Ethics and migration
Rina Jimenez-David
Philippine Daily Inquirer
The United Nations Convention on The Rights of Migrant Workers and Their Families has been in existence since 1990 and entered into effect in 2003. But so far, only 75 states have signed the Convention, most of them countries of origin of migrant workers, including the Philippines.
“But even if a country, especially a country of destination, has not signed the Convention, it may have many laws and regulations and practical programs that can be used to protect migrant workers,” points out Esteban Conejos Jr., foreign undersecretary for Migrant Workers’ Affairs.
That is one goal of the Global Forum on Migrants and Development, a two-part international meet that unfolds next week at the Philippine International Convention Center. Organizers hope to come out at the end of the event with a listing and discussion of “best practices” that everyone involved—from governments to the workers themselves, from employers to recruiters—can adopt to ensure not only that workers are protected in foreign lands, but also that destination states are able to harness the labor and talents of migrants for development.
The Forum opens on Oct. 27 with a two-day conference among civil society groups, convened by the Ayala Foundation, to gather the thinking of the private sector, migrants’ groups and other concerned parties. The outcome documents from this meeting will then be channeled into the proceedings of the official meet, which opens Oct. 29, with government representatives participating.
One example of a “best practice” that Conejos cites is the opening of a “domestic workers’ desk” in a police station in Jeddah in Saudi Arabia, which by the way has yet to sign the Convention. The desk, which receives complaints of abuse or violation from domestics working for Saudi families, has made a big difference in the lives of Filipino domestic workers, says Conejos, and is an example of a “small” step resulting in lots of practical good.
* * *
Conejos knows whereof he speaks: In the three years since he joined the Department of Foreign Affairs, looking after the welfare of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) has been his main focus. When he took his post in 2006, says Conejos, there were 64 death penalty cases involving OFWs, ranging from murder charges against workers in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, to drugs-related cases for those in Malaysia and China.
Of these 64 cases, 24 have been commuted to life or lengthy imprisonment, of which 11 have since gone home. “We’re also monitoring the 40 cases still pending,” the undersecretary says, but pleads for understanding from the workers’ families, especially of the different legal and cultural systems in the countries where the incarcerated migrants are.
Governments in destination countries, Conejos reminds, should keep in mind that migrants and foreign workers have much to contribute to the host country. But to harness the talents of migrants, and for migrants to be able to contribute to development, “their rights must be protected,” presumably so that they could work without fear of being exploited or deported, and invest in both their host and home countries.
* * *
But for both “sending” and “receiving” countries to negotiate for the protection of workers, their representatives must come to the table as equals, respectful of the sovereignty and authority of both sides, and mindful that both sides of the discussion have something to gain from the arrangement.
This is the thinking underpinning the concept of “ethical recruitment,” especially of health workers from developing countries, whose departure for work in developed countries would have disastrous consequences for the health of the people they leave behind.
Former secretary of health Jaime Galvez Tan is seeking to address the problem. Tan’s paper on the healthcare diaspora, to remind you, was the very first study to call attention to the issue; and included in that paper were several suggestions to make the exchange fairer and mutually beneficial.
Recently, Tan was in discussions with officials of the Canadian provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, which have “expressed interest in working with the Philippines” as partners to ensure ethical recruitment through what Tan calls “win-win bilateral agreements.”
Among the suggested measures is the development of a “Trust Fund for Health Human Resources Development” in which the “importing” country provides scholarships and support for the “improvement of health care delivery services, training and education of local health workers in exchange for the money it saved by receiving already skilled and trained professionals.” For its part, says Tan, “the source country will ensure a steady cohort of qualified health professionals through ethical recruitment practices.”
* * *
Tan proposes setting up a Philippine-Canadian Fair Health Trade Partnership to implement three programs: Ethical Employment Education for both decision makers (school administrators, recruiters) and future health workers; a Circle of Excellence in nursing training and education; and Migration Watch, to take charge of monitoring of arrangements and working conditions of migrant health workers.
In a position paper, Tan states: “Labor migration need not always be a one-way ticket widening the gap between poor and rich countries. We must ensure ethical, fair, just and transparent agreements through win-win partnerships in the spirit of global solidarity.”
Perhaps this is the mindset that everyone involved in advocating for migrant rights should bring to the table, especially during the upcoming Global Forum, where countries, it is hoped, talk to each other as equals, each needing something the other has.
