The law finally caught up with the job agents who coerced the parents of Rizana Nafeek to go along with the idea of forged documents to send their daughter overseas as an under-aged maid.
Since 2005, Ms Rizana has been languishing in a Saudi jail awaiting the implementation of a death sentence after a baby in her care choked to death.
There has been a flurry of activity over the past few years in seeking mitigation on the grounds that she was an under-aged girl and then appealing to the Saudi King for clemency.
However while all this was happening, the authorities here didn’t make any effort to arrest the culprit agents. Whatever police action, if ever, was feeble and these suspect agents may have been fleecing many other unsuspicious migrant workers.More than five years later the system wakes up, the two culprits are arrested and this week were jailed for two years and ordered to pay Rs 60,000 compensation to Ms Rizana’s parents. Little relief however for a family that has been suffering in anguish wondering whether their loved one would be executed or released.
Even if one subscribes to the adage, “Its’ better late than never” in catching up with these criminals, the question must be asked: “Why did it take so long for the suspects to be arrested?”
How did the authorities suddenly wake up in mid-August 2011 and arrest the culprits? Was there pressure from Saudi authorities for Sri Lanka to act to curb migration based on forged documents or passports or face a cut in job opportunities?
The point is that whatever the authorities may say about the positive role the government and its related agencies are playing in promoting and encouraging labour migration and protecting Sri Lankan workers overseas, there just isn’t enough being done to protect migrant workers and provide for the welfare of their families.
The National Policy on Migration enacted about two years ago by all stakeholders, including those representing migrant workers, provided the right direction and signals towards a more, focused migrant labour sector. However much of it needs legislation to give effect to some of these policies.
If there is progress on the policy, then the Government needs to share this information with the public.
The biggest problem why migrant labour does not get the attention it deserves from the authorities is that despite the pronouncements by ministers, present and past, dealing with this subject, the sector hasn’t got ‘priority’ treatment just like for example garments, tea or IT.
Last year expatriate workers’ remittances rose to US$5.2 billion or 8.8% of GDP (from 8.3% in 2010) and this year is expected to reach a record $6.5 billion, ousting garments and apparel as the main foreign exchange earner ($4 billion in 2011). Tourism, which has been getting a lot of attention lately, received foreign earnings of around $900 million.
Tea, another priority sector, was also much lower than the labour migration contribution in foreign earnings.
This simply means migrant workers who are not only filling Sri Lanka’s coffers to be able to pay for essential food (wheat flour, sugar, dhal, etc.) and fuel imports but also contributing to easing the high trade deficit, are not considered an important economic sector.
Migrant workers stakeholders do not have access to the Treasury during budget preparations when chambers and associations representing garments, tea, IT and other sectors made a plea for concessions or benefits. Migrant workers and this industry chain (recruitment agents, etc.) miss out completely on these preparations.
Another issue is that the sector is not organized enough unlike other sectors which have powerful lobby groups like JAAF (the umbrella garments’ group), the Tea Traders Association or Exporters Association for that matter.
Though migrant workers are one of the biggest contributors to the economy they are at the bottom of the table in terms of benefits, concessions like tax breaks and/or low interest loans. This kind of incentive comes only, and occasionally, owing to some Government initiative.
When trade unions complained about the pension bill for private sector workers, the Government withdrew it. Little was spoken about the pension scheme for migrant workers. Incidentally this week, the Government again pulled back from a weak and fool-hardly attempt to insert a pension scheme through some other bill, after unions protested.
While there are a couple of NGOs and other groups working for migrant workers, most of it is not through any rights-based approach. It’s more about welfare and of a reactive nature when a domestic worker is in trouble.
Migrant workers need to be adequately briefed on the laws that prevail in countries where they work – many, many months before they go abroad. While they need to know their rights, they also need to know their obligations to the employer and the workplace as per contract.
They need to be advised and guided on avenues of self-employment or starting a small business on their return. They should have access to cheap, low cost or even interest free loans.
For years, groups like the Migrant Workers Centre (MSC) have been campaigning for voting rights for migrant workers – to be able to cast their vote overseas or through some other mechanism. All their efforts however have failed and there is little progress on this issue.
Migrant workers are a potent force and can make or break governments just like the Ceylon Workers Congress representing just 500,000 plantation workers. With some 1.5 million migrant workers and twice that number including dependents making up a vote base of over three million, this should be attractive enough for any political party to canvass for their rights and make them a powerful economic force. |
E-mail
