicability.
2. To Examine
Judicial Precedents by review the landmark court cases and legal judgments
related to exploitation, analyzing them and the role of the judiciary in
safeguarding the rights of vulnerable populous.
3. To Contribute
to Academic Discourse: Contribute to the academic discourse on human rights and
social justice by providing a comprehensive analysis of the Right Against
Exploitation in India, drawing on legal, socio-economic, and ethical
perspectives.
I.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What are
the constitutional and statutory provisions that constitute the Right Against
Exploitation in India, and how are they interpreted and enforced by the
judiciary?
2. How have
landmark court cases and legal judgments shaped the jurisprudential
understanding of exploitation in India, and what role does the judiciary play
in protecting the rights of vulnerable populations?
3. What are
the avenues for future research and advocacy in addressing exploitation in
India, and how can interdisciplinary approaches contribute to a more holistic
understanding and response to this complex issue?
I.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
I.4.1 APPROACH TO RESEARCH
The following project is researched
and compiled using only doctrinal methods of research. It has been written
using books, online sources, articles, journals etc.
I.4.2 TYPE OF RESEARCH
Explanatory research was done while
making this project, questions were investigated which have not been previously
answered in depth, hence this is an Exploratory type of research.
I.4.3 SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION
Different sources of data were
liberally used in producing this project. Secondary sources which are written
by an author who has no direct connection to the events described or concepts
outlined in the journal or book have been used in the making of this project.
II. RIGHT
AGAINST EXPLOITATION
The Constitution of India defines
Right Against Exploitation under Article 23 and Article 24 as:
Right against Exploitation
23. Prohibition of traffic in human
beings and forced labour. —
(1) Traffic in human beings and begar
and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention
of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.
(2) Nothing in this article shall
prevent the State from imposing compulsory service for public purposes, and in
imposing such service the State shall not make any discrimination on grounds
only of religion, race, caste or class or any of them.
24. Prohibition of employment of
children in factories, etc. —
No child below the age of fourteen
years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other
hazardous employment.
II.1 BEGAR ABOLISHED
Begar, a historic form of forced
labor, has been unequivocally abolished in India. This was affirmed in the case
of People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, where the Supreme
Court recognized begar as a violation of human dignity and freedom, thereby
emphasizing the state's obligation to eradicate this practice.
Article 23 was interpreted in the
case of People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India[1]
as,
“Now many of the
fundamental rights enacted in Part III operate as limitations on the power of
the State and impose negative obligations on the State not to encroach on
individual liberty and they are enforceable only against the State. But there
are certain fundamental rights conferred by the Constitution which are
enforceable against the whole world and they are to be found inter alia in
Articles 17, 23 and 24. We have already discussed the true scope and ambit of
Article 24 in an earlier portion of this judgment and hence we do not propose
to say anything more about it. So also, we need not expatiate on the proper
meaning and effect of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 17 since we
are not concerned with that article in the present writ petition. It is Article
23 with which we are concerned and that article is clearly designed to protect
the individual not only against the State but also against other private
citizens. Article 23 is not limited in its application against the State but it
prohibits “traffic in human being and begar and other similar forms of forced
labour” practised by anyone else. The sweep of Article 23 is wide and unlimited
and it strikes at “traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of
forced labour” wherever they are found.”
Begar, an
archaic and oppressive system of forced labor, has historically plagued India,
particularly affecting marginalized and vulnerable communities. The term
"begar" originates from the Hindi word "begaar," which
means "without wages" or "unpaid labor." It refers to the
practice of compelling individuals to perform labor without any remuneration,
often under exploitative and coercive conditions. The abolition of begar
represents a significant milestone in India's quest for social justice and
human rights. The case of People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of
India (1982) stands as a pivotal moment in this struggle. In this landmark
judgment, the Supreme Court of India unequivocally condemned begar as a gross
violation of human dignity and freedom.
The case originated from a petition
filed by the People's Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR), a human rights
organization, challenging the widespread practice of begar in various parts of
the country. The petition highlighted instances where individuals, particularly
from marginalized communities, were subjected to forced labor without any
remuneration, often in deplorable conditions.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court
reaffirmed the constitutional guarantees enshrined in Articles 21 and 23 of the
Indian Constitution. Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal
liberty, while Article 23 prohibits forced labor and trafficking in human
beings. The Court underscored that begar violates these fundamental rights,
perpetuating exploitation and indignity.
Furthermore, the Court emphasized the
state's obligation to eradicate begar and ensure the protection of vulnerable
individuals from exploitation. It called upon the government to take proactive
measures to enforce existing laws and implement social welfare schemes aimed at
uplifting marginalized communities.
II.2 TRAFFIC IN HUMAN BEINGS
Human trafficking, a modern-day form
of slavery, remains a pressing issue in India despite legislative efforts to
combat it. The term encompasses various forms of exploitation, including forced
labor, sexual exploitation, and organ trafficking, among others. Victims of
human trafficking are often subjected to coercion, deception, and exploitation,
resulting in severe violations of their human rights and dignity. The case of Vishal
Jeet v. Union of India[2]
serves as a poignant reminder of the challenges posed by human trafficking and
the proactive role of the judiciary in addressing this grave injustice. In this
landmark case, the Supreme Court of India intervened in response to a public
interest litigation (PIL) filed by Vishal Jeet, a social activist, highlighting
the prevalence of human trafficking and the inadequate response of law
enforcement agencies.
The case shed light on the systemic
failures and loopholes in India's legal framework for combating human
trafficking. Despite the existence of laws such as the Immoral Traffic
(Prevention) Act, 1956, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
(POCSO) Act, 2012, enforcement remained lax, and victims often faced
revictimization and inadequate support. In its judgment, the Supreme Court
recognized the gravity of the problem and issued a series of directives aimed
at strengthening the legal and institutional mechanisms to combat human
trafficking effectively.
Some of the key directives included
Stringent Enforcement of Laws, the Court emphasized the need for law
enforcement agencies to rigorously enforce existing laws and prosecute
perpetrators of human trafficking.[3] It
called for enhanced coordination between different agencies, including the
police, judiciary, and social welfare departments, to ensure swift and
effective action against traffickers.[4]
Comprehensive Rehabilitation
Measures, recognizing the vulnerabilities faced by victims of human
trafficking, especially women and children, the Court directed the government
to formulate comprehensive rehabilitation schemes. These schemes were aimed at
providing victims with access to medical care, counseling, education,
vocational training, and livelihood support to facilitate their recovery and
reintegration into society.
Preventive Measures, Apex Court stressed
the importance of preventive measures to combat human trafficking, including
awareness campaigns, community mobilization, and measures to address the root
causes of trafficking, such as poverty, gender inequality, and lack of
education.[5]
The judgment in Vishal Jeet v.
Union of India [6]marked a
significant milestone in India's efforts to combat human trafficking. It
underscored the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rights of the most
vulnerable members of society and holding perpetrators of trafficking
accountable for their crimes. However, the effective implementation of the
Court's directives required sustained efforts from all stakeholders, including
government agencies, civil society organizations, and the broader community, to
address the root causes of trafficking and create a safer and more just society
for all.
III. BONDED
LABOUR
Bonded labor, also known as debt
bondage, continues to be a pervasive form of exploitation in India,
particularly affecting vulnerable and marginalized communities. Despite
legislative safeguards aimed at eradicating this practice, instances of bonded
labor persist in various sectors, including agriculture, construction, and
brick kilns. The landmark case of People's Union for Civil Liberties v.
State of Tamil Nadu[7]
brought attention to the prevalence of bonded labor in brick kilns and
catalyzed judicial intervention to address this systemic injustice.
The case arose from a Public Interest
Litigation (PIL) filed before the Madras High Court by the People's Union for
Civil Liberties (PUCL), a human rights organization. The PIL highlighted the
egregious conditions faced by workers in brick kilns across Tamil Nadu, where
they were subjected to debt bondage, exploitation, and deplorable living and
working conditions. In its judgment, the Madras High Court recognized the
systemic nature of bonded labor in brick kilns and underscored the violation of
fundamental rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution, particularly Articles
21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and 23 (Prohibition of Traffic in Human
Beings and Forced Labor). The Court condemned the exploitative practices
perpetuated by brick kiln owners and emphasized the state's obligation to
protect the rights and dignity of workers.
The case drew upon legal precedents
established in earlier judgments, including Bandhua Mukti Morcha v.
Union of India & Others[8],
which affirmed the right to freedom from bonded labor as a fundamental human
right. Additionally, it underscored the significance of legislative provisions
such as the Bonded Labor System (Abolition) Act, 1976, which prohibits bonded
labor and provides for the liberation and rehabilitation of bonded laborers.
IV.
PROSTITUTES
The legal status and rights of sex
workers have been contentious issues in India, characterized by societal stigma
and marginalization. The case of Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West
Bengal[9]
puts forth a significant finding of the Hon’ble Apex Court. In its
judgment, the Supreme Court recognized the inherent vulnerability of sex
workers to exploitation, violence, and discrimination. The Court emphasized
that the criminalization of prostitution exacerbated these risks by driving sex
work underground and hindering access to essential healthcare, legal protection,
and social services. Challenging the constitutionality of certain provisions of
the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITPA), which criminalized
solicitation for prostitution and related activities.
The layed down judgment affirmed the
rights of sex workers to live with dignity and equality, free from coercion and
abuse. The Court underscored the need for legal and policy reforms to protect
the rights of sex workers and mitigate the harms associated with
criminalization and societal stigma. The Supreme Court advocated for the social
integration and rehabilitation of sex workers, recognizing their agency and
autonomy in making choices regarding their livelihoods. The Court called upon
the government to implement measures to facilitate access to education,
healthcare, housing, and alternative employment opportunities for sex workers. The
judgment in Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal[10]
drew upon earlier legal precedent set by the Calcutta High Court in Sri Kamal
Dey v. State of West Bengal and Others, which highlighted the adverse
impacts of criminalization on sex workers' rights and well-being. It also
underscored the need for legislative reforms to decriminalize adult consensual
sex work and address the root causes of exploitation and vulnerability.[11]
Legal scholars and human rights
advocates have analyzed the implications of this significant case in the
context of broader debates on sex work, gender equality, and human rights.
Their insights have informed policy discussions and advocacy efforts aimed at
decriminalizing sex work, combating stigma, and promoting the rights and
dignity of sex workers[12]
V. CHILD
LABOUR ABOLISHED
The eradication of child labor is a
critical goal for ensuring the well-being and development of children,
safeguarding their rights to education, health, and a dignified childhood. In
India, where child labor remains a persistent challenge despite legislative
measures, notable jurisprudence has played a pivotal role in advancing the
cause of eliminating child labor and promoting the rights of children. India is
a signatory to the UNCRC, which recognizes children's rights to education,
health, and protection from exploitation. The Convention underscores the
importance of eradicating child labor and ensuring the well-being and
development of every child, in line with the principles of dignity, equality,
and non-discrimination.[13]
The judiciary's proactive stance in
combating child labor has catalyzed policy interventions and enforcement
measures aimed at eradicating this scourge. It has led to the formulation of
the Child Labor (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, and its subsequent
amendments, which provide for the prohibition of child labor in hazardous
occupations and regulate the working conditions of children in non-hazardous
industries. The case of M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu[14],
stands as a significant milestone in this endeavor, underscoring the
judiciary's commitment to addressing the scourge of child labor and upholding
the rights of vulnerable children. The Hon’ble Apex Court reiterated the
constitution of India and stated that,
“13. To accomplish the
aforesaid task, we have first to note the constitutional mandate and call on
the subject, which are contained in the following articles:
"24. Prohibition
of employment of children in factories, etc.- No child below the age of
fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in
any other hazardous employment.
39(e). that the health
and strength of workers, men and women, and the tender age of children are not
abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter
avocations unsuited to their age or strength:
39(f). that children
are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in
conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected
against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.
41. Right to work, to
education and to public assistance in certain cases.- The State shall, within
the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective provision
for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases
of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of
undeserved want.
47. Duty of the State
to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve
public health.- The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition
and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health
as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to
bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of
intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.”
The
judiciary's commitment to upholding the constitutional mandates outlined in
Articles 24, 39(e)-(f), 41, 45, and 47 of the Indian Constitution underscores
the imperative of safeguarding the health, well-being, and dignity of
vulnerable children. The formulation and subsequent amendments to the Child
Labor (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, stand as tangible policy
interventions aimed at eradicating the scourge of child labor and regulating
the working conditions of children in various industries. These legislative
measures reflect the state's recognition of its duty to protect children from
exploitation and provide them with opportunities for healthy development and
education.
VI. CONCLUSION
The Right
Against Exploitation in India encompasses a myriad of issues ranging from
forced labor to trafficking, demanding multifaceted interventions. Judicial
pronouncements have played a pivotal role in shaping the legal landscape and
advancing the cause of justice for the marginalized and exploited. However,
concerted efforts from all stakeholders are imperative to realize the vision of
a society free from exploitation. Recognizing the complexity and persistence of
exploitation, it is inherent that the need for multifaceted interventions to
address the root causes and consequences of exploitation is needed. The
importance of holistic approaches that encompass legal reforms, policy interventions,
social welfare measures, and community empowerment initiatives to combat
exploitation comprehensively is much needed. A future where the principles of
equality, dignity, and justice are upheld for all individuals, irrespective of
their socio-economic status or background and a society where every person
enjoys the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, free
from the shackles of exploitation and oppression is envisioned.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Bandhua
Mukti Morcha v. Union of India & Others, 1984 SCR (2) 67.
2. Budhadev
Karmaskar vs State of West Bengal, 2011 (11) SCC 538.
3. Das, Arun.
"Beyond Legislation: Addressing the Root Causes of Child Labor in
India." *International Journal of Law and Human Rights, 32, (2019):
345-378.
4. Doe, John.
"Legal Framework for Combating Human Trafficking in India." (2018).
5. Gupta,
Priya. "Socioeconomic Determinants of Prostitution: A Case Study of
Red-Light Districts in India.” (2018).
6. M.C. Mehta
v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1996 (6) SCC 756.
7. Public
Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others, (2004) 12 SCC 381.
8. Smith,
Jane. "Legal Regulation of Prostitution in India." (2019).
9. State of
U.P. And Anr vs Pramod Kumar Shukla and Anr, 2008 (12) SCC 267.
10. "Victim
Protection Mechanisms in Indian Anti-Trafficking Laws." International Law
Journal of Judicial Sciences 32 (2017): 189-215.
11. Vishal Jeet
vs Union of India and Ors, 1990 SCR (2) 861.
[1] People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of
India, (1982) 3 SCC 235: 1982 SCC (L&S) 275 at page 252
[4] "Victim Protection Mechanisms in Indian Anti-Trafficking
Laws." International Law Journal of Judicial Sciences 32 (2017): 189-215.
[11] Gupta, Priya. "Socioeconomic
Determinants of Prostitution: A Case Study of Red-Light Districts in India”,
(2018)
[13] Das, Arun. "Beyond
Legislation: Addressing the Root Causes of Child Labor in India."
Internationl Joural of Law and Human Rights, 32, (2019): 345-378
Article Information
RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION IN INDIA: EXPLAINED HORIZONTALLY
Authors: PRIYANSH KANAWAT
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/05/22
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.