NEW DELHI: Despite existing laws and policies, the lack of sensitisation among local authorities and the government on the prohibition of manual scavenging remains the main reason behind people being forced to engage in the hazardous cleaning of septic and sewer tanks, highlights a report on manual scavenger deaths — Justice Denied.
The report, released by NGO Rashtriya Garima Abhiyan, on Thursday has covered case studies from 11 states.The study identified 140 incidents and over 302 deaths from 1992 to 2018. Of the 140 incidents, the study covered 51 incidents in which 97 deaths were documented. There is an immediate need to intensify awareness campaigns for the public, urban bodies, contractors and households where manual cleaning of septic and sewer tanks is carried out, especially since cleaners do not have access to any kind of protective gear or safety equipment, to stop this practice,said the report.
Currently, there is little awareness on The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Bill, 2012 which outlaws manual scavenging. This hinders effective implementation of the law at the grassroots, said the study.
The study was conducted in order to assess the implementation of the Act, the socio-economic conditions of the family members in the aftermath of the death of the workers and to analyse the legal recourse for such incidents.
According to the survey, the living conditions of the family degraded after the death of the sewer workers even if they got compensation.An analysis of the primary occupation of the family after the death of the sewer workers showed at least one family member engaged in sanitation work at the local municipality in 51% cases.
In 20% of the cases, a family member had resorted to septic tank cleaning, in 6% of the cases one family member had engaged in drainage cleaning and in 3% of the cases, members have engaged in manual scavenging.
No relief in sight
According to the report, in most of the families of those who died while engaged in manual scavenging, atleast one family member has gone back to the practice.