Jagannath Adhikari

Even though three coffins with dead migrant workers land at the Tribhuvan Airport every day, The Guardian’s recent report on the death of a 16-year-old Nepali boy in Qatar drew the attention of many. The report spread like wildfire in the digital world and, as expected, many expressed their rage towards the working conditions in Qatar and towards all the unscrupulous agencies that play a role in putting migrants at risk.

The Guardian report exposes the dark side of Nepal’s remittance economy, whose bright side has always been highlighted in the media and taken for granted by the government. However, it has yet to be seen how the government, international communities and human rights protection agencies react and respond to such incidences.

Such an outpouring of emotion by the general public was also seen when the media reported on the death of Kani Sherpa in 1997. The government responded to this incident by banning women from migrating to the Gulf states and Malaysia. This led to women informally migrating, making them even more vulnerable. Reports estimate that as many as 200,000 women were working in the Gulf in 2010, despite Nepali women not being permitted to work there until that year.

It is the prime responsibility of the government to act immediately to improve the working conditions of Nepali workers in foreign countries in order to protect their life. At this stage, Nepal cannot afford to stop workers from migrating to foreign countries. Stopping the work migration would be another violation of human rights.

Labour-importing countries have a tendency to offer a dirty choice to migrant workers. To Nepali agencies, they would certainly say—of course, in diplomatic language—that they can take back their workers anytime if they do not want them to work in a given condition. They would continue by saying that they would hire workers from other countries in case Nepalis are not ok with the working conditions. As a matter of fact, employers have been playing one country against another in order to get cheap labour. Because of this, wage rates have been declining for migrant workers.

Nepal has acceded to a bilateral agreement with Qatar and there are provisions of regular monitoring of the working conditions of workers. Then, there are also provisions for joint meetings to sort out issues in relation to labour migration. These meetings could be the right forums for raising issues related to working conditions from time to time. But these agreements were signed without any action being taken afterwards. Not even the joint meetings have taken place. As Nepal could improve the welfare of its migrant workers through these meetings, it should be in its interest to hold them.

Collective bargaining from the workers’ side is one of the ways to solve problems when employers treat migrant workers badly and play one country against the other. This collective bargaining can be done if labour-supplying countries come together. As it is mainly South Asian countries that supply labour to the Gulf and it is their workers who are treated badly, they need to come together and negotiate as a group for better wages and better working conditions for their workers. They should at least come to a common understanding of how much their workers should earn, of the desired working conditions and safety measures for workers. South Asian countries have to support each other if these conditions are not met.

From the perspective of the South Asian countries, Saarc would be an appropriate platform to discuss issues related to migrant labour and to develop a common framework for it. With this framework, Saarc will have a stronger position to negotiate with the Gulf countries or with the Federation of Gulf States. This collective negotiation and action for the welfare of workers works better and can also minimise costs for a single country, whether it concerns dealing with Gulf States or rescuing workers when there are problems. I remember clearly that when there was a war in Lebanon and Nepal did not have an embassy there, some Nepali workers were rescued by Indian rescue teams. As these teams were already there, it was convenient for them to rescue Nepali workers. In a way, there will always be cooperative dividends if those matters which mutually affect all countries are dealt with through cooperative efforts.

The stories of migrant workers and the violations of their human rights should also be the concerns of international agencies, developed countries, human rights organisations, and, above all, UN agencies. In an age of globalisation, if these matters are not tackled by supra-national organisations, then the new world order will not be harmonious. If the 2022 World Cup is to be organised in a stadium smeared with the blood of 4,000 poor and helpless workers (as reported in The Guardian) and drenched in the tears of thousands of their family members, the moral credibility of the organisers, participating countries and players would surely be deteriorated.

Everyone gets emotional when any member of their community has to suffer from such a devastating fate. But to prevent, or rather, minimise such incidences, a nation needs to take prudent measures. We have seen in the past that emotional knee-jerk responses tend to boomerang. Our government needs to map out political and diplomatic possibilities to improve the working conditions of its workers. It needs to discuss this matter with other countries in South Asia to come up with concerted action. It needs to ask international human rights organisations to monitor the situation and exert pressure on the companies and countries abusing migrant workers’ rights. On the home front, problems of corruption and irregularities, which are crippling the foreign employment sector, need to be dealt with first. These are the basic conditions that expose innocent workers to the type of problems that The Guardian has made public.

Adhikari is a social scientist researching various aspects of development

Published on: 10 October 2013 | The Kathmandu Post