Sanjay Sharma

The bastion of Nepali migrant labour has shifted from India to the Middle East and Gulf countries of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Most women migrants, relatively less educated and unskilled, migrate to the Gulf primarily as domestic workers in the informal work sector. Besides the financial security of earning one’s keep, migration provides women with recognition as economic agents who support families back home with remittances.

With few opportunities for work back home, migration strengthens their confidence and makes them economically independent. However, the informal work sector comes with great risk of exploitation and abuse. Following a series of cases of victimisation and abuse in the media, the Government of Nepal, on August 9, imposed a ban on women under the age of 30 from travelling to the Gulf for domestic work. Justifying the ban, a government spokesperson said, “Young female workers are reported to have been sexually and psychologically exploited in Gulf countries; so the Cabinet decided to set an age bar for women migrant workers going to the Gulf.”

A similar move had previously been taken in 1998, following a Nepali housemaid’s suicide in Kuwait. The ban persisted until 2003 when it was partially lifted and women were once again allowed to go abroad to work, although only in organised sectors. The ban was eventually removed in 2010.

The primary reason why women working in the Gulf are victimised is because of the Kafala system that prevails in most Gulf countries. Under this sponsorship system, the migrant domestic workers’ complete liability lies with the employers, giving them full authority over workers. Because these migrants work in the informal sector, domestic workers do not come under any of the Gulf’s labour rights, as such rights are only applicable to formal sector workers. Therefore, because of the Kafala system, laws formulated by the destination countries for workers’ protection are void, leaving migrant domestic workers vulnerable to abuse. There are no proper working hours, no properly defined work and the workers might have to engage in activities to ‘entertain’ their employers.

Consequently, stories of physical, sexual and psychological abuses against women migrant workers in the Gulf countries are frequent and widespread. The government rationalised that with the ban, the problem of young Nepali women getting abused would go away. However, reality is not that simple. Despite bans on mobility time and again, history shows that Nepalis have always been a mobile population and no ‘ban’ has actually restricted them. For example, the 1991 census shows that 394 Nepali women were already in Gulf countries. This was a time when international migration was ‘discouraged’ by the Panchayati government, was limited to India and recruitment into foreign armies and was considered primarily a masculine phenomenon.

Similarly, according to the 2001 census, 2,031 women were in Gulf countries, despite the ban on women going abroad for foreign employment. Likewise, gender-based enumeration of migrants by the Ministry of Labour shows a clear increase in the number of women receiving final labour approval for work in Gulf countries. In the fiscal year 2006/07 (when the ministry started keeping gender based records of final labour permits issued to aspiring migrants), the number of women receiving going to the Gulf was just 85; this escalated to 1,433 in the fiscal year 2007/08, to 2,491 in 2008/09, 5,561 in 2009/10, 8,438 in 2010/11 and to a whooping 19,078 in 2011/12.

This drastic increase was partly due to the fact that the previous partial ban was fully lifted in 2010. These numbers only account for women going abroad through legal channels. It is estimated that more than 200,000 Nepali women are working illegally in the Gulf countries, most of whom went there before 2010, when the ‘partial ban’ against women migrants existed. Most of these women reached their destinations through Indian airports or on tourist visas through the national airport or the popular ‘setting’ phenomena that is regulated by employment agents at the national airport.

Therefore, no matter how strict the ban, as long as illegal channels remain unmonitored and uncontrolled, migrants will use these channels to reach the ‘banned’ destinations. As the demand for domestic workers in the Gulf remains high and most less-educated and unskilled women workers under 30 find no other work that suits them, they will continue to work as domestic workers. Therefore, rather than imposing a ban, the government should recognise women migrants’ contribution to the economy and try to make the destinations safer. It should realise the fact that foreign employment is providing them opportunities to becoming independent when such opportunities inside the country are severely lacking.

Moreover, it should immediately collaborate with the governments of other labour outsourcing countries like the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh and hold inter-governmental talks with the authorities of the destination countries on issues like the eradication of the Kafala system and bringing domestic workers under labour laws. Strengthening diplomatic missions working abroad could be another effective measure. Rather than trying to stay untouched by imposing a ban and expecting a default solution to problems, the government should take responsibility towards women migrants and assure their safety.

Whither state ownership? It is estimated that more than 200,000 Nepali women are working illegally in the Gulf countries

Published on: 6 November 2012 | The Kathmandu Post