Yogi Adityanath, now widely accepted by the Sangh bet and his supporters, including many of the BJP’s chief ministers, as an “innovative leader and lawmaker” introduced a draconian bill aimed at controlling the population in the state. It would be very unfortunate if this too were accepted as something worth emulating by others.
The bill released into the public domain by the Uttar Pradesh Law Commission on July 7 is poorly drafted and filled with various threats and flattery that will do little to bring down the birth rate in the state , but will certainly do much to harm poor families . This will have a more negative impact on women of all communities and classes, disenfranchising them and making them even more vulnerable to poor health, social stigma and violence.
The government presented this draft law with its document, Population policy 2021-30, to achieve its stated goal of lowering the total fertility rate (TFR) in the state from 2.8 to 2.1 over the next decade. This is something that has been achieved in several states of the country without resorting to coercive measures but, unfortunately, the government of Uttar Pradesh does not want to learn from it.
In fact, it is now widely accepted that the use of coercion to control the population is not only a violation of basic human and women’s rights, but also a totally ineffective and ineffective way of achieving its goal.
Illustration of a family with two children. Photo: Sandy Millar/Unsplash
Incentives and disincentives
The draft bill consists of five chapters, each with several sections. I will try to address some of its important and extremely objectionable content.
Chapter II deals with incentives and disincentives. The incentives apply, for the most part, to those in the civil service. If an employee (assumed to be a man by the project) or his spouse undergoes sterilization after the birth of two children, he will be entitled to many incentives such as promotion, raises and other benefits in health care, d educational institutions for children, etc. If this sterilization is undertaken by him or his wife after the birth of a child, even more inducements are promised.
Critics have spoken of the corruption and implementation gaps that are bound to be the consequences of the policy, apart from the incredible bureaucracy and paperwork that will become necessary.
In the extremely patriarchal society we inhabit, the burden of sterilization is often borne by women. This means that attempts to access incentives will not only have negative effects on the health of many women, but other problems may arise as well. For example, if the woman is pressured to undergo sterilization after the birth of a child, if this child is a girl or if this child loses her life, there is every chance that the woman will be divorced. The man is then free to remarry while the woman faces an extremely uncertain future because she has been sterilized. This is not an exaggerated assumption. There are countless cases of women facing domestic violence, divorce and death because they only gave birth to daughters.
In the incentives section, families below the poverty line (BPL) will be eligible for a payment of Rs 1 lakh if the husband or wife is sterilized after the birth of a child, a girl; if this is done after the birth of a child, a son, the payment will be Rs 80,000. It is very likely that it is the wife who will undergo sterilization in most cases, at the risk of her health, their well-being and safety.
The mentioned disincentives are extremely harsh. Government employees who have more than two children will forfeit promotions and raises. Anyone who violates the two-child norm will be penalized by losing access to all government-sponsored social welfare programs; subsidized rations will be limited to only four people per family; and offenders will be barred from standing for election to local bodies. In addition, other deterrents (not listed or described) may also be prescribed.
It has been established by various surveys like the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) that it is people at the lowest rungs of the social and economic hierarchies who have more than two children. These sections, made up largely of Dalits, Adivasis, people from backward castes and poorer sections of minority communities, have been denied access to education, health care and the opportunity institutional deliveries, resulting in high rates of maternal and infant mortality.
It is precisely these factors, for which they are certainly not responsible, that lead them to have several children. To punish them for acts of omission and commission by the government is to punish them for their poverty and the sins of others. Punishing them by depriving them of social measures designed precisely to alleviate their poverty will condemn them to remain poorer, more malnourished and hungrier and, therefore, more likely to have more children.
Local body elections were designed to bring democracy and development closer to the poor and deprived. For this to have any meaning, they must be encouraged to participate in these elections as candidates. Already, the massive and ever-increasing use of money power in elections at this level means that poor candidates are at a disadvantage. If this law is enacted, then the poor who are even eligible to run as candidates will be drastically reduced and democracy will be further restricted.
Another disincentive prohibits those with more than two children from holding public service jobs. This will cause the greatest harm to members of the SC and ST communities, who will be deprived in large numbers of access to their right to reservation in government jobs. As things stand, this right is regularly curtailed and the enactment of this bill will deal a cruel blow to the aspirations of the most exploited and needy citizens for a better future.
The final deterrent in this section is that those who violate the two-child standard will lose access to all government grants. It is unthinkable that in a situation where the coronavirus pandemic has reduced so many people to utter penury, millions of poor families will be deprived even of the misery that the government pours into their bank accounts at long intervals. Those who are homeless will remain so.
In a sadistic twist, the deterrents include a clause that says the government can also prescribe other deterrents. Can a government be given general permission to prescribe cruel punishments as it pleases and without any punishment? This clause runs counter to any understanding of citizens’ rights.
Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty/The Wire.
Dangerous repercussions
The bill appears to have been drafted with complete insensitivity to the ravages already wrought by son preference in our extremely patriarchal society. According to the most recent figures, the sex ratio in Uttar Pradesh is 1,000 males to 789 females. The law on preconception and prenatal diagnostic techniques (PCPNDT) which was enacted precisely to remedy this situation is now forgotten and in ruins. In such a situation, if this bill is enacted, there is no doubt that female feticide will increase exponentially with disastrous implications for the status of women and social relations in the state.
The last chapter of the bill, “Duties of the government”, mentions the establishment of maternity centers in all government health centers. The fact that it is a duty to be accomplished later is proof that such maternity wards do not exist today. In this case, even if all women wanted to avail themselves of the incentives promised by this draft bill and avoid falling victim to the disincentives, it would simply not be possible for them to do so simply because the government did not has not established the centers.
This is just an indication of what is wrong with this bill and why it should be scrapped.
Better examples and non-coercive measures
The TFR of 2.1 that the government of Uttar Pradesh wants to achieve in a decade by enacting this law has already been achieved in other states without resorting to any coercive legislation.
If we take the example of Kerala, whose TFR is 1.7 (still lower than what Uttar Pradesh aspires to achieve after a decade), it is clear that the female literacy rate in this state is 91%. It is only 61% in Uttar Pradesh, where even the ability to write one’s name is considered a sign of literacy. The percentage of institutional births is 99% in Kerala while it is only 67% in Uttar Pradesh, and the infant mortality rate in Kerala is seven deaths per 10,000 live births while it is is disproportionately high of 47 in Uttar Pradesh. It is these high indicators that have led to a considerable reduction in the birth rate of Kerala.
Kerala and other states like Tamil Nadu have consistently spent money on health infrastructure, education, pre-natal and post-natal care and other welfare measures. This is what the UP will have to do if it wants to achieve the objectives it has set itself.
Unfortunately, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh prefers to project himself as a strongman ready to use tough measures. He boasts of improving law and order by giving the police full freedom to ‘thoko‘ (slang for hit hard or kill) but the crime rate, far from going down, has only gone up. His efforts to reduce the birth rate in the state by hitting hard on poor families and inflicting great cruelties on poor women are also likely to prove counterproductive.
It is imperative that this population control bill be fought by any means possible. Its enactment will prove devastating to millions of people in the state struggling to exist in inhumane conditions. This will deal a terrible blow to women in the state who already face the worst violence, discrimination and deprivation.
Note: The Uttar Pradesh Law Commission has invited suggestions and amendments to the Bill to be submitted by July 19. The All India Democratic Women’s Association has submitted a memorandum containing most of the points mentioned above.
Subhashini Ali is a former MP for Kanpur and a member of the Politburo of the Communist Party of India (Marxist).