Of late, Odisha has seen an upsurge in cases related to human trafficking and bonded labour. With the state government launching some initiatives to rescue and rehabilitate those held captive under exploitative conditions in neighbouring states, things seem to be changing for good. However, a lot more needs to be done. On the occasion of the International Labour Day, May 1, former Union labour secretary, LD Mishra, shares his views on migrant labourers of Odisha and the challenges and problems the system of bonded labour pose to modern society.
What exactly is bonded labour and how big is the problem in Odisha?
Bonded labour implies service rendered under bonded conditions. That is, bereft of freedom, dignity and security with an element of coercion and regimentation. Denial of wages, denial of freedom of movement, denial of option/discretion to change the employer and other means of livelihood, denial of wages as also the product of labour are the consequences of bonded labour system. These consequences are alternatives, not conjunctives. Bonded labour system may appear in many forms such as customary bondage (bartan system/gothi/halia/barmasia in Odisha), debt bondage and bondage arising out of trafficking i.e. trade of humans like commodities.
Section 14(e) of BLS (A) Act speaks of surveys to be conducted by the Vigilance Committees (VCs) (to be set up by the state government at the district and sub-divisional level) for identification of the victims of bonded labour system.
Odisha has 30 districts and 58 sub-divisions. No information is available as to whether such VCs have at all been constituted and re-constituted after expiry of two years, whether they are functional whether surveys have been systematically conducted from time to time, what are the findings and to what extent they have been acted upon.
What leads to distress migration and which areas in Odisha are the worst affected? Why?
Landlessness, non-availability of stable and durable avenues of employment, non-payment of statutorily notified minimum wages, large size of the family with less number of earning members and many mouths to feed, non-functional public distribution system and spiralling prices of commodities lead to distress migration.
Additionally, small and marginal farmers who on account of the high cost of production are unable to sell the farm produce and recover the high cost of production have no other wherewithal except to leave their hearth and home and go for work at alternative locations outside the state.
Districts like Kalahandi, Nuapada, Bolangir, Nabarangpur, Rayagada, Koraput and Malkangiri which are less irrigated, dry and drought-prone with sizeable percentage of families being below the poverty line are also prone to migration.
What are the ways and means innocent men are lured into such traps?
Malfunctional and dysfunctional middlemen approach such BPL families who are already heavily indebted to the village landlord/moneylender, pay them advances to liquidate the said debt, offer hopes, promises and allurements of better employment, better wage, better working conditions, better standard of living and recruit them for work at the work sites of the destination point. Needless to mention, that no sooner the workmen have arrived at the work site of the destination point, all the promises made are belied and the workmen are subjected to ruthless exploitation. Ignorance of the provisions of the law relating to inter-state migration, pervasive illiteracy and lack of bargaining power and skills are the factors responsible for such an unfortunate situation.
How effective is the public justice system in dealing with the crime?
Promoting and sustaining bonded labour system is a cognisable and bailable offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend up to three years and also with fine which may extend to Rs 2,000.
There are a number of offences listed in Sections 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. All these offences are triable by adoption of summary procedure as laid down in Section 21(2) of BLS (A) Act read with Sections 260 to 265 of CRPC, 1973.
Is the government doing enough? What measures should be taken to rein in the habitual offenders?
In the initial years, when BLS (A) Act was enacted February 9, 1976, preceded by promulgation of an Ordinance October 25, 1975, there was a lot of gusto and tempo in the activities at the ground level launched by the state government to eliminate the scourge of bonded labour system.
More than 40 years have rolled by, there have been sweeping changes in the social, economic and political system as well as in the labour market and it is difficult to say if the same gusto and tempo have been maintained over the years and whether the government is attaching the same priority or paying the same concentrated attention to elimination of bonded labour system as before.
A few positive measures such as (a) opening of seasonal hostels at a few selected pockets where children of migrant parents can be left for stay and study; (b) entering into MoUs with neighbouring Andhra Pradesh to protect the interests of labourers migrating from Odisha to the former; (c) maintaining constant liaison and coordination with various other destination states; and (d) maintaining an up-to-date data base on the movement of people from Odisha to other states have been taken.
How can the vulnerable population be sensitised about the issue of safe migration?
We need to draw up an advocacy campaign for them. The thrust of this campaign would be preparation of balance sheet which should have two sides. On one side, we should draw a list of temporary gains like liquidation of local moneylender’s debt through the advance received from middlemen, same employment & some income or same wherewithal to keep body & soul together for some time.
On the other side, the damage caused, or the long-term adverse consequences of migration, should be listed. These are: Long hours of work without spread over; non-payment of wages in time; deduction from wages for payment of commission to middlemen; absence of weekly off; poor safety & accidents at worksite; educational deprivation to children accompanying parents; possible sexual harassment of women and girls at the workplace; abusive behaviour / repressive treatment of employer and his minions.
Once the sensitisation agents start explaining these adverse consequences, it will not take long time for workers to get convinced that distress migration is not in their best interest and that they should not migrate.
