Roshan Sedai

While reports concerning the plight of Nepali migrant workers in Qatar were dominating media headlines around the world, its impact inside Nepal was negligible. As the Guardian started to bring to light the woes of Nepali migrants in a series, it created an upheaval among FIFA, rights groups and the Qatari government. Qatar, the hosts of World Cup 2022, was vehemently denounced for its inhumane treatment of migrant workers from all corners of the world. 

In Nepal, the government did not even think it necessary to speak out until some local media demanded its official statement. The story had already gotten old when the Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Qatar’s Ambassador to Nepal seeking clarifications. The political parties—who never tire of portraying themselves as messiahs of the poor—acted as if nothing had happened.

Nepal’s official reaction is not at all surprising. The simple answer as to why the government didn’t speak out is its reluctance to let the world know that the problem is far more serious than what appeared in the media. In other words, there was fear that widespread problems and irregularities inside its own system might be exposed.

Sadly, the ground reality is far worse than what appeared in the news reports. Nepal, according to authorities at the Tribhuvan International Airport, receives an average of three dead bodies a day, almost all of them from the Gulf and Malaysia. Last summer, the situation turned so appalling that the airport administration had to seek a hospital’s morgue after up to eight dead bodies started piling up each day.

What The Guardian and other media reported is the story of every Nepali neighbourhood. This has been an integral part of Nepal’s migratory experience for the last two decades. The gravity of the situation is better illuminated in internal reports from Nepal’s embassy in Riyadh, which reveals the death toll of Nepali workers since the establishment of the embassy in 1978—3,500 in Saudi Arabia alone. Records show that around 25 Nepalis die each month in the Gulf kingdom. Malaysia, the country’s largest work destination in terms of the size of workers, is gradually emerging as the largest graveyard with a monthly death toll of over 20 workers. Embassies’ own records show at least 2,100 Nepalis have already perished in Malaysia since 2003. What is troubling is not the sheer figure but the fact that many deaths resulted from avoidable causes like traffic accidents, workplace accidents, suicides and curable health defects.

Overseas employment has become so overpowering in Nepali society that one in every two households has at least one working member abroad. Remittance equals 25 percent of the nation’s GDP and around half a million workers are formally leaving their homes each year. But the government’s plans, policies and perception remain as they were two decades ago. The understaffed and scarcely resourced Department of Foreign Employment (DoFE) and the embassies at labour destinations; unmonitored manpower agencies, recruiting agents, pre-departure orientation centres and health institutions; Capital-centric services; and the unwillingness to use diplomatic efforts for the protection and promotion of workers rights through pro-worker labour pacts show just how committed Nepal is to the betterment of foreign employment sector.

There is no doubt that governments in the Gulf, with their existing neo-tribal forms of employment embedded in the Kafala system, harsh climatic conditions and inhumane treatment of workers, are primarily responsible for what befalls workers during their work tenure.

But blaming the labour destination alone is not going to work. The government, manpower agencies and workers should share the responsibility and do the needful to ensure and promote safe migration.

A major problem in the foreign employment sector is the discrepancy between the law and its proper implementation, along with the overtly centralised mechanism. No efforts to reform the foreign employment agencies will yield the desired outcome unless the plans and policies concentrate on the grassroots level. With neither the presence of the DoFE nor a district-level mechanism, prospective workers are exposed to the unfiltered influence of recruiting agencies and agents, the majority of whom are unauthorised.

Since relatives, villagers, friends and family members act as agents, they have the first and last say over every decision the migrant workers take. In the name of prompt service, both literate and illiterate workers are encouraged to purchase certificates instead of undergoing pre-departure orientation classes, training and health check-ups. The trend of using fake passports, falsifying age and hiding medical defects has also become commonplace. Agents and recruiting companies, through the influence of power and money, buy government officials and ministers in order to give validity to their unlawful endeavours. The mere fact that over three dozens DoFE officials and two labour ministers were found involved in corruption in the last year and a half only illustrates this point.

Most workers are charged higher fees than assigned by the government, even when the employers themselves fund the ticket and visa. By the time workers leave the country, the majority of them unknowingly spend the first six months of their salary in the migratory process.

Despite good intentions, stakeholders have repeatedly come up with disastrous, shortsighted solutions.

The decision to impose an age restriction on women and an over-emphasis on Capital-centric regulatory measures and mechanisms are just a few such examples.

The various government-formed recommendation panels in the past have suggested a 30-point suggestion from the Foreign Employment Improvement Committee and a 23-point direction from the National Vigilance Centre. Besides calling for more pro-worker programmes, the recommendations had in essence cited the need for greater coordination among the state, recruiting agencies and workers throughout the entire migration process. The Foreign Employment Act 2007, the recommendations said, was inadequate.

Coming back to the Guardian report, although FIFA 2022 seems to be the primary area of interest, there is little doubt that the extensive coverage will have a far-reaching impact on the lives of thousands of migrant workers in Qatar. Nepal should be able to cash in on this as an opportunity to press other labour destinations across the Gulf and Malaysia to be more accountable for the rights and welfare of its migrant workers. But more important is its own commitment to its citizens. Change, after all, should begin from within. The acceptance of Nepal’s past failures can be a point of departure.

Sedhai is a reporter with the Post.

Published on: 20 October 2013 | The Kathmandu Post