Malawi should protect its citizens
Revelations that Malawians working in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on a Malawi and UAE governments labour export deal are being subjected to poor working conditions have been met with mixed reactions. I spoke to labour law expert Mauya Msuku, who is also a lecturer at Chancellor College, to find out what labour export deals entail and why this is happening.
Q: Malawi Government is on a labour export deal with the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Can you explain to us, what such deals entail?
A: Behind the concept of labour export deals is the issue of labour migration. This is where people migrate from one country to another for purposes of employment. This is a common phenomenon such that even at International Labour Organisation (ILO) level, there are a number of conventions dealing with this. The challenge with labour migration is that it usually happens in an informal and unregulated manner, hence a number of conventions meant to protect labour migrants.
Labour deals such as the one at hand, therefore, are usually meant to regulate the labour migration phenomena. To the exporting country, there is a benefit of reduction in unemployment while to the receiving country, there is usually a benefit of relatively, cheap labour (though this may not be an absolute assertion).
Q: Looking at how Malawi and UAE have been handling the deal. What impression do you get?
A: An assessment of the Malawi and UAE deal can only be done if one has full information on the same which I don’t think I have. The only observation I can make, however, is that for such deals to be more effective and beneficial, they need institutional and policy backing which we do not seem to have in place now.
The major challenge with such deals, just as in many international bilateral agreements, is that while the arrangements are between governments, implementation, may be left to private institutions. There is, therefore, a question of monitoring. If a Malawian goes to a foreign country, and he is employed in a remote area by a private institution, how do you monitor compliance with governments agreed? That is why we need established institutions.
Q: There is a revelation that Malawians working in UAE are being exploited, living in dormitories and earning peanuts. They were promised 800 Dirham, but are earning 200 Dirham, a revelation that has angered government. In such circumstances, what should happen?
A: I will repeat myself here. The major problem seems to be lack of legal, institutional and policy framework in which the arrangement is to work. As indicated earlier on, labour importation, is usually for access to cheap labour. Even within Malawi, we have the concept of minimum wage. The reason we have that is because there should be some compelling force to see to it that people are fairly paid. We have officers specifically meant to enforce that. Now, if we can have those systems for domestic employees, what more with colleagues working outside the country?
Q: Government has threatened to cancel the deal. What advise can you give on this?
A: Government is duty-bound to protect its citizens wherever they may be. So, if government feels the deal is not serving the purpose, it can indeed terminate it. The question, however, is whether this has been brought to the attention of their counterparts. As said before, most of these may not be employed in government institutions. So, even the UAE government may not at least formally be aware of these developments.
Q: Do you think government was right to resort to the export deal as a way of reducing unemployment rate?
A: With increased levels of unemployment in the developing world, and with labour migration being an internationally recognised phenomenon, there is nothing wrong with such arrangements. All we need are systems to support such arrangements.
Q: Some human rights commentators say such employees should be compensated. Who should pay such compensations and how should it be done?
A: The question of compensation is a bit tricky. Mind you, in such arrangements, governments usually merely facilitate the labour movements. They are usually not privy to the employment arrangements. I do not believe, therefore, that by engaging in such facilitation, governments are taking responsibility over such employees. Compensation should ordinarily be pushed to those who employed the people. A lesson can be learnt from our friends who worked in South African mines. This is currently an issue which is in public domain.
Q: Have labour export deals worked anywhere in the world? What lessons can be drawn from the current Malawi/UAE deal?
A: Indeed, such arrangements have worked elsewhere. One of the countries considered an icon when it comes to regulation of labour exportation is Philippines. Philippines has a whole range of laws, institutions and policies which not only regulate but even monitor the performance of their nationals working outside. They have institutions that look into the welfare of such people. They even give awards to outstanding Filipinos working abroad on migrant workers day which falls on 7th June. They have put in place institutions and systems on how to identify such workers.
Q: Any last word?
A: On the face of it, there is nothing wrong with arrangements as the one in issue herein. However, we cannot send our citizens outside the country without putting in place systems to ensure their welfare. Things such as return arrangements in case a citizen wants to come back ought to be considered. We need institutions to monitor compliance with whatever is agreed between States. We need clear policies, laws and guidelines to ensure the safety and welfare our citizens. Otherwise, such arrangements have been used elsewhere to reduce unemployment.
