The strongest form of activism is not the loudest confrontation
It is the ability to
pursue a legitimate cause without compromising the rights, safety, dignity
or education of children.
That is the spirit in
which “CJP Ko Theek Karo Abhiyan” should be conducted.
The proposed “CJP Ko Theek Karo Abhiyan” should
not be understood as a campaign against any individual or political group. Its
purpose should be to promote awareness of the legal, administrative and
child-protection responsibilities that apply when political or civil-society
groups seek access to government schools.
The central
question is therefore simple:
What should CJP understand and respect when it enters or seeks to enter
a government school?
1. A protest victory does not confer unlimited authority
CJP should reconsider any assumption that it “won” its
Jantar Mantar protest merely because the Education minister subsequently
resigned. A political development following a protest does not automatically
give any organization unrestricted authority or institutional powers.
Nor can CJP reasonably claim to be the sole
representative of Gen-Z. Young people are not a monolithic group. They have
diverse political, social and ideological views, and no single organization can
claim exclusive representation of an entire generation without a clear
democratic mandate.
The right to peaceful protest must be respected. If
CJP exercised that right peacefully, that democratic participation should be
acknowledged.
However, rights also carry responsibilities.
Any organization conducting a protest should also recognize its responsibility
for maintaining peaceful conduct and addressing any damage, disruption or other
consequences directly attributable to its activities.
A government
school being publicly funded does not mean that every individual or
organization has an unrestricted right to enter its premises.
School access is governed by administrative authority,
school rules and child-safety considerations. The National Commission for
Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has published a Manual on Safety and
Security of Children in Schools and continues to issue school-safety
guidance.
Therefore,
anyone wishing to investigate an issue in a school should ordinarily approach
the appropriate school or education authorities rather than treating the school
premises as an open political platform.
3. Children deserve privacy, dignity and protection
Students in
schools are children. Their privacy, dignity, safety and uninterrupted
education must remain paramount.
The UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes children's right to privacy
under Article 16 and establishes the principle that the best interests of the
child should be a primary consideration in actions concerning children.
Consequently,
filming identifiable children and publishing their images or videos for
political purposes can raise serious child-protection and privacy concerns,
depending on the circumstances and applicable law.
The issue
becomes particularly sensitive when children are questioned, confronted,
pressured to respond to political questions, or made part of a political video
without appropriate safeguards.
4. There are proper channels for investigating schools
If an
organization genuinely believes that something is wrong in a government school,
it should use established mechanisms.
Complaints can
be submitted to appropriate authorities such as:
- The Headmaster/Headmistress
- The Mandal or
District Education authorities
- The District
Collector
- Other competent
government authorities
- Appropriate
child-rights authorities where children's rights are allegedly affected
The NCPCR is a
statutory body established to protect, promote and defend children's rights and
monitors implementation of important laws relating to children, including the
JJ Act, POCSO Act and RTE Act.
A legitimate
grievance does not require bypassing established procedures.
5. Political activity must not interfere with education
A school
exists primarily to educate children.
Political
visitors should therefore not:
- Interrupt
classroom teaching;
- Intimidate or
pressure teachers or school administrators;
- Question children
on political matters;
- Turn students
into participants in political publicity;
- Film children
unnecessarily;
- Create an
atmosphere of confrontation inside the school;
- Treat teachers or
headmasters as political opponents simply because they enforce school
rules.
Disagreement
with a school official does not automatically make that official a political
adversary.
Similarly,
allegations that school authorities belong to a particular political
organization should not be used as a justification for entering school premises
without authorization.
6. What should the “CJP Ko Theek Karo Abhiyan” actually do?
The campaign
should be peaceful, educational and completely lawful.
If CJP
representatives arrive at a school without the required authorization, teachers
and school authorities should avoid confrontation. Instead, they can calmly
explain the applicable rules and request that the visitors follow the
prescribed procedure.
A practical
approach could be:
Step 1 — Explain the rules
The school
authorities should politely explain that school premises are subject to
administrative control and that visitors must comply with applicable permission
and safety requirements.
Step 2 — Explain child-protection obligations
The visitors
should be informed that children have rights relating to privacy, dignity,
safety and protection from unnecessary interference.
Step 3 — Provide written guidance
A copy of the
relevant school-access, child-protection and administrative rules can be
provided to the visitors so that there is no ambiguity about the expectations.
Step 4 — Document the interaction lawfully
If necessary
and lawful, school authorities can maintain an official record of the incident,
including appropriate video documentation, for submission to competent
authorities. The objective should be evidence preservation, not public
humiliation or retaliation.
Step 5 — Do not engage in confrontation
If the
visitors refuse to comply, teachers should not attempt to physically remove
them or engage in a heated argument. The matter should be referred to the
competent authorities near by police station.
Step 6 — Allow the law to take its course
If there is
evidence of unlawful entry, intimidation, disruption, harassment, assault,
trespass or another offence, the Headmaster or competent authority can submit a
complaint to the local police station
and appropriate authorities.
The police
and, where necessary, the courts should determine the subsequent legal course
of action.
7. Particular caution concerning children's images
The law
provides enhanced protections in certain circumstances involving children.
For example,
Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act
restricts publication of identifying information or pictures of children
covered by that provision when they are involved in specified proceedings,
subject to the statutory exceptions.
This does not mean that every photograph or
video of every schoolchild is automatically prohibited by Section 74. The
precise legal position depends upon the circumstances. Nevertheless, it
demonstrates why political organizations should exercise extreme caution before
recording and publishing identifiable children.
The guiding
principle should be:
When in doubt, protect the child rather than the political message.
8. CJP should understand the difference between activism and authority
CJP may
organize protests, raise grievances and demand governmental accountability
within the law.
But activism
does not make an organization:
- A government
department;
- An education
authority;
- A law-enforcement
agency;
- A
school-inspection authority; or
- The
representative of an entire generation.
If CJP
believes that a school has violated a rule, it should document the concern and
approach the competent authority.
A complaint is not a licence to bypass the law.
9. International child-rights principles reinforce this approach
The concern
for children's privacy and safety is not merely an Indian administrative issue.
International child-rights principles also emphasize the protection of
children.
The UN
framework recognizes both the best interests of the child and the
child's right to privacy as important principles.
Where
appropriate, concerns involving child protection can therefore also be brought
to the attention of relevant child-rights institutions and organizations,
including:
- UNICEF
- Save the Children
- Plan
International
- Terre des Hommes
- ChildFund
Alliance
- World Vision
International
- SOS Children's
Villages
- Alliance for
Child Protection in Humanitarian Action
- UN Special
Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children
However,
complaints should first be supported by credible evidence, accurate
documentation and the applicable Indian legal framework. International
organizations should not be approached merely as a means of escalating a
political dispute.
10. The real objective
The objective
of “CJP Ko Theek Karo Abhiyan” should ultimately be constructive:
Teach, don't threaten.
Explain, don't intimidate.
Document, don't provoke.
Complain through lawful channels, don't take the law into one's own hands.
Protect children, don't use them as political props.
CJP has every
right to raise issues, question governments and participate in democratic
protest within the law.
But the same
democratic system that protects the right to dissent also requires respect
for institutions, lawful procedures and the rights of others—especially
children.
The strongest
form of activism is not the loudest confrontation. It is the ability to pursue
a legitimate cause without compromising the rights, safety, dignity or
education of children.
That is the
spirit in which any “CJP Ko Theek Karo Abhiyan” should be conducted.
