Change the blame game

The no-confidence motion that will be taken up in Parliament this week against Foreign Employment Promotion Minister Dilan Perera provides a telling context within which to discuss protection of migrant rights.

Parliament will on Tuesday debate a no-confidence motion on Perera, prompted by the execution in Saudi Arabia of Lankan housemaid Rizana Nafeek. The motion, signed by 14 UNP MPs, accuses the Minister of failing to extend meaningful support in any manner to Nafeek, who was executed in Saudi Arabia earlier this year after being convicted of killing an infant in her care.

Before being carried away by the blame game, it must be remembered that former Labour Minister Keheliya Rambukwella also had a part to play this the strand of events that led to the execution and as such should perhaps be held more responsible for failing to provide initial assistance when Nafeek was initially charged. This kneejerk reaction for political gain will provide little solace to over a million migrant workers that need greater support of an apathetic government. Among these challenges is a new law in Saudi Arabia that stipulates that a greater percentage of better paying jobs should be held by Saudi citizens. This will result in about 5,500 Sri Lankan workers being deported, according to Foreign Employment Bureau officials. Most of these will be Sri Lankans that have voided their initial contracts with employers, over unfair contracts, and have become employed elsewhere. There is little recourse for these people at present.



Workers continue to complain that they are short-changed by manpower agencies that advertise high salaries but fail to provide them. Many also live in terrible conditions, with some people forced to live crammed into rooms with 10 others. Even though the Government insists that problems will reduce if the quota of women is lessened, the challenges for male workers cannot be ignored. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) has consistently called for responsible action by countries of origin to reduce abusive practices and help migrant workers make better choices. Beyond educating migrant workers about unethical and exploitive practices, origin countries should enact legislation and regulations and enforce them to prevent such abuses from taking place and sanction those who have engaged in them.



The ILO insists that where the rights of migrant workers have been violated, all persons involved in the chain of their recruitment and employment should be legally accountable, to prevent workers from being left without any remedy. When such persons cross national borders themselves in committing violations against migrant workers, origin countries must cooperate with transit and destination countries to put a stop to their conduct.

Bilateral agreements with destination countries spelling out how responsibilities are to be shared can be a significant means of providing minimum standards and rights for a country’s citizens. Origin countries can negotiate for greater rights, particularly for less-skilled workers, which conform to international standards, with compliance guaranteed by the agreements.



Another effective means of intervention and protection by origin countries is to establish consular services with labour attaches and both male and female staff to whom migrant workers may come for assistance. This is particularly important in countries where a large number of their citizens work, such as the Middle East for Sri Lanka. This is all the more important since this region is has the bulk of unskilled and female workers, which are the two most vulnerable groups. Yet the Opposition is ignoring all these avenues and preferring to concentrate on one individual. While he may be at fault, punishing him will do nothing to better the lot of other migrant workers.