While the Right to Education Bill falls significantly short of what it should/could have had been, it is also a significant improvement over what obtains today actually on the ground.
Based on this acknowledgement, those concerned must gear up for for two-pronged struggles in the days ahead. One, there is a need for vigorous monitoring of the actual implementation of the forthcoming Central Act including necessary legislative follow up actions by the states. Two, based on the legitimacy granted to the concept of universal education, campaigns have to be launched to extend its ambit to include both younger and older students. And also to make the net of inclusion for those in 6-14 years bracket as loophole free as possible. Utterly unreasonable and hysteric shrieks against the Bill/Act would rule out any action on the former front. And also make any movement forward on the latter more, and not less, difficult. Here is a detailed and informed alternate analysis. Sukla Article on RTE Bill 2009 for circulation, comments and publication ** *THE RIGHT OF CHILDREN TO FREE AND COMPULSORY EDUCATION* *BILL, 2009 FAILS THE TEST OF CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE* *Ashok Agarwal, Advocate & Social Activist* The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Bill, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as RTE Bill, 2009) passed by the Parliament on 4thAugust 2009 though appears to be a progressive legislation but on examination thereof, it is not difficult to conclude that the same does not stand the test of constitutional mandate guaranteed under Article 14 (right to equality), Article 21 (right to life with dignity), Article 21-A (right to education) and Article 38 (right to social justice) of the Constitution of India. Undoubtedly, some of the provisions of the RTE Bill, 2009 are laudable. Section 3 talks of right to free and compulsory education and admission in a neighbourhood school. Section 4 talks of admission of child in class appropriate to his or her age. Sections 8 & 9 talk of obligations of the government to provide compulsory education to children. Section 12 talks of obligation of the unaided recognised private schools to provide free seats to the extent of 25% to the children of the economically weaker sections. Section 13 (1) talks of “no capitation fee” and “no screening procedure” for admission. Section 14 talks of admission without insisting upon production of age proof. Section 16 talks of “no expulsion of a child”. Section 17 bans corporal punishment. Section 23 talks of formation of school management committees. Section 23 ensures recruitment of only qualified teachers. Section 25 talks of ensuring Pupil-Teacher Ratio as specified in the schedule. Section 32 talks of grievance redressal mechanism. On the other hand, several provisions of the RTE Bill, 2009 are meant to legalise and to perpetuate the existing unjust and discriminatory school education system based on socio-economic status. Section 3 (b) defines “capitation fee” means any kind of donation or contribution or payment other than the fee notified by the school. The import of this provision is that a school is free to notify any amount of fee whether needed or not and once it is notified, it will be legal. The Bill does not provide any fee regulatory mechanism to check the menace of commercialisation of education. Moreover, the right of every child to receive free and compulsory education as guaranteed under Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution does not depend on the capacity of the parents to afford fee or not. Therefore, every child whether studying in private or State-run school, is entitled to free education. The State should bear the entire expenses even of the children studying in private-run schools. On the other hand, Section 8 disentitles a child studying in such private school even to claim from the State the reimbursement of expenditure incurred. Section 2 (n) instead of permitting only same category of schools for all the children, sanctifies different categories of schools for the children of different socio-economic status. Most objectionable is; “a school belonging to specified category”. Section 2 (p) defines “specified category” in relation to a school, means a school known as Kendriya Vidyalaya, Sainik School or any other school having a distinct character which may be specified by notification, by the appropriate Government. How can you have such a specified category of school with ‘State Funding’ which does not provide equal opportunity to all the children in the matter of admission? That providing only 25% of seats to the children of weaker sections in such ‘specified category of school’ is a cruel joke. Section 7 talks of sharing of financial responsibilities between the Centre and the States. It appears that the Central Government does not want to provide funds to the States uniformly. The State Governments cannot insist upon the Central Government to provide funds more than what is provided under Section 7 (3). The State Governments have been made responsible to provide funds for implementation of the Act. It is submitted that unless the Central Government takes upon itself to provide entire funds for the implementation of the Act, the object of the Act is not possible to be achieved, particularly when the State Governments have publicly declared their inability to implement the Act on account of paucity of funds. Section 10 talks of duty of parents to admit his child in neighbourhood school. It is submitted that the duty of parent is alright but where is the duty of the State to bring the child to the school. The State has completely absolved itself of such duty. Section 13 (2) provides punishment with fine against a school, if it is found violating the provisions relating to ‘no capitation fee and screening procedure for admission’. Interestingly, the Central Government has lost sight of the fact that if a school is punished with fine; such amount of fine would simply be passed on by the school to the children by levying the same in the fee slip. It is submitted that thereby it is the child and not the school which would be punished. What is required is the punishment with imprisonment and not merely punishment with fine. Section 26 permits the Government to keep the vacancies of the teachers unfilled up to 10% of the total sanctioned strength. It is a well known fact that on average 10% of the teaching staff at a time remains on leave for one reason or another. Therefore, there is a need to have 10% extra teaching staff instead of reducing it by 10% as contemplated in the RTE Bill, 2009. Section 31 talks of monitoring of child’s right to education by NCPCR. Experience with all the Commissions including NCPCR is that all these Commissions work like the department of the Government. Moreover, the Government has not so far appointed full strength members in the NCPCR. It is submitted that the District Judge of every district in the country, should be entrusted with the work of monitoring of child’s right to education. I am conscious of the fact that the Hon’ble Judges are already burdened with deciding so many pending cases but one can not lose sight of the fact that the right to education is a most precious human and fundamental right and any further delay in implementation of the same would be a great peril to the nation. The Bill is also mute on accountability of the authorities. Unless there are provisions for the penalties against the erring authorities at least similar to those available in the Right to Information Act, 2005, it is really doubtful if the authorities would honestly perform their tasks. Our constitutional goal is to achieve a casteless and classless society as has been highlighted by a seven-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the recent decision in OBC reservation in educational institutions case. The Government should have brought a Bill which would have directions towards casteless and classless society. However, the Bill in the present form, on the other hand, perpetuates the inequality and unjust discrimination among children in the matter of right to education. That while expressing the above concerns regarding the serious drawbacks of the RTE Bill, 2009 particularly when it fails the test of Constitutional mandate, it cannot be over emphasised that the passing of the Bill is a welcome step. It will undoubtedly open the Pandora’s Box for a national debate on the same in the interest of the future of the children. *Author can be contacted at **[email protected]* <http:///> *M: 09811101923* * * On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Venugopalan K M <[email protected]>wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Shiva Shankar <[email protected]> > Date: Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:40 AM > Subject: national security > To: > > > > '... The Right to Education Bill that has just been passed by the Rajya > Sabha and the Lok Sabha, if it is notified by the government, will only be a > boon for those who make money in the school business, while it will be a > disaster for those who have no access to education today. Unfortunately, > that is what the rich and the ruling classes want. For education is the most > important weapon of empowerment, and the best defence against exploitation. > ...' > > http://www.hindu.com/2009/08/11/stories/2009081155790800.htm > > Questions of real national security > > Pushpa M. Bhargava > > Policies with regard to agriculture, education and health need to change in > order to ensure a meaningful and wide-ranging security for this country. > > The arms business is probably the second largest business in the world > after the food business. It is, therefore, not surprising that we consider > national security to be just what the defence and allied services provide > the country. > > But there could not be a greater illusion than that. With all the weapons > in the world, we must not consider ourselves secure unless we have > agriculture security (which is synonymous with food security, farmers’ > security and rural sector security), education security, and health > security. If India were secure on these fronts, there would have been no > so-called left-wing extremism affecting a quarter of the districts: in many > areas the government’s writ does not seem to run now. > > We waived farmers’ loans, but did we take steps to empower them so that > they do not need to take any more loans? What we did was for political gain. > For what we did not do, the explanation is that we pay only lip service to > farmers’ security. > > Agriculture security concerns seeds, agro-chemicals, water, power and soil. > It involves the marriage of traditional and modern agricultural practices; > the de facto empowerment of panchayats and women; the marketing of > agro-products at fair prices. Such security requires the provision of > sources of augmentation of income to agriculturists and village-dwellers > through the development of traditional arts and crafts, medicinal plants, > and the unparalleled repertoire of fruits and vegetables. Also involved here > are organic farming; the use of post-harvest technologies; orchid tissue > culture (for example, Arunachal Pradesh has 650 varieties of orchids which, > if exploited, can bring the State an income of Rs.10,000 crore a year), > mushroom culture, and the appropriate use of fisheries and marine wealth. > Other elements include intelligent energy use; the empowerment of the rural > sector with knowledge; microcredit; the integration of rural and urban > sectors; appropriate research such as on organic farming, bio-pesticides, > and the development of varieties with all the advantages of hybrids, that > would benefit India: research that is being encouraged under the Indo-U.S. > Knowledge Initiative on Agriculture would be of greater use to the U.S. The > integration of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme with carefully > thought-out developmental plans; prevention and management of disasters such > as floods and famine and the cleaning up of land records are also not to be > forgotten. Then come a system to prevent, detect and take care of > bio-terrorism against agriculture. Emerging new and exotic diseases of > plants and animals need to be tackled by setting up centres of plant and > animal disease control. Climate change has to be addressed, bearing in mind > the fact that a one-degree rise of temperature can bring down the production > of wheat by 5 million tonnes. None of the above constituents of agriculture > security has been adequately taken care of. > > If a power from outside India wishes to control this country’s destiny > today, it is not going to drop a nuclear bomb: it only has to control Indian > agriculture. And to do that, it needs to control just seed and > agro-chemicals production. The Indian government is not cognizant of this: > otherwise, more than 30 per cent of the country’s seed business today would > not have been under the control of multinational seed companies. Indeed, a > moratorium on genetically modified (GM) crops would have been declared until > preparations were made to test them adequately. > > As regards education, the most important division in the country today is > between those (numbering less than 10 per cent) who have access to good > education and those (adding up to more than 90 per cent) who have only > education without any value. The former are the rulers and the latter are > the ruled. > > With the extensive commercialisation of both school and higher (including > professional) education leading to a university degree, education has become > a commodity to be sold and purchased. India is perhaps the only country in > which this has happened so extensively, with the buyer getting the minimum > that the seller can get away with. So a private school has no hesitation in > charging Rs.10,000 as laboratory fees for a Class I student, and there is > often no correlation between what is charged and for what amount the receipt > is given. You could sometimes get your required registration and university > affiliation for an engineering, medical, pharmacy or nursing college that > you are setting up by buying off the inspection team and officers of the > accreditation authority. It is no surprise, therefore, that 80 per cent of > the engineering graduates (in fact, graduates in all areas) India produces > are unemployable. > > Till the 1960s, there was no commercialisation of education, and > government-run or trust-run schools were uniformly good. The children of the > rich and the poor went to the same school, and the rich and the powerful had > a stake in government schools. Now only the poor send their children to > government schools; they might as well not do that too for, at times the > school may exist only in name or the designated teacher may not come for > weeks on end. Or, if he is a little more considerate, he may send a > surrogate replacement for 20 per cent of his salary which he would > compensate for by engaging in a more lucrative business activity during > school hours. > > The Right to Education Bill that has just been passed by the Rajya Sabha > and the Lok Sabha, if it is notified by the government, will only be a boon > for those who make money in the school business, while it will be a disaster > for those who have no access to education today. Unfortunately, that is what > the rich and the ruling classes want. For education is the most important > weapon of empowerment, and the best defence against exploitation. > > To be truly independent as a nation, and to maintain national dignity, > India needs a knowledge society in which every citizen has a minimum amount > of knowledge. The country can do that only by decommercialising and > decommodifying education and setting up a common school system (for which > there has been a continuous demand since the days of the Kothari Commission > in the early-1960s) in which the students of the rich and the poor in the > same neighbourhood would be studying in the same school without paying any > fees, and with a new curricular framework. That is the only way for us to > ensure education security. > > As regards health security, the lack of a sense of ethics in the medical > profession (with some exceptions granted), and corruption in the Central > Government Health Service, in the corporate health sector, and in the > Medical Council of India, are matters of common knowledge. Inflated bills, > pay-offs, unnecessary medical tests and a lack of general physicians are all > well-known and well-documented phenomena. In Bhopal on September 24, 2008, a > gas tragedy victim was denied medical assistance in the Bhopal Memorial > Hospital which was permitted to be set up by Union Carbide expressly for the > gas tragedy victims; he died the next day while waiting in the hospital. But > who cares? > > Our rural health-care scheme covers just a few diseases. Contrast our > health-care efforts with that of China’s recently announced well-thought-of > programme of spending $124 billion to modernise its national health-care > system in the next three years. > > We seem to really care only about the requirements of countries such as the > U.S., the multinational companies, and the top 15-20 per cent of our rich > and the powerful. According to an article in The Lancet (May 16, 2009), a > small country like Ghana lost $60 million since 1951 which it spent on > training health workers who have migrated to the U.S., the U.K. and Canada. > The U.K. alone saved £103 million in training costs by importing Ghanians. > It is unclear what the corresponding figures are for India and the U.S., but > there is no doubt that the U.S. will be the winner. > > Ironically, the Indian government can do everything required to ensure > agriculture, education and health security. The Green Revolution was based > on our own varieties and not seed companies’ hybrids. Some of the best > schools in the country even today are the Central Schools, or Kendriya > Vidyalayas. And many of the best institutes of higher learning in every > sector are government institutions. Some of our best hospitals, such as the > All India Institute of Medical Sciences in Delhi, the Post Graduate > Institute of Medical Education and Research in Chandigarh, and the Christian > Medical College Hospital in Vellore, are run by the government or a trust > without a profit motive. > > If the present Indian policies with regard to agriculture, education and > health security continue to be pursued, there could well be a civil war in > the next 10 to 15 years. > > (Dr. P.M. Bhargava is former vice-chairman, National Knowledge Commission.) > > > > -- > http://venukm.blogspot.com > > http://www.shelfari.com/kmvenuannur > > http://kmvenuannur.livejournal.com > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
