Nafeek tragedy: Wiser after the event
View(s):Parliament mourned the execution of underage Sri Lankan housemaid Rizana Nafeek and everyone jumped on the bandwagon to share the limelight in death and, in some cases, score a few political points.
However if Nafeek’s 7-year incarceration in death row in a Saudi jail was that serious, why didn’t our half-baked politicians in their BMWs, Pajaros, Laborginis and SUV, contemplate for a moment to call an urgent parliamentary debate on her plight and the crisis facing migrant workers just like Nafeek, amongst other steps to seek her release or a pardon?
Both the government and the opposition have to share the blame for not being able to intervene and save Nafeek’s life.
This issue has dogged Sri Lanka for seven years. Other than the intervention of the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), Sri Lankan leaders including the President, Ministers, officials and the Sri Lankan mission were not forceful enough to prevent the death of this innocent young girl who went to work in a Saudi home as a housemaid at just 17 years.
Nafeek’s death has triggered a chorus of protests, demonstrations, anger and frustration across the island, overshadowed however by the impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake.
Have these concerns come rather late in the day or will Nafeek’s sacrifice be a symbol for greater action to ensure due protection of all Sri Lankan migrant workers, female or male?
There are probably hundreds like Nafeek who have migrated abroad as underage housemaids but carrying genuine travel documents. Blame the job agents, blame the immigration officers, blame human trafficking smugglers or bring in the safeguards. But that’s not going to solve the larger issues confronting labour migration.
While all governments (present and past) have been overjoyed at the billions of rupees remitted by Sri Lankan migrant workers, this sector doesn’t get the priority and respect meted out to other foreign exchange earning sectors like garments, tea, etc. Every year the minister in charge of foreign employment ‘proudly’ explains in parliament (during the votes on the budget of that particular ministry) the ‘valuable’ contribution of ‘our’ workers.
This is a ritual-like exercise with the minister in an ‘I-did-it-like’ fashion taking the credit for increasing remittances. Migrant workers get step-motherly treatment primarily also since the bulk of those working abroad are from the lower strata of society and don’t have the influence or political clout unlike the big shots in other sectors. A good example is the sustained protests against the impeachment of the chief justice steered and directed by influential, powerful or respected Sri Lankan personalities. In the case of Nafeek’s death, the protests would be on for a few days – that too by small women’s groups – and then fizzle out.
Migrant workers have, in a cause championed by David Soysa – a veteran in the migrant rights arena -, asked for voting rights but that has been stuck in bureaucracy despite the Human Rights Commission during the tenure of Faiz Mustapha as chairman making a recommendation on these lines.
Recently when a high level team from the Qatar Human Rights Committee led by its chairman visited Sri Lanka, it was a herculean task for the local organisers to get an appointment with the minister in charge (Dilan Perera). Then when the appointment was given, Perera was too busy in parliament, to meet the visitors. This would never have happened in garments or tea sectors.
What is particularly galling is that the Government sets up missions overnight in some odd places like Nigeria for political reasons whereas it took more than two decades to make a decision to set up a mission in Bahrain for the benefit of Sri Lankan migrants. The decision is yet to take effect.State condemnation of the execution and recalling Sri Lanka’s ambassador in Saudi Arabia are symbolic gestures and knee-jerk reactions. What is required is a long-term strategy on labour migration.
A National Policy on Migration was launched in 2009 but the public is still unaware about its progress. A permanent committee is involved in its implementation but little is known to the public about forward strides.
One immediate question is whether the policy dealt at any point with what kind of legal aid is available when a worker is in jail awaiting a court verdict and punishment.
In the Nafeek case, it was the AHRC that first came to her rescue and marshaled its own financial resources plus contributions from concerned parties before the Sri Lankan Government stepped in. Appeals were made to Saudi authorities by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to pardon the jailed housemaid but these failed. As the AHRC points out in a statement elsewhere in the Business Times, the only way of saving her life was through effective negotiation with the family of the deceased infant, which the Government failed to do. “All kinds of gestures were done; Ministers travelled up and down from time to time. However, they failed to establish direct contact with the family and to deal with the issue,” it said.
The reality is that domestic workers are not recognised. According to the ILO, “We must recognise that domestic workers don’t just care for families, but create value for the economy by allowing more workers, often with valuable skills, to leave the house and take up paid work. Domestic workers clearly deserve a better deal”.
Once the protests and demonstrations against Nafeek’s death taper off in the next few weeks, issues facing migrant workers would continue to remain unresolved. It is the responsibility of every Sri Lankan to work towards the betterment of our brothers and sisters toiling abroad to ensure the rest here have a better life. Only then would Nafeek’s death be more meaningful and serve as a springboard for action.
Follow @timesonlinelk
comments powered by Disqus