ABOLITION OF BONDED LABOUR SYSTEM IN INDIA

INTRODUCTION

Prior to the early modern age, feudal and serfdom systems were the predominant
political and economic systems in Europe. These systems were based on the holding
of all land in fief or fee, and the resulting relation of lord to vassal, and was
characterized by homage, legal and military service of tenants, and forfeiture. Many
historians have argued that this system was also established in some Latin American
countries, following European settlement.

A modernization of the feudal system was "peonage", where debtors were bound in
servitude to their creditors until their debts were paid. Although peons are only
obliged to a creditor monetarily, it might be viewed that this relationship reduces
personal autonomy.

HISTORICAL PEONAGE

Peonage is a system where labourers are bound in servitude until their debts are paid
in full. Those bound by such a system are known, in the US, as peons. Employers may
extend credit to labourers to buy from employer-owned stores at inflated prices. This
method is a variation of the truck system (or company store system), in which workers
are exploited by agreeing to work for an insufficient amount of goods and/or services.
In these circumstances, peonage is a form of unfree or restricted or constrained labour.
Such systems have existed in many places at many times throughout history.

Historical examples from International Arena

* In Colonial America, some settlers used indentured service to obtain passage or an

initial settlement, then continued working independently after completing their
bonded labour.

* The American South - Such a system was often used in the southern United States
after the American Civil War where African-American and poor white farmers,
known as sharecroppers, were often extended credit to purchase seed and supplies
from the owner of the land they farmed and pay the owner in a share of the crop.

* In Peru a peonage system existed from the 1500s until land reform in the 1950s. One
estate in Peru that existed from the late 1500s until it ended had up to 1,700 peons
employed and had a jail. Peons were expected to work a minimum of three days a
week for their landlord and more if necessary to complete assigned work. Workers
were paid a symbolic 2 cents per year. Workers were unable to travel outside of their
assigned lands without permission and were not allowed to organize any
independent community activity.

Thousands of such labourers were sold into slavery during the West African slave
trade and ended their lives working as slaves on the plantations in the New World.
For this reason, Section 2 of the Slave Trade Act 1843 enacted by the British Parliament
declared "persons Holden in servitude as pledges for debt" to "be slaves or persons
intended to be dealt with as slaves" for the purpose of the Slave Trade Act 1824 and
the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.

It continued to be very common in Africa and China, but was suppressed by the
authorities after the establishment of the People's Republic of China. It persists in rural
areas of India, Pakistan and Nepal.

In Niger, where the practice of slavery was outlawed in 2003, a study found that
almost 8% of the population are still slaves. Descent-based slavery, where generations
of the same family are born into bondage, is traditionally practised by at least four of
Niger’s eight ethnic groups. The slave masters are mostly from the nomadic tribes —
the Tuareg, Fulani, Toubou and Arabs.

40 million people in India, most of them Dalits, are bonded workers, many working
to pay off debts that were incurred generations ago. These figures are comparable to
ones in Bolivia, Brazil, Peru and Philippines. There are no universally accepted figures
for the number of bonded child labourers in India. Of 20 million bonded labourers in
Pakistan 7.5 million are children. An estimated 496,000 children are in slavery in
Bangladesh.

MODERN VIEWS

According to Anti-Slavery International, "A person enters debt bondage when their
labour is demanded as a means of repayment of a loan, or of money given in advance.
Usually, people are tricked or trapped into working for no pay or very little pay (in
return for such a loan), in conditions which violate their human rights. Invariably, the
value of the work done by a bonded labourer is greater that the original sum of money
borrowed or advanced."

According to the Anti-Slavery Society, pawn age or pawn slavery is a form of

servitude akin to bonded labour under which the debtor provides another human
being as security or collateral for the debt. Until the debt (including interest on it) is
paid off, the creditor has the use of the labour of the pawn.

At international law

Debt bondage has been defined by the United Nations as a form of "modern day
slavery" and is prohibited by international law. It is specifically dealt with by Article
1(a) of the United Nations 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of
Slavery. It persists nonetheless especially in developing nations, which have few
mechanisms for credit security or bankruptcy, and where fewer people hold formal
title to land or possessions. According to some economists, for example Hernando de
Soto, this is a major barrier to development in those countries - entrepreneurs do not
dare take risks and cannot get credit because they hold no collateral and may burden
families for generations to come.

Where children are forced to work because of debt bondage of the family, this is
considered not only child labour, but a worst form of child labour in terms of the
Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 of the International Labour
Organization.
Despite the UN prohibition, Anti-Slavery International estimates that "between 10 and
20 million people are being subjected to debt bondage today."

SOME INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS CONVENTIONS

The practice of bonded labour violates the following International Human Rights
Conventions whereas India is a party to all of them and such is legally bound to
comply with their terms. They are:

• Convention on the Suppression of Slave Trade and Slavery, 1926;

• Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and

Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery Trade, 1956;

• Forced Labour Convention, 1930;

• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966;

• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ECOSOC), 1966;

• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989

MODERN EXAMPLE: PROSTITUTION

News media in western Europe regularly carry reports about one particular kind of
debt bondage: women from Eastern Europe who are forced to work in prostitution as
a way to pay off the "debt" they acquired when they were illegally smuggled to
destinations in Western Europe. This form of debt bondage also takes place in other
parts of the world, such as women moving from Southeast Asia or Latin
America.[citation needed]

MARXIST ANALYSIS

According to Marxist economists, debt bondage is characteristic of feudal economies,

where families are considered the responsible unit for financial relationships, and
where heirs continue to owe parents' debts upon their deaths. Fully capitalist
economies are characterized by the individual taking all responsibility, and such
mechanisms as bankruptcy and inheritance taxes reducing creditors' rights (while
increasing the power of the state). Heirs are freed from the creditor, but at the cost of
a drastically increased power accruing to the state itself.

Debt bondage is often a form of disguised slavery in which the subject is not legally
owned, but is instead bound by a contract to perform labour to work off a debt, under
terms that make it impossible to completely retire the debt and thereby escape from
the contract

LAW AND ISSUES RELATED TO BONDED LABOUR IN INDIA

INTRODUCTION

Bonded labour is widely prevalent in many regions in India. The main feature of the
system is that the debtor pledges his person or that a member of his family for a loan
and is released on the repayment of the debt.

Bonded labour is referred to by different names in different regions. The

Elayaperumal Committee mentions the following:

• Gothi in Orissa;

• Machindari in Madya Pradesh;

• Sagri in Rajasthan;

• Vet Begar and Salbandi in Maharastha;

• Jana, Manihi or Ijhari in Jammu and Kashmir;

• Jeetha in Mysore;

• Vetti in Tamil Nadu;

• Kamiya or Kuthiya in Chattisgarh.

In the beginning of the twentieth century the system combined the elements of
exploitation, patronage and protection at least in some regions. But with increasing
trend towards the money-economy and changes in the types of use to which
agricultural land is put, the element of patronage disappeared and that of exploitation
persisted.

ABOLITION OF BONDED LABOUR SYSTEM: A LEGAL CONTEXT

Indian Constitution

Some related provision regarding to bonded labour, namely:

• Preamble: The Constitution of India guarantees all citizen social, economic and
political justice, freedom of thought and expression, equality of status and
opportunity and fraternity assuring dignity of the individual;

• Article 14, 15 and 16: These articles guarantee equality and equal treatment;

• Article 19(1) (g): The article guarantees freedom of trade and profession;

• Article 21: The article guarantees right to life and liberty;

• Article 23: Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour - Traffic in
human beings and beggar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and
any contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with
law. 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 on religion, race, caste or class or any of them.

• Article 24: The article prohibits the employment of children whether as bonded
labour or otherwise. Together, Article 23 and Article 24 are place under the heading
“Right against Exploitation”, one of India’s constitutionally proclaimed fundamental
rights.

• Directive Principles: Moreover, the Directive Principles directs the State to strive to
secure, inter alia: (a) Just and human conditions of work (Article 42); (b) Educational
and economic interest of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and other weaker
section of the society (Article 46).

• Under Article 42. Provision for just and humane conditions of work and maternity
relief - The State shall make provision for securing just and humane conditions of
work and for maternity relief.

• Under Article 43. Living wage, etc. for workers - The State shall endeavour to secure,
by suitable legislation or economic organization or in any other way, to all workers,
agricultural, industrial or otherwise, work and living wage, conditions of work
ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural
opportunities and, in particular the State shall endeavour to promote cottage
industrial on an individual or co-operative basis in rural areas.

Indian Penal Code:

Under Section 374. Unlawful compulsory labour - Whoever unlawfully compels any
person to labour against the will of that person, shall be punishable with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with
fine, or with both, also;

Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, 1933:

Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, 1933 says that unless there is something repugnant
in the subject or context - “an agreement of pledging the labour of child” means an
agreement written or oral, express or implied, whereby the parent or guardian of a
child, in return for any payment or benefit received or to be received by him,
undertakes to cause or allow the services of the child to be utilized in any employment.
Provided that any agreement made without detriment to a child, and not made in
consideration of any benefit other than reasonable wages to be paid for the child’s
services and terminable at not more than a weeks notice, is not an agreement within
the meaning of this definition. It also says that “Whoever, being the parent or guardian
of a child, makes an agreement to pledge the labour of that child, shall be punished
with fine which may extend up to fifty rupees”.

Based on those provisions, the system of bonded labour is thus totally incompatible
with the aim of an egalitarian socio-economic order under the Constitution of India.
The system is also an infringement of the basic human rights and destruction of the
dignity of human labour.

NATIONAL LAW

In order to give effect to the constitutional prohibition of bonded labour as specified

under Article 23 of Indian Constitution, Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act was
passed in 1976.

The Act was intended to free all bonded labourers, cancel their debts, establish
rehabilitative measures and punish offender through imprisonment and fines.
Implementation of the Act is the responsibility of the State Government.

Before going into the material parts and the implementation of the Act of 1976, let us
observe a few developments in this area prior to the posing of the Act of 1976.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Prior to 1976, all efforts to tackle the issue of bonded labour were made at the regional
level only. Before the Independence, there were two legislations, namely:

• The Bihar and Orissa Kamiauti Agreement Act, 1920;

• The Madras Debt Bondage Abolition Regulation Act, 1940.

In the post independence period two legislation which had dealt with the abolition of
bonded labour deserves mention are:
• The Orissa Debt Bondage Abolition Regulation, 1948;

• The Rajasthan Sagri System Abolition Act, 1961.

In all, according to the Report of the Commission for SCs and STs 1964-11965, the net
results of these enactments are failure. And in 1975, yet another attempt was made to
abolish the system through India under the twenty-point programme.

Initially, the Bonded Labour System Ordinance was promulgated in 1975 and later
this was enacted by the Parliament. Thus came into being the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act 1976.

Apart from the abovementioned the response of the judiciary has been positive but
the disappointment comes when it is seen that till date there has not been a single case
of conviction. Some of the major case laws related to the issue of bonded labour are:

• Dharambir v State (1979, where the Supreme Court held that prisoners are entitled
to fair wages while doing work in the jails. The court held that free labour by prisoners
is violative of Article 23 of the Constitution.

• PUDR v UOI (1982), where the Supreme Court held that giving wages below the
limits set by the Minimum Wages Act would amount to forced labour.

• Bandhua Mukti Morcha v UOI (1984), where the Supreme Court issued directions
for the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers engaged in the mining
operations.

• Neerja Chaudhary v State of M.P (1984), where the Supreme Court expressed
anguish over the indifference of the government towards the rehabilitation of released
bonded labourers.

• Shankar Mukherjee v UOI (1990), where the Supreme Court held that the Contract
Labour Act, 1970 is a welfare legislation that must be interpreted liberally in favour of
the labourers. The court further held that the system of contract labour is just another
form of bonded labour and it should be abolished due to its baneful effect.

• PUCL v State of TN (2004) , where the Supreme Court appreciated the role of NGOs
in the prevention of bonded labour and their emancipation. The court further
observed that the approach of judiciary should be benevolent towards bonded
labourers.

THE BONDED LABOUR SYSTEM (ABOLITION) ACT, 1976

SALIENT FEATURES

The open objectives of the Act are Identification, Release and Rehabilitation of Bonded
Labourers. Let us analyse some of the silent features of the Act:

Firstly, it is about the awareness of the need for machinery relating to its
implementation. Secondly, the Act envisage the Constitution of Vigilance
Communities at the district and sub-divisional level, to advise the District Magistrate
and to ensure the implementation of the provision of the Act.

Thirdly, Section 16 to 19 of the Act deals with the Penal Sanctions which are, if
enforced properly, sufficient to have the requisite effect.

IMPLEMENTATION

The real problem lies in the implementation aspects. The failure in the implementation
of the Act may arise because of a variety of factors chide among them, namely:

• Lack of Awareness: The need to create awareness of socio-economic legislation or to

publicize it is hardly realized.
• Lack of Actual Prosecution of the Offenders: As also seen from past experience, there
is hardly any enforcement of the penal sanctions provisions.

• Lack of Administrative and Political Will: Not infrequently, the administrators who
implement the programmes are drawn from the dominant castes whose interests are
adversely affected by the legislation.

• Lack of Facilities for Legal Aid and Advice: Often, illiteracy, lack of communication,
remoteness from urban centres and poverty inhibits the weaker section from taking
advantage of the legal process available to them.

• Social and Economic Dependence: The law should take account of the social and
economic background of the issue.

• Lack of Measures to Make Concerned Official Countable for Their in Action or

Misdeeds: In Neeraja Chaudhary v. State of M.P. (1982), most of the released bonded
labourer had not been rehabilitated even after six months of their release.

As per the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976:

“bonded labour” means any labour or service rendered under the bonded labour
system-Section 2 (e).

“bonded labourer” means a labourer who incurs, or has, or is presumed to have

incurred a bonded debt-Section 2(f).

“bonded labour system” means the system of forced, or partly forced, labour under
which a debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered, into an agreement with
the creditor to the effect that he would-

i. render, by himself or through any member of his family, or any person dependent
on him, labour or service to the creditor, or for the benefit of the creditor, for a specified
period or for any unspecified period, either without wages or for nominal wages, or
ii. for the freedom of employment or other means of livelihood for a specified period
or for an unspecified period, or

iii. forfeit the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, or

iv. forfeit the right to appropriate or sell at market value any of his property or product
of his labour or the labour of a member of his family or any person dependent on him;

and includes the system of forced, or partly forced, labour under which a surety for a
debtor enters, or has, or is presumed to have, entered, into an agreement with the
creditor to the effect that in the event of the failure of the debtor to repay the debt, he
would render the bonded labour on behalf of the debtor-Section 2(g)

Through its various judgments, Supreme Court has given a very broad, liberal and
expansive interpretation of the definition of the bonded labour. According to the
interpretation given by the apex court, where a person provided labour or service to
another for remuneration less than the minimum wage, the labour or service falls
clearly within the scope and ambit of the words forced labour under the constitution.

NUANCES OF THE BONDED LABOUR SYSTEM (ABOLITION) ACT, 1976

On commencement of this Act the bonded labour system shall stand abolished and
every bonded labourer shall stand freed and discharged free from any obligation to
render bonded labour.

Any custom, agreement or other instrument by virtue of which a person is required

to render any service as bonded labour shall be void.

Liability to repay bonded debt shall be deemed to have been extinguished.

Property of the bonded labourer to be freed from mortgage etc.

Freed bonded labourers shall not be evicted from homesteads or other residential
premises which he was occupying as part of consideration for the bonded labour.

District Magistrates have been entrusted with certain duties and responsibilities for
implementing the provision of this Act.

Vigilance committees are required to be constituted at district and sub-divisional

levels.

Offences for contravention of provisions of the Act are punishable with imprisonment
for a term which may extend to three years and also with fines which may extend to
two thousand rupees.

Powers of Judicial Magistrates are required to be conferred on Executive Magistrates

for trial of offences under this Act. Offences under this Act may be tried summarily.

Every offence under this Act shall be cognizable and bail able.

STATISTICS : THE TRUTH NEVER REVEALED

Official statistics reflecting enforcement of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act
are equally difficult to obtain. Statistics regarding application of the Bonded Labour
System (Abolition) Act to children are non-existent. Indeed, at least some government
officials interviewed by Human Rights Watch appeared to be labouring under the
conviction that the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act does not apply to children,
an interpretation that has no basis in the law itself nor in Supreme Court cases
interpreting the law.

As of March 1993, the latest date for which official figures are available, state
governments had reported the identification and release of a total of 251,424 bonded
labourers. This number indicates all bonded labourers identified and released since
the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act was passed in 1976. Of this number,
227,404 were reported to have been rehabilitated. If this number includes any
rehabilitated bonded child labourers, that fact has not been reported.

State governments' statistics grossly under-report the current incidence of bonded

labour. As mentioned, the Supreme Court has been examining the incidence of
bonded labour in thirteen states. These thirteen states, chosen by the court for
investigation because of their reputation for high rates of debt bondage, all claimed in
affidavits to the court that there was little or no bonded labour within their
jurisdictions. The court, sceptical of these claims, appointed teams of investigators to
study the issue in each state.

When districts and states do report on statistics regarding the identification and
rehabilitation of bonded labourers, these numbers are frequently unreliable. The team
investigating bonded labour in Tamil Nadu, for example, found that “statutory
registers relating to bonded labour were not maintained in many districts." Simple
neglect or lack of resources is not the only or even the primary reason for lack of
accurate statistics. According to the investigative team, "Details provided by the state
government and the district administration do not tally in most districts and even
appear fabricated."

This can be seen in states' statistics on bonded labour which are submitted to the
central government. For example, there are at least three examples from 1988 to 1995
where states have reported that the number of bonded labourers that have been
rehabilitated are greater than the number of bonded labourers that have been
identified. In 1988, the state of Tamil Nadu reported that 34,640 bonded labourers had
been rehabilitated, but they also reported that 33,581 bonded labourers had been
identified, meaning that the state claimed it had rehabilitated 1,059 more people than
it had ever identified as bonded labourers. In the 1989-90 report to the Ministry of
Labour, the state of Orissa reported that 51,751 bonded labourers had been
rehabilitated, but only 48,657 had been identified. The state of Tamil Nadu reported
in the 1994-95 Ministry of Labour Annual Report that 39,054 bonded labourers had
been rehabilitated, but they had identified 38,886. In total, these three examples
indicate that 4,321 more people were rehabilitated than were identified as bonded
labourers.

These statistics are disturbing for two reasons:

• these statistics are cumulative totals, meaning that every year, new cases are added
to the cases from previous years, dating back to 1976, when the Bonded Labour System
(Abolition) Act became law, so that the yearly statistics represent the total number of
bonded labourers that have ever been identified, released, and rehabilitated.

• before bonded labourers can be eligible for rehabilitation, they must be identified as
bonded labourers. Because of this methodology, the cumulative totals for
rehabilitation can never be more than the cumulative totals for identification and
when this occurs, such as the previous three cases, it indicates a serious flaw in
reporting. This may be due to several factors: state governments may be arbitrarily
determining bonded labour statistics, or the inaccuracies may be due to simple error,
or people who were not bonded labourers are being rehabilitated as bonded labourers.
In one example of the latter, a survey of 180 bonded labourers who had been officially
rehabilitated by the Bihar government found that 120 had never been bonded.

Another indication that the law is not being enforced is the fact much of the money
allocated for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers is unspent and reabsorbed by the
government. Funding for rehabilitation is allocated through a fifty-fifty matching
grant in which the states undertake rehabilitation and the central government matches
their expenditures. It is administered through several schemes under the Integrated
Rural Development Program (IRDP) and Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY). Records of
expenditures for these programs show that in 1989-90, only 76.16 percent of the funds
were utilized. In 1990-91, 78.41 percent of funds were utilized. And in 1991-92, only
47.83 percent of funds available were utilized for rehabilitating bonded labourers. On
March 14, 1996, the Parliamentary Committee on Labour and Welfare reported that
only 38.39 percent of the funds available for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers
had been utilized. The reason given was that "the state governments failed to submit
certificates in regard to the expenditure incurred by them. Because of this lapse, the
Central government did not release funds to them." The failure to report expenditures
indicates a failure to enforce the law.

A Supreme Court lawyer closely connected to bonded labour litigation corroborated

the unreliable nature of the district collectors' reports, saying there is "no mechanism
to ascertain the collectors' veracity." According to this advocate and others familiar
with the issue, corruption in application of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act
and dispersal of act-related rehabilitation funds is common. "A collector may receive
100,000 rupees for rehabilitation efforts but disperse only 10,000 of it. Embezzlement
is difficult to track, but we all know it happens. For example, a bonded labourer comes
in, puts his thumb print on the document saying he will receive 6,250 rupees, but
receives only 3,000 rupees."

Corruption and neglect are not the only reasons for bad statistics regarding bonded
labour. Another is passivity on the part of enforcing officials, who too often take no
affirmative steps to discover and root out debt bondage in their districts. Whether this
is due to simple apathy or to a misunderstanding on their part of their official duties,
the effect is disastrous for bonded labourers, who are left in their state of enslavement
indefinitely. In Tamil Nadu, for example, the investigators found that "most District
Collectors... had one basis to assume that bonded labour does not exist-No one is
coming forward [to report that they are in bondage."

Human Rights Watch was unable to obtain any statistics on prosecution under the
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act after 1988. Up to 1988, there were 7,000
prosecutions under the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act throughout India, of which
700 resulted in convictions. It is certain that prosecution under the act is rare. In Tamil
Nadu, the first prosecutions under the twenty-year-old act occurred in 1995, when
eight beedi employers were arrested by the North Arcot District Collector. The case,
which drew headlines in the regional press, was depicted as a bold "get tough"
measure. The agents spent one night in jail and were fined 500 rupees each. The
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act allows for punishment of three years in prison
and a 2,000 rupee fine.
HINDRANCES: The problem of Bonded Labour System is not a problem in or by
itself. It is a part of the larger issue of welfare of the nation as a whole. Besides the
several failures of implementation of the Act, the Report from Human Right Watch
Asia (1996) finds that there are also some obstacles to enforce the Act, namely:

• Apathy;

• Caste and Class Bias;

• Obstruction;

• Corruption;

• Lack of Accountability;

• Lack of Adequate Enforcement Staff.

SUGGESTIONS

The problem of bonded labour is dynamic in nature and it can reoccur at any point of
time. Thus, the bonded labourers must be rehabilitated as soon as possible after their
release. If this is not done than it is a remedy worst than the malady because these
labourers will die of starvation. Thus, before releasing the bonded labourers a sound
rehabilitative planning is inevitable. The following measures can be adopted in this
regard:

• Public awareness and education is a must,

• Productive and income generating schemes must be formulated in advance

otherwise they will again fall back upon the system of bonded labour after their
release,

• These schemes should be chosen after duly consulting the concerned labourers and
NGOs involved in their emancipation and rehabilitation,
• The government should work on a priority basis in areas vulnerable for the system
of bonded labour and for the rehabilitation of already releases labourers,

• An effective and speedier grievance redressal machinery should be established for

proper disposal of cases pertaining to bonded labour,

• A humanitarian training programme should be formulated for persons dealing with

bonded labourers,

• There should be a system of summary disposal of cases under various laws dealing
with the evil of bonded labour,

• There should be a strict enforcement of the welfare and labour legislations,

• There should be more stringent penal laws for effectively dealing with the menace
of bonded labour etc.

Besides the measures for improvement mentioned already in the foregone discussion,
the Government of India should demonstrate its commitment to the eradication of
bonded labour by implementing some of the following recommendations at the
earliest possible.

• The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act should direct Vigilance Committees and
District Collectors to initiate serving and credit programme at the community level.

• In addition to genuine government action, it is essential that non-governmental

organization be encouraged by the Governance to collaborate in this effort.

• A nation-wide public awareness campaign should be launched regarding the legal

prohibition of bonded labour.

• The scheme for rehabilitation programmes should be integrated with existing IRDP
and NREP (35th Session of the Labour Ministers Conference held in 11 May 1985).
• The Court should also abandon the conventional approach and come to the rescue
of the bonded labourers, particularly in the technical rules of evidence and degree of
burden of proof.

CONCLUSION

Bonded labour must be attacked from many fronts. Enforcement of the law is
essential, but it is not enough. The bonded labour must have someplace else to go. The
elimination of current debt bondage and the prevention of new or renewed bondage
therefore, require a combination of concerted government action and extensive
community involvement.

Bonded labour is a vast, pernicious, and longstanding social evil and the tenacity of
the Bonded Labour System must be attacked with similar tenacity. Anything less than
total commitment is certain to fail.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Labour and industrial laws by H.K.Saharay

2. Labour Laws in India by G.B.Pai
3. Industrial Law 1 by P.L.Malik
4. Labour and industrial cases 2012(2) Reports 1201-2400
5. www.pblabour.gov.in
6. www.nhrc.nic.in