Destroying our Future!!!

Children are no doubt the future of our country. The Government took 55 years to realise that before they started programmes for the benefit for children. 52% of the children (below 14yrs) are below the poverty line which makes it around 180 million of them. Shattering!! is all I can say.

I'd like to put forward a recent example of how we, as 'responsible' Indians treat our children. On the 28th of February, the Finance Minister came and presented the union Budget from which 7800 Crores ($1.5 Billion) was allocated for the midday meal scheme for the children. If I were to put it straight forward, the Government spends Rs 8/- on every poor child in a year. That indirectly will get him nothing more than a cup of rice for one day. Now what exactly does a kid get under this scheme; a bowl of rice and spiced water. Little does he know that in the garb of free food, the government is treating him like a dirt bag.
In 2002, the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) filed a petition in the Supreme Court regarding the right to food. Something that has not been recognised in India till date. While the case is still going on, the Court passed interim orders regarding the Midday Meal scheme and the Integrated Child Dev. Scheme (ICDS). These two are to be monitored by commissioners appointed by the Court. It seems that the Government treated this order like a jolt in its functioning and formally launched the 'midday meal prog'. It would be more of an understatement to say that today the scheme is nothing more than a way to fill the pockets of the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats.
We claim to be a democratic welfare state. Theoretically it means that the Government shall secure the rights of all its citizens and aim for the promotion and upbringing. In a country with 300 million below the poverty line, this remains to be seen. One still finds it hard to believe that it has taken more than 50 years for the Gov. to make welfare programs for its children. The irony is that amidst all this we pride ourselves in our misery. We show that we are a booming economy despite the fact that millions are dying of hunger. At times, we are made to believe that the democracy that we call ourselves to be does not consist of the poor and those who are denied rights. The gov measures to do alleviate this situation are nothing but a farce. Its high time the gov pulls up its socks and does something concrete. Most of these schemes fail in their implementation and there is no authority/procedure to check their abuse. Democracies thrive on the welfare of their people and not on growth figures which is what is happening.

The above picture is nothing but a representation of the discussion in the post. While on one side the Gov prides itself in growth rates, the poor suffer. We have poor children with no clothes to wear coming about and holding a WLL telephone. !!!!!
For more about the budget and society, read;
Brinda Karat - Priorities are Wrong (Times of India, March 1, 2007)

The Right to Food

A lot of doubt has arisen on the nature of the right to food. While the petition of PUCL is still being decided by the Court, interim orders have been passed to secure the right to food for children and other people. But then, in what sense are we construing the nature of this right? A reading of Paschim Bengal Kisan Samiti and Francis Coralie tells us that the right to food may be interpreted in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. However, no case has formally sought to do so.

I would like to look at the nature of this right in light of starvation deaths. There are around 50 million people dying of starvation in our country. This is at a time we call the 'economic boom' and see a rise in agriculture exports. Food surplus reached around 12 million tonnes in 2002.
The above data is relevant if we understand food in terms of the rights enshrined in part III and part IV of the Constitution. While part III enshrines the civil and political rights, part IV or the directive principles talk about the economic and social rights. Part IV rights are non- justiciable and cannot be enforced in a Court of law. The Constitution assembly debates show that part IV rights are placed such because they can only be enforced if the state has the requisite resources to provide for them. Since at that time, the State did not seem to have the resources, they were termed as the 'fundamental principles of governance' and must be achieved as soon as possible. BR Ambedkar and Dakshayeni Nivedkar stated that once the state has resources, such rights must be provided for. It then becomes an obligation for the State to do so. In terms of the right to food, Article 47 in part IV gives us an idea of the right to food and the responsibility of the state in raising the level of nutrition in the Country. This right then still is a non justiciable right and cannot be enforced per se.
Now here lies the argument, if economic and social rights are to be enforced depending on the State's availability of resources, would the very fact that people are dying despite a food surplus be deemed a denial of a right and the violation of an obligation on the part of the State to provide? If we have people starving to death and Food Corporation of India godowns filled with food 50 kms away, would this be a violation of the obligation to provide, respect and protect? This is something we need to ponder about. Why is it that despite the resources at hand the State does not provide for the welfare of the people? This does not apply to merely food but also other areas like education and employment. Somewhere down the line we see the whole idea of a welfare state boiling down to a mere idea that exists only in theory and not in practice.

More information on the right to food is available at;
www.righttofoodindia.org