Prosecution Of Child Labor Exploitation In Urban And Rural Areas
Prosecution of Child Labor Exploitation in Bangladesh
Child labor remains a critical issue in both urban and rural areas in Bangladesh, especially in sectors like garment factories, domestic work, brick kilns, agriculture, and street vending. The government has strengthened legal frameworks to combat child labor through the Bangladesh Labour Act 2006 (amended 2013), Penal Code 1860, and international conventions.
Relevant Legal Provisions
Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006 (amended 2013)
Section 34 & 42: Prohibition of employment of children under 14 years
Section 80 & 82: Penalties for violation of child labor provisions
Section 100–102: Penalties for hazardous work by children
Penal Code, 1860
Section 328: Causing hurt to children
Section 375 & 376: Sexual exploitation of minors
Section 364: Kidnapping for exploitative purposes
Constitutional Provisions
Article 39: Prohibition of forced labor
Article 24 & 32: Rights to protection against exploitation
International Commitments
ILO Convention No. 138 (Minimum Age)
ILO Convention No. 182 (Worst Forms of Child Labor)
Case 1: Dhaka Garment Factory Child Labor Case (2015)
Facts: An inspection revealed that children under 14 were employed in a Dhaka garment factory, working over 12 hours a day without proper wages or safety measures.
Legal Issue: Violation of Bangladesh Labour Act Section 34, child exploitation.
Court Action: Labour Inspector filed case; factory owner arrested. Dhaka Labor Court convicted the owner, imposed 3 years imprisonment, and fined 5 lakh taka. Children were rescued and provided rehabilitation.
Significance: Illustrates urban industrial child labor exploitation and enforcement of Labour Act provisions.
Case 2: Brick Kiln Child Labor in Rangpur (2016)
Facts: A brick kiln in rural Rangpur employed children aged 10–13 in hazardous conditions, including lifting heavy bricks and working in extreme heat.
Legal Issue: Child labor in hazardous work Sections 42 & 100 Bangladesh Labour Act, criminal negligence.
Court Action: Police and NGO investigation led to rescue of 25 children. Kiln owners prosecuted; sentenced to 2 years imprisonment and fined 3 lakh taka.
Significance: Shows rural child labor exploitation in hazardous industries and legal mechanisms for prosecution.
Case 3: Domestic Child Labor in Dhaka City (2017)
Facts: A household employed a 12-year-old girl as a domestic worker, denying wages and freedom of movement. Complaints to NGO revealed abuse and long working hours.
Legal Issue: Violation of Labour Act, child exploitation, and criminal breach of trust Section 406 Penal Code.
Court Action: Police arrested household head; court sentenced them to 1.5 years imprisonment. The child was provided rehabilitation.
Significance: Highlights domestic child labor, which is often hidden and unregulated.
Case 4: Street Child Labor Exploitation in Chittagong (2018)
Facts: Children aged 8–14 were forced to sell items on the streets, denied schooling, and threatened with violence if they refused.
Legal Issue: Forced labor, child exploitation, violation of Labour Act Section 34 & 42, Section 374 & 375 Penal Code (if sexual harassment involved).
Court Action: Police and NGOs rescued 18 children; traffickers prosecuted. Court sentenced offenders to 2–4 years imprisonment.
Significance: Demonstrates urban street labor exploitation, often linked with trafficking networks.
Case 5: Agricultural Child Labor in Mymensingh (2019)
Facts: Children under 14 were employed to work in sugarcane fields with long hours and exposure to pesticides.
Legal Issue: Hazardous child labor, violation of Labour Act Section 100.
Court Action: Labour Department conducted raid; 30 children rescued. Field owner prosecuted and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and fines.
Significance: Shows rural agricultural exploitation and the application of Labour Act provisions in non-industrial settings.
Case 6: Garment Subcontractor Exploiting Children in Narayanganj (2020)
Facts: Subcontractors hired children for stitching garments in small workshops attached to residential buildings. Children worked overtime with no safety measures.
Legal Issue: Labour Act violation Section 34 & 42, criminal negligence under Section 328 Penal Code.
Court Action: Police and Labour Department raided workshops; children rescued. Court sentenced subcontractor to 2.5 years imprisonment and imposed fines.
Significance: Highlights hidden urban child labor in informal garment sector, emphasizing legal reach beyond large factories.
Key Observations Across Cases
Urban vs Rural Exploitation:
Urban areas: Garment factories, domestic work, street vending
Rural areas: Brick kilns, agriculture, sugarcane fields
Legal Tools Used:
Labour Act provisions for prohibition and hazardous work
Penal Code sections for assault, sexual exploitation, or forced labor
NGO-assisted rescue operations often trigger prosecution
Enforcement Challenges:
Child labor often hidden in informal sectors
Economic dependency and social acceptance of child labor
Need for strong inspection and monitoring mechanisms
Court Trends:
Courts increasingly impose imprisonment and fines
Rehabilitation and education of rescued children is emphasized
Both employers and traffickers held criminally liable
RELATED Blog
comments