Despite ratifying key ILO forced-labour conventions, India faces international scrutiny for enforcement gaps. Examine the constitutional, statutory, and administrative framework governing forced labour in India and suggest measures for effective compliance.

Q. Despite ratifying key ILO forced-labour conventions, India faces international scrutiny for enforcement gaps. Examine the constitutional, statutory, and administrative framework governing forced labour in India and suggest measures for effective compliance. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

India ratified ILO Convention No. 29 in 1954 and No. 105 in 2000 [1], yet the USTR's June 2026 Section 301 findings propose additional tariffs on India for failing to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on forced-labour goods [2]. The deficit lies in enforcement, not in the absence of law.

Constitutional framework - Article 23 prohibits begar, traffic in human beings and other forms of forced labour — a Fundamental Right enforceable even against private persons [3]. - Judicially widened: in PUDR v. Union of India (1982) the Supreme Court held that work extracted below the minimum wage amounts to forced labour. - Labour falls in the Concurrent List (Seventh Schedule) [3] — the Centre legislates, but States enforce, producing uneven compliance.

Statutory framework - Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 abolishes the system, extinguishes bonded debt and bars its civil recovery; but the penalty remains three years' imprisonment and a fine up to ₹2,000 [4] — a deterrent unrevised since 1976. - The four Labour Codes, effective from 21 November 2025, rationalise 29 laws [5], though several States are still finalising rules — leaving transitional enforcement gaps. - India has no import-side prohibition on forced-labour goods, the precise omission USTR cites [2].

Administrative framework - District Magistrates and statutory Vigilance Committees identify, release and rehabilitate bonded workers [4]. - The Central Sector Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labourers, 2016 gives ₹1–3 lakh per rescued worker and a ₹10 lakh district Rehabilitation Fund [6]; weak surveys, low convictions and a largely informal workforce blunt its reach.

Way forward: legislate a forced-labour import prohibition with supply-chain due diligence for export clusters; enhance penalties and ensure time-bound release certificates; activate Vigilance Committees with civil-society representation; link rescue data with e-Shram for portable entitlements; and expand district-level surveys.

Compliance is not merely a tariff-avoidance strategy but the constitutional promise of Article 23 made real. Converting ratification into verifiable enforcement will simultaneously protect India's export competitiveness and advance SDG 8.7 on eradicating forced labour.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. ILO NORMLEX — Ratifications for India — ratification of Conventions No. 29 (1954) and No. 105 (2000) 2. USTR — Findings and Proposed Action in 60 Section 301 Investigations on Trade in Forced Labor Goods (June 2026) — proposed tariff action for failure to impose/enforce a forced-labour import prohibition 3. The Constitution of India (India Code) — Article 23; labour as a Concurrent List subject 4. Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (India Code) — abolition, extinguishment of bonded debt, penalties, Vigilance Committees 5. PIB — Government Makes the Four Labour Codes Effective — 29 laws consolidated into four Codes, effective 21 November 2025 6. PIB — Multi-pronged strategy to abolish the bonded labour system — Central Sector Scheme, 2016: rehabilitation assistance and district Bonded Labour Rehabilitation Fund