ISLAMABAD, July 20: The Supreme Court has cautioned Punjab’s Inspector General of Police that the district police officer (DPO) concerned will be held responsible if it receives a complaint about bonded labour or a habeas corpus application for detaining labourers.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry ordered the IGP to circulate the court’s directive to all law-enforcement agencies, especially the DPOs, to ensure that no case of bonded labour existed in their areas of jurisdiction.
The court issued the directive on an application filed by Rasoolan, wife of Mohammad Aslam.
The bench directed the Punjab chief secretary to ensure that within two weeks of receipt of its order all labourers working in brick kilns, subject to fulfilment of requirement of the law, were registered as recipients of social security and kiln owners were bound to pay their contribution to the social security department.
The court also ordered the chief secretary to submit a report after which it would pass the final order.
In a report submitted to the court, Sialkot DPO Mohammad Gohar Nafees acknowledged that about 8,250 labourers were working in brick kilns across the district.
To ascertain whether they were subject to bonded labour, the DPO said, he arranged a campaign through police and civil society during which it was revealed that 379 labourers were detained at brick kilns because they had received advance on their wages.
He said police got the labourers released and registered about 150 cases against the brick kiln owners and submitted challans in courts.
He pointed out that owners didn’t register the labourers to avoid paying their contribution under the Employees’ Social Security Ordinance, 1965.
Additional Advocate General Mohammad Haneef Khatana conceded that unfortunately the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1992, had not been applied strictly inasmuch as that vigilance committees, which should have been set up under the law, had not been formed.
He said since there was no local government system in place, vigilance committees could not be formed in the districts.
The court observed: “We must insist that it is the command of the constitution to hold the local government elections, as the elected members, including the chairman of district council, are always helpful in solving the problems of maintaining law and order as well as to control crime with the cooperation of the police.”
The court directed the government to activate the vigilance committees as early as possible.