CJP KO THEEK KARO ABHIYAN - The strongest form of activism is not the loudest confrontation

                               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.

Political participation and peaceful dissent are essential elements of democracy. At the same time, schools are places of learning, not political arenas, and children should never become unwilling participants in political activities, confrontations or publicity campaigns.

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.

 2. Government schools are not unrestricted public spaces

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.