Education is one of the most important services benefiting children. It contributes not only to cognitive development but also to personal development and overall psycho-social and physical welfare.Among children it instils a sense of purpose and provides skills essential for the transition to a new existence. 1 in 7 children around the world is a child labourer. That is 218 million children who are working instead of going to school. They work in factories and in fields, they sew footballs and t-shirts, they pick cotton and cocoa, they mine, they dig, they serve in homes. They are trapped in poverty with little hope of escape. They have been denied their rights to a childhood and full-time, quality education. Children, as one of the most vulnerable groups in society, should be afforded our highest standards of duty and care. They need protection from exploitation and should have the opportunity to grow, develop and fulfill their potential. Child labour makes this impossible for children. By depriving 218 million children of their right to education and all the potential that it holds, we are all denied a brighter and more just world. Eliminating child labour is a moral imperative that we can no longer ignore. Child labour is a fact of life for children in many countries and it is an issue that affects us all. It is the responsibility of everyone to contribute to the elimination of child labour – governments, international organizations, communities, teachers, parents and you. Through the provision of full-time quality education, the elimination of child labour is achievable. Over 200 million children between 5 and 14 years of age are working world-wide.This figure represents one- fifth of the total population of girls and boys in this age group. About 111 million children are in what has been termed as “hazardous work” which refers to forms of labour which are likely to have adverse effects on the child’s safety, health, and moral development. Nearly 10 million of these children are engaged in some form of slave labour, armed conflict, prostitution or pornography, or other illicit activities, simply all types of trafficking. Some observers believe that these figures understate the real magnitude of child labour. The implications of this situation are significant, complex, and multidimensional. The hazardous and worst forms of child labour are of universal concern, given the obvious harm that they inflict on the lives of these children and their possibilities for a hopeful future. Child labour also has important economic implications. Most notable are the substantial future income losses that working children will incur because of the negative consequences working will have on their human capital, including their health and education. Since children are more likely to work and not go to school if their parents worked as children, the economic losses associated with child labour and their implications for poverty are often transmitted across generations. Studies have concluded that eliminating child labour and putting these children into education would have huge aggregate developmental benefits. Gains would primarily be through the added productive capacity of future generations that had the benefit of education, as opposed to having worked as children. Very recently, the ILO (International Labour Organisation) (2004) has published estimates that the discounted present value of this economic gain would be in the order of US$5 trillion over the 2000-2020 period. As the international community rallies around the Millennium Development Goals Convention on the Rights of the Child and, even more so, the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention reflect a recognition that child labour is a complex phenomenon, with various forms, diverse underlying causes, and different meanings in different cultural contexts. Understanding these realities sharpens the discussion on child labour and builds consensus on appropriate responses. It would be difficult for any concerned individual or organization to not support the goal of Convention 182 to eliminate children working in the unconditional worst forms (slavery, prostitution, armed conflict, drug trafficking, etc.) or in work that is unsafe, unhealthy, or hazardous to mental, emotional, and physical development. However, while consensus may have been established against the very visible forms of child labour targeted by Convention 182, these do not describe the work life for tens of millions of working children. The reality is quite complicated. The vast majority of child workers are involved in agricultural work, typically in family-run farms. In Africa, where the incidence of child labour is highest, rural children are at least twice as likely to be working as urban children. A significant proportion of working children are enrolled in school as well, although there is a lot of evidence confirming the adverse impact of child labour on educational achievement. Reflecting this complex reality, addressing child labour and, thus, achieving universal education goals requires complex approaches. Effective policy responses depend “upon recognizing that most children work with or for their parents in economies where markets are underdeveloped and the legal and political infrastructure is thin” (Bhalotra and Tzannatos, 2003: 54). Understanding household decision-making and the incentives and constraints facing families is essential, then, to comprehend why child labour exists and to consider interventions that can effectively address the underlying causes. It is true that the incidence of child labour is associated with poverty, so policies that alleviate poverty are likely to have beneficial outcomes. In April 2000, the international community committed to Education for All (EFA), a partnership to achieve education for every citizen in every society. This initiative will not meet its objectives by focusing only on the education system itself. Child labour, of course, has already received considerable attention. Most countries have long had prescriptive legislation as well as compulsory education laws. At the international level, child labour has been the focus of various conventions and recommendations. Most significant have been the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) and two ILO conventions, the Minimum Age Convention (No. 138, 1973) and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (No. 182, 1999). As Myers (2001) has argued, the content of these conventions reflects an evolution in thinking within the international community about how children’s rights should be applied to child labour and education. The principal international legal instruments for addressing child labour include the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) which covers both child labour and the right to education and two ILO conventions, the Minimum Age Convention (No. 138, 1973) and the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (No. 182, 1999). The UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights (1948) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights also address the right to education but the above- listed instruments provide more detail and are commonly seen as the key international instruments for addressing children’s rights. These instruments are summarized in Table 1. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the ILO child labour conventions have received widespread international support, the former being ratified by 192 countries – all U.N. members, in fact, save the United States and Somalia. ILO Convention 182, prioritizing action against the worst forms of child labour, was the first convention adopted unanimously and has been the most rapidly ratified convention in the organization’s 85-year history.
Since being adopted unanimously in June 1999 by the International Labour Conference, Convention No. 182 on the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour has been ratified at a pace unprecedented in the history of ILO Conventions. By May 2010 the Convention had received 172 ratifications. Also, of significance is the recent rapid increase in the number of countries ratifying the ILO Minimum Age Convention, No. 138. After gaining some 40 ratifications in its first two decades, acceptance of this Convention took off during the past decade with ratifications reaching 155 in early 2010.
Table 1: International Human Rights Instruments Related to Education and Child Labour
Title Date Ratified Provisions (Articles)
Universal Declaration on Human
Rights
1948 N/A Right to Education (26)
International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (CESCR)
1966 148 Compulsory and free primary education
(13)
ILO Convention 138: Minimum
Age
1973 131 Minimum Age of 15; exceptions for
LDCs and “light work.” Consolidated and replaced earlier CL conventions.
Convention on the Rights of the
Child (CRC)
1989 192 Freedom of association (15); primary
education; (28) rest and leisure (31); no
hazardous child labour (32); protection from sexual exploitation (34) and trafficking (35)
ILO Convention 182: Worst
Forms of Child Labour
1999
147
Ban slavery, use in armed conflict, prostitution, drug trade; Work harmful to health safety, morals.
Source: United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (http://www.un.org/rights/) and International Labour Organization (www.ilo.org).
While widely supported, international human rights laws related to children do have Limitations. Negotiated by governments (and, in the case of the ILO, social partners), they are the result of political consensus. They reflect what governments and interest groups could agree on, not necessarily what experts believe should be done. Once adopted by the international bodies, individual countries voluntarily decide to ratify and apply the convention in their national laws. While the international system provides mechanisms for oversight and monitoring, there are no international enforcement provisions; ratifying countries are responsible for enforcing their own laws. Some bilateral trade agreements, however, do refer to ILO conventions and provide options for sanctions. Despite these limitations, international conventions provide important standards or points of reference for developing national policy as well as benchmarks against which national policies and interventions can be monitored and assessed. Standards for child labour and education policy are established with varying degree of specificity in the three key instruments under discussion. ILO Convention 138 is the most specific international instrument pertaining to child labour. When adopted in 1973, it replaced ten previous ILO conventions referring to minimum working age in various industries. Unlike the CRC, this convention does not refer to children as having rights; the purpose is simply to establish a minimum age at which they ought to be allowed to work. That age is set to 15 or not less than the end of compulsory schooling, with an exception for developing countries of 14. There are also exceptions for light work, defined as work which is not harmful to a child’s health and development and which does not prejudice school attendance or participation in vocational training nor the capacity to benefit from the instruction received. Light work is allowed for ages 13-15, or 12-14 in developing countries.
Hazardous work is to be generally banned for children under 18 but conditionally allowed at 16 if adequate protection and training is provided. Not all work done by children should be classified as child labour that is to be targeted for elimination. Children’s and adolescents work above the nationally designated minimum age that does not interfere with their schooling is generally regarded as being something positive. This includes activities such as helping the parents around the home or assisting in a family business. Child labour refers in general to employment or work that is carried out by children that does not conform to standards established in the ILO Conventions on child labour and national laws/regulations in line with them. The fundamental ILO Conventions on this issue are the Convention on the Minimum Age of Employment, 1973 (No. 138) and the Convention on the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 (No. 182). ILO Convention No. 138 requires States to establish a minimum working age, which should not be below the age for finishing compulsory schooling ‐ generally 15 years. However, this Convention includes different flexibility clauses to permit States to determine whether or not certain activities are appropriate for a child, taking into consideration age and the national or local socio economic development context. For instance, a developing country has the option of initially specifying a minimum age of 14 years. The minimum age for hazardous work (likely to jeopardize the health, safety or morals of a child) has to be at least 18 years, while governments may allow children to carry out light work6 as from 13 years (or 12 if the general minimum age is set at 14). The ILO’s standards on child labour have achieved a very high level of support from member States. This support indicates the strength of the international consensus on the need to tackle and ultimately eliminate child labour and expectations increasing of putting them out of this abyss. Since being adopted unanimously in June 1999 by the International Labour Conference, Convention No. 182 on the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour has been ratified at a pace unprecedented in the history of ILO Conventions. By May 2010 the Convention had received 172 ratifications. Also, of significance is the recent rapid increase in the number of countries ratifying the ILO Minimum Age Convention, No. 138. After gaining some 40 ratifications in its first two decades, acceptance of this Convention took off during the past decade with ratifications reaching 155 in early 2010.
(The author is a researcher at Department of Sociology Kashmir University Srinagar. Views are his own)