INTRODUCTION:

Migration is today, as it has always been, a function of the search for greater opportunity. “Throughout human history, migration has been a courageous expression of the individual’s will to overcome adversity and to live a better life.”¹ As always, and in many forms, migration involves work to support oneself and one’s family. Migrants are rational decision-makers who decide to move on the basis of cost benefits involved by moving from one place to another in search of better employment opportunities. People move to a place where their capabilities according to the prevailing lab our market is the best product and enable them to earn higher wages.

Neo-classical migration theory sees rural-urban migration as a constituent part of the whole

the development process, by which surplus labor in the rural sector supplies the workforce for

the urban industrial economy

By postulating that it “is a well-known fact of economic history that material progress usually has been associated with the gradual but continuous transfer of economic agents from rural-based traditional agriculture to urban-oriented modern industry.’’²

Migrants move within the state territories (interstate or intrastate) which is fundamentally recognized as the rights of citizens in many countries. However, the movement of people across borders and the right to admission within the territorial boundaries of the state has become a hallmark of modern citizenship. Citizenship refers to individual membership, and consequently, rights and participation in a polity are assured.

Migration highlights the political core and the boundaries of citizenship. In migration contexts, citizenship marks a distinction between members and outsiders based on their different relations to particular states. In the international arena, citizenship serves as a control device that strictly limits state obligations towards foreigners and permits governments to keep them out or remove them, from their jurisdiction. A migration perspective highlights the boundaries of citizenship and political control over entry and exit as well as the fact that foreign residents remain in most countries deprived of the core rights of political participation.

These exclusionary aspects of citizenship raise some difficult problems for the theory of democracy. Such questions are often ignored in discussions that start from the false assumption that liberal democracies have already achieved full political inclusion and equality and focus then only on questions of social equality, economic opportunities, political participation, and cultural liberties among citizens. As Joseph Carens has put it: ‘Citizenship in the modern world is a lot like feudal status in the medieval world. It is assigned at birth; for the most part, it is not subject to change by the individual’s will and efforts; and it has a major impact upon that person’s life chances.’³

The conceptual field of citizenship can be roughly outlined by distinguishing three dimensions. These are, first, citizenship as a political and legal status, second, legal rights and duties attached to this status, and, third, individual practices, dispositions and identities attributed to, or expected from those who hold the status. As a membership status, citizenship has certain features distinguishing it from related concepts that describe various forms of affiliation between individuals and territorially bounded societies.³

Citizenship and Rights:

Of the three modes of affiliation, ‘belonging’ is the most flexible and open-ended one. Migrants may not only develop a sense of belonging to several societies, regions, cities, ethnic and cultural traditions, or religious and political movements; they can also feel to belong to imagined communities located in a distant past or future. Modes of belonging will, however, not be purely subjectively defined since they always refer to some socially constructed entity and are shaped by discourses within these about who belongs and who does not. Migrating between distinct societies also creates multiple social ties and political and economic stakes, but, different from their sense of belonging, these must be grounded in some factual dependency of an individual’s activities and opportunities on her or his affiliations. Even irregular migrants can formally claim certain basic rights of civil citizenship that are considered human rights, e.g., due process rights in court or elementary social rights, such as emergency health care or public schooling for their children. On the one hand, these rights are precarious since they effectively depend on the right to the residence. The most significant inclusion of foreign nationals has probably occurred concerning social citizenship. In democratic states with a long history of immigration, there is nowadays comparatively little legal exclusion of foreign nationals in the provision of public education, health, and housing and concerning financial benefits such as social insurance payments in case of unemployment, sickness, work accidents or retirement. This is very different in needs-based and means-tested public welfare systems where foreign nationals are frequently excluded or receive reduced benefits.

The rationale behind this discrimination is that immigrants are supposed to be either self-supporting or to be supported by their sponsors. In a broader conception of social citizenship, one should include not merely legal equality of public entitlements but also protection against discrimination in employment, housing, education and health.³

Migration entails far-reaching implications for putting into practice an exhaustive declaration on human rights. Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to all individuals in any part of the world, in practice, these sacrosanct claims are not available or denied to migrants. The contemporary world is witnessing the mass movement of people within the national territory and inter nation-state. The crossing of the boundary is not accompanied by a corresponding assurance of rights enjoyed by people in their origin place.

Migration results in development gains at both places-from where and to the place migrants move. Migration is a boom to the labor market by alleviating pressure on labor markets as migrants provide their labor. By meeting the demand for labor they contribute to development at the destination place. Development also takes place at the origin place as migrants send remittances back home, acquire new skills, and further make investments. There is a close nexus between the development gains and rights of migrant workers. Protection of rights including social rights where the migration takes place provides security net to the migrants in terms of health and education benefits having a positive impact to stay for longer duration and contribute to productivity.

That protection of migrant workers is a shared responsibility between source and destination countries. Indeed, actions taken from one side only of the migration process will not prove adequate to ensure the protection of migrant workers and to promote mutual benefits of migration to development. The countries from which these workers come and those in which they work have a shared responsibility to lessen the burdens on them by protecting and promoting their rights.

This can be done by increasing the supervision and regulation of international labor migration and engaging in international cooperation in the interest of promoting their rights and preventing abusive conditions. United Nations SDG target 10.7, which calls for states to “facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.’’⁴

Migration is a critical demographic variable, integral to the process of development as highlighted in the Human Development Report by the United Nations Development Programme 2019. Migration plays a very important goal in achieving sustainable development goals thereby preventing migration could even be counterproductive.

Social security benefits and negligence of Migrants in India:

Freedom of movement is a fundamental right of the citizens of India guaranteed in article Article 19(1)(d) and Article 19(1)(e), Part lll, Fundamental Rights of The Constitution of India. The Constitution states “All citizens shall have the right (…) to move freely throughout the territory of India; to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India.’’⁵Internal movements intrastate or interstate is not restricted by any law.

India's total population, as recorded in Census 2011, stands at 1.21 billion. Internal migrants in India number 454 million, or 37 percent of the population. This far exceeds the estimates of Indian emigrants i.e., 11.4 million. India experienced rapid urbanization between 2001 and 2011, with an estimated 31.8 percent decadal growth. Internal migrants in India constitute a large population. Migration, one of the components of India’s urban growth, is expected to increase in the foreseeable future. Policies such as the National Smart Cities Mission have also contributed to this phenomenon. During 2001-2011, India saw an increase of 139 million to its migrant workforce. The internal migration almost doubled during 20 years—from 220 million in 1991 to 454 million in 2011.

The general movement of labor is from the North and East India to the West and South. Some of the prominent labor-sending States are Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Odisha. Gujarat, Maharashtra, Delhi, Haryana, Punjab, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala serve as the key labor recipients. This is owing to the demographic divide between the South and North in terms of demographic dividend and transition.⁶

There can be contrasting reasons for this current increase in the migration rate. On the one hand, increasing unemployment, poverty, population pressure, environmental degradation, depletion of natural resources, etc. limit the livelihood options and may force people to migrate. But at the same time urbanization, better employment and educational opportunities, improvement in educational level, changing occupational patterns, development of transport, and communication are the new impetus facilitating spatial mobility.

Migration and urbanization are an integral part of economic development and societal transformation, and historical experience has shown that it cannot be stopped. The rising contribution of cities to India’s GDP would not be possible without migration and migrant workers. Migrants are indispensable and yet invisible key actors of socially dynamic, culturally innovative, and economically prosperous societies. An independent study examining the economic contribution of circular migrants based on major migrant employing sectors in India revealed that they contribute 10 percent to the national GDP.⁵

The constraints faced by migrants are many - lack of formal residency rights; lack of identity proof; lack of political representation; inadequate housing; low-paid, insecure or hazardous work; extreme vulnerability of women and children to trafficking and sexual exploitation; exclusion from state-provided services such as health and education and discrimination based on ethnicity, religion, class, or gender.

In the absence of proofs of identity and residence, internal migrants are unable to claim social protection entitlements and remain excluded from government-sponsored schemes and programs. Children face the disruption of regular schooling, adversely affecting their human capital formation and contributing to the inter-generational transmission of poverty. Further, migrants are negatively portrayed as a “burden” to society, discouraged from settling down and excluded from urban planning initiatives. Most internal migrants are denied basic rights, yet internal migration is given very low priority by the government in policy and practice, partly due to a serious knowledge gap on its extent, nature, and magnitude.

Those who move within national boundaries - are several times more significant in terms of the numbers involved compared to those who move across countries, but fail to receive the attention. internal migration remains grossly underestimated due to empirical and conceptual difficulties in measurement. Even though approximately three out of every ten Indians are internal migrants, internal migration has been accorded very low priority by the government, and existing policies of the Indian state have failed in providing legal or social protection to this vulnerable group. This can be attributed in part to a serious data gap on the extent, nature, and magnitude of internal migration.

Social policies and migrants’ neglect:

The 11th 5 Year Plan (Vol 1 para 4.48) is explicit in the recognition of a severe gap in policies vis-à-vis migrants: “migrant workers are the most vulnerable and exploited among the informal sector workers, and have not received any attention in the labor policy. In the States which are sources (origin) of supply of migrant workers … the effective and large-scale effort for vocational training in the labor-intensive occupations is required … amenable to the special needs of the entrants to informal labor markets. In the destination States, the focus of public policy (including Labour Policy) should be to improve the conditions under which the bulk of these in-migrants live and work.” Much of the attention, however, has focused on social protection schemes. There is little in terms of legislation and policies to support labor (with NREGA seen as supporting employment, whereas it is primarily a cash transfer scheme). The National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganized Sector (NCEUIS) recommendations that focused on support to the informal sector by and large have been shelved, as the dominant policy paradigm has been to improve the investment climate through which jobs would be generated, and support to the poorest through the flagship schemes.

Improvement of employability of and conditions for migrants does not appear to be high on the agenda, as even support to the ‘informal sector’ appears unpopular amongst policymakers. The conclusion of Srivastava and Sasikumat that “legislation regarding migrants fails because regulatory authorities are over-stretched; the state sees migrants as a low priority” by and large seems to hold, while acts like the Inter-State Migrant Workman Act remain by and large without teeth. Many social protection schemes, moreover, tend to have a ‘sedentary bias’, i.e. focus on the 'resident' population, and tend to exclude migrants. Working mostly in the informal sector, migrants tend to lack work-related social security and are seldom unionized. Migrants may not have access to PDS and housing schemes. Health care may not be accessible, either because of an absence of or large distance to health care centers and anganwadis or because of discrimination against groups of migrants. Even immunization schemes may neglect the children of migrants. Similarly, schooling may not be available to migrants, particularly if they move seasonally .⁷

Migrants continually face difficulties in becoming a full part of the economic, cultural, social, and political lives of society. Regulations and administrative procedures exclude migrants from access to legal rights, public services, and social protection programs according to residents, on account of which they are often treated as second-class citizens.

Internal migrants face numerous constraints, including a lack of political representation; inadequate housing and a lack of formal residency rights; low-paid, insecure or hazardous work; limited access to state-provided services such as health and education; discrimination based on ethnicity, religion, class or gender; extreme vulnerability of women and children migrants to trafficking and sexual exploitation.⁸

Dr. N.C. Saxena, Member, National Advisory Council, and Commissioner to the Supreme Court on the Right to Food Campaign pointed out that “as compared to the rural poor for whom there exist a large number of programs, for urban migrants, there are no policies". In the absence of proofs of identity and residence, internal migrants are unable to claim social protection entitlements and remain excluded from government-sponsored schemes and program.⁸

The focus of social protection and programs is on settled population, internal migrants' access to social security benefits is linked to permanent residency. There remains no concerted strategy to ensure the portability of entitlements for migrants. Planning for migrant families who are not settled, but are on the move, warrants a fundamental rethinking of development approaches and models in order to protect and promote migrants’ access to social services and enable migrants to become socially and politically active citizens.

COVID 19 and the Plight of Uncounted Numbers:

The economic development of India depends on migrants who dominate the labor force in the construction and manufacturing sectors. While their remittances aid the development of the source State, they also help propel the economy of the destination States. This movement is known to improve households' socioeconomic status and benefits both the region that people migrate to and where they migrate. According to UN General Secretary, Ban Ki-moon's statement "Migration is an expression of the human aspiration for dignity, safety, and a better future. It is part of the social fabric, part of our very make-up as a human family.”⁹

The visuals in various media platforms of migrant workers desperate to reach back home town walking on foot or whatever means of communication available to them as left with no work no pay to sustain themselves is a stark reality of the wide gaps existing in the provision of rights entitled to all citizens. The lockdown has brought to the forefront the uncertainty about welfare benefits for the uncountable. On March 25, when the government of India implemented a lockdown to curb the spread of Covid-19, it brought to light a problem that has remained invisible in the minds of policymakers and public consciousness – that of ensuring dignity and rights to a vast majority of India's workers, most of whom are in the casual and informal sectors. and survival concerns of the vulnerable communities as many of whom depend on daily wages for living.

Article 14 of the constitution provides dignified life to the citizens by guaranteeing the right to equality. However, in a crisis like situation (in today's context) COVID 19 pandemic, inequalities embedded in the socio-economic fabric of our system has been the biggest impediments for equal access to constitutional rights.

Incorporating Migrants’ Right and Development:

It is somewhat disconcerting to see that the links between migration, rights, and development have been neglected. Lack of attention to migrants' rights and to the fact that different baskets of rights differentially determine the development impacts back home is the biggest shortcoming of the contemporary debate on the migration-development nexus. Rights play a crucial part in that nexus, a bigger role than pre-departure or postadmission skills. basic human rights such as the right of workers to organize and bargain with employers, to be free from discrimination or to enjoy the freedom of movement within the country in which they stay; economic and labor rights such as the right to change employers, sectors, and occupations; and social rights such as the right to access welfare benefits on an equal basis and to have old-age pensions follow the erstwhile workers wherever they retire too. The UN's International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families spells out sets of rights to which different categories should be entitled. Neglect of human and other rights is due to the political irritation and sensitivity that the mere mention of this subject nowadays entails in host country government circles If politicians cared about the migration-development nexus, they would acknowledge the central role of migrants' rights, and do something about it. Lack of rights severely curtails the development potential of migration; many rights greatly expand it.¹⁰

The first-ever task force on migration, the Working Group on Migration formed by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation and headed by Partha Mukhopadhyay from the Centre for Policy Research, was set up in end 2015. The panel in its report stated that the migrant population contributed substantially to economic growth and that it was necessary to secure their constitutional rights. The 18-member working group submitted its report in January 2017.The report began by stating that in principle there was no reason for specific protection legislation for migrant workers, inter-State or otherwise and that they should be integrated with all workers as part of a legislative approach with basic guarantees on wage and work conditions for all workers, as part of an overarching framework that covers regular and contractual work.⁶

CONCLUSION:

The development benefits of labor migration depend upon the degree to which migrants are protected and empowered by their place origin from which they come and the destination in which they live and work.

The Smart Cities Mission, one of the most ambitious projects of the Central government, has attracted large numbers of migrant workers. The current migrant crisis has indicated how migrant workers are excluded from the safety nets of both receiving and sending States. Therefore, a fresh focus is required to protect this invisible workforce in Indian cities, by including them in the social, economic, and health security net.

To further safeguard the interest of the migrant workers, the Central government has enacted the Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979, which, inter alia, provides for payment of minimum wages, journey allowance, displacement allowance, residential accommodation, medical facilities, and protective clothing. However, the current crisis has demonstrated starkly the lack of proper implementation, and thus the ineffectiveness, of the Act. Most importantly, the lack of political will is the most serious hindrance to uphold migrant rights. Nevertheless, there is hope when both the sending and receiving States make proactive interventions.

There is an urgent need to develop a governance system for internal migration in India, i.e. a dedicated system of institutions, legal frameworks, mechanisms, and practices aimed at supporting internal migration and protecting migrants. Issues of internal migration need to be addressed in a comprehensive and focused manner and mainstreamed into national development planning and policy documents, such as the Five Year Plans, Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission, and City Development Plans.

REFERENCES:

1. Wickramasekara P. Globalization, international labour migration and rights of migrant workers Paper presented at the International Symposium on a Culture of Peace 2006: “Intercultural Understanding and Human Rights Education”,October 25- 27 2006.Seoul,https://www.globalmigrationpolicy.org/articles/globalization/Globalization%20International%20Labour%20Migration%20Rights%20of%20Migrant%20Workers.%20WICKRAMASEKARA%20Seoul%202006-1.pdf.Accessed April2,2021.

2. Haas HM, Mark J, Castles S. The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. Palgrave Macmillan; 2013:46.

3. Bauböck R, ed. Migration and Citizenship Legal Status, Rights, and Political Participation. Amsterdam University Press; 2006:16-19.

4. Global Citizenship Commission. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 21st Century; Gordon Brown Open Book Publishers,2016:1-13.

5. Faetanini M Tankha R. Social inclusion of internal migrants in India: Internal migration in India initiative. New Delhi: United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization;2013:1-13.

6. Rajan SI. The way forward on migrant issues, May22,2020. Frontline Print edition.

7. Haan A. Inclusive growth? Labour migration and poverty in India.The Hague:, International Institute of Social Sciences;2011:21.

8. UNESCO. Internal Migrants in India: The Millions Who Cannot Exercise their Rights,www.unesco.org/newdelhi/aboutthisoffice/singleview/news/internal_migrants_in_india_the_millions_who_cannot_exercise_their_rights?.Published Jan16,2013.Accessed date April2,2021.

9. Moon, BK. Secretary-General's remarks to High-Level Dialogue on International Migration and Development. United Nations. 03 October 2013; https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2013-10-03/secretary-generals-remarks-high-level-dialogue-international Accessed April2,2021.

10. Böhning R. Getting a Handle on the Migration Rights—Development Nexus. The International Migration Review.2009;46: 652-670.

Received on 11.09.2021 Modified on 21.11.2021

Asian Journal of Management. 2022;13(1):21-26.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5763.2022.00005