At this juncture of my argument against the post made by Ms. Ruchira Gupta, I am forced to quote Adolf Hitler: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”
I will continue my argument by slating the post of Ms. Gupta by saying that the right to dissent does not take away from the responsibility of the dissenter to do so only on the basis of facts and truth. The above post of Ms. Gupta is bereft of facts, truth and logic, therefore a point by point explanation of the facts along with actual evidences is herein attempted. The writer of the post, it appears, is not only ignorant of the particulars of the quoted legislations but is also completely clueless about basic jurisprudence and the fundamentals of our country’s law making process. This piece is an attempt to delineate the law making process as it obtains in our country. It will be demonstrated that perhaps this post is the result of some personal biases and the writer appears to have been guided by motives other than concern for the rights and the protection of children. Motive is personal gain or has some political agenda, I leave it for the reader to decide. This piece is also an attempt to bring out the true meaning of inclusiveness and compassion and demonstrate as to how dialogue between different sections of the society in a democracy can be instrumental in bringing about a positive social change, particularly with respect to the rights of children.
**********
Ms. Gupta, since you have been for a long time making attempts to gain political mileage by saying and writing things with total disregard for facts and since in this process the wellbeing and protection of children in India is getting jeopardized, hence, I am taking the liberty of inviting your attention to a few facts:
Please allow me to explain basic jurisprudence to you. No private individual or civil society organisation makes a law. The Government in power frames a law. Any draft Bill or Rules are formulated by a specialised team of the concerned Department/ Ministry. Once a draft is ready, it goes through a wide range of scrutiny and debate within the concerned Ministry. The revised draft which emerges after these consultations is placed in the public domain with brief information and justification for the Bill, its financial implications and its impact on the fundamental rights, lives and livelihood of the people concerned. Suggestions are also sought from other Ministries and government bodies in the meeting of Inter-ministerial Committee. Suggestions of various stakeholders, including the domain experts and civil society organisations are appropriately incorporated. Finally, the Bill or the Rules are vetted by Ministry of Law and Justice. It is only thereafter that the draft Bill is placed before the Cabinet and then the Parliament. Ms. Gupta, this very procedure was followed in the drafting of Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2016 and the Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018. By questioning the judiciousness of these legislations, you are essentially questioning the wisdom and knowledge of the large number of domain experts etc. which have gone into the drafting of these Bills.
On a previous occasion also, you in an open letter to Smt. Maneka Gandhi, Hon’ble Minister, Ministry of Women and Child Development, criticized the Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018 with your baseless and fake arguments, which were justly responded by me. Your disinclination towards the Anti-Trafficking Bill, 2018 has been witnessed at various other platforms. At this juncture, your groundless altercations have forced me to quote Adolf Hitler saying, “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” This is very much true in your case. Your repeated attempts to hamper the passing of the Anti-Trafficking Bill, 2018 in one way are the reflection of your ‘Nazist’ thought.
Recently, I came across your article where you have mentioned about the role of Sh. Satyarthi’s organization in the drafting of these legislations. I will refer to my above argument relating to the ‘law making process’, wherein it has been clearly mentioned that an individual or organization is not responsible for the making of any law. The ‘domain experts’ and CSO’s who has expertise in the subject matter are called for suggestions by the Ministry drafting such law.
In this regard, if you make the effort to go through the first draft of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2016, you will see that it stipulated complete elimination of all forms of engagement of children in all occupations. However, the law, as enacted by the Parliament, was a watered version of the original draft and had infirmities. Some of these infirmities of the amendment Act were cured subsequently while drafting the Rules thereunder. Vide the amendment, the number of hazardous occupations and processes was reduced from 83 to 3 in the amended law, this has now been increased to 107 hazardous occupations and processes by way of a notification by the Government of India. Today the child labour law not only prohibits all forms of employment of children in labour but also prohibits employment of adolescents in any hazardous occupation. May I point out that throwing around random and unfounded numbers and statistics on the issue undermines your own credibility. Well, whatever little is left of it.
Further, to your comment regarding the Trafficking of Persons (Prevention, Protection and Rehabilitation) Bill, 2018, wherein you are referring that it excludes definition of sexual exploitation holds no strength. The Bill is an extension of Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which already explains exploitation as ‘any act of physical exploitation or any form of sexual exploitation, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude, or the forced removal of organs.’ Hence to say that the Bill excludes trafficking for sexual exploitation is nothing but a travesty of truth. It appears that probably you have not had the time or probably the inclination to read the Bill before commenting on it. I hope that this explanation helps you in having some clarity.
Further, in the same post your reference to Mr. Satyarthi’s visit to RSS headquarters on the occasion of Vijayadashami again inspired me to see the media news of RSS function and to research on the significance of ‘Shastra Pujan’ on the occasion of Vijayadashami. You posted a picture of the said function where one can clearly see Shri Satyarthi not performing ‘half salute’, instead he was standing graciously in a ‘namaskar’ position. In my understanding the ‘nazist’ half salute is something different, which has been quoted by you in in the context of RSS’s salute. This could be effortlessly seen by everybody who has seen the RSS function.
For the sake of my own understanding, I took the opportunity to read about the relevance of ‘Shastra pujan’ and I find it quite easy to explore such information. ‘Shastra pujan’ is known as ‘Ayudh puja’ or ‘Astra Puja’ is a Hindu festival and is an integral part of the Navratri festival and Vijayadashami, which is marked for triumph of Godly powers against the evil forces, a which is celebrated in India. It is celebrated on the ninth day of navratras or on the occasion of ‘Vijayadashami’. In other words, it is imperative to mention that while the weapons are integral part of the lives of security personnel, its worship keeps them distant from its misuse. That is the whole ideology behind ‘shastra pujan’. But, in my opinion it is very important to understand the ideologies and customary values as portrayed not only in ‘hinduism’ but also in other religions and cultures of INDIA.
It was quite evident from the speech of Sh. Satyarthi that he chose the RSS platform only to spread his vision for a progressive child-friendly nation- a “compassionate, inclusive, safe, self-reliant and self-respecting India”. You are requested to see his speech and understand the underlined thought in it. It was just a response to understand that any democracy to function in its true sense, debates and dialogues take place continuously, even between groups with differing ideologies or socio-political views.
Probably these facts hold no meaning to you, just as truth holds no meaning to one who benefits from lies. However, I wish you well, and hope that you too can discover compassion in your heart to rise above your personal agendas and vested interests and be honest and sincere towards those whom you claim to protect.