MOM has seen the report on forced labour in the migrant domestic worker (MDW) sector by the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (HOME) and Hong Kong-based anti-human trafficking organisation Liberty Shared, says HOME Executive Director Sheena Kaur.

The report illustrates the reprehensible abuses that MDWs are forced to endure here in Singapore. It highlights multiple case studies in which migrant domestic workers face abuses such as overwork, food deprivation, confinement, isolation and having their salary withheld by employers and agents.

But beyond just the abuses committed by employers and agencies, the report also highlights the inadequate legal protection available to this vulnerable group and how authorities are reluctant to pursue or investigate complaints by MDWs when there no evident physical abuse.

Ms Kaur said that the report has been shared with the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and a discussion on the report was held with MOM and HOME. Ms Kaur, together with Stephanie Chok, Research & Advocacy Manager at HOME and author of report met with MOM officers and had a ‘great discussion’ with MOM with ‘healthy disagreements’, Ms Kaur said that it was a “great starting point for more collaborative discussions with MOM in the coming months”.

That’s not to say the meeting was not also ‘deeply distressing’.

Ms Kaur noted that the MOM officers questioned the case studies which HOME cited in their report, asking if the cases had been verified with MOM and how the claims made by the MDWs were substantiated. Sheena added that MOM kept going back to individual claims of forced labour. The officers kept asking questions like, ‘did she tell the employer she didn’t have enough food? Did she tell the employer she wanted to leave the house? Maybe she wanted to stay without salary for 8 months?’

Sheena said one officer even asked if the MDW who had no rest days for 10 years and had her salary withheld for 10 years consented to those conditions when she first started working here. MOM said they ‘don’t know enough to comment’.

The response from MOM is quite startling. When confronted with cases of severe abuses and forced labour within the Republic, MOM officers seem stubbornly obtuse, preferring to push the blame back onto the MDWs and ignore completely the lack of legal protection afforded to this vulnerable group.

Ms Kaur said it well: “When government officers say that, it’s not encouraging”.

HOME was also told that there haven’t been any cases serious enough to warrant prosecution under the human trafficking legislation or the Penal Code. Clearly, as HOME has reiterated in there report, the current Employment of Foreign Manpower Act is inadequate and does not provide clear protections to MDWs. This, MOM agreed with. There was at least a discussion of looking at how they can look at forced labour as a whole and not just individual instances of abuse that MOM cannot act on because the laws are too vague.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Racist remark by Fandi Ahmad?

National interim football coach Fandi Ahmad and the Football Association of Singapore…

提醒狮城签署身心障碍者权利公约 人权律师吁对患精神障碍毒骡“刀下留人”

“难道说你可以吊死一位已经被精神科医师判定有精神障碍、且智商只有69的囚犯?我们认为不能,因这有违国际法乃至新加坡的法律。” 马来西亚捍卫自由律师团呼吁新加坡当局,勿处决患有精神疾病的马籍毒品走私者纳嘉(Nagaenthran s/o K Dharmalingam)。 昨日,新加坡人权律师拉维,在吉隆坡与马国律师苏仁德兰等人,召开记者会,并提醒新加坡也有签署联合国身心障碍者权利公约(CPRD),也意味着任何对于身心障碍者不人道的惩处都应被禁止。 他们也认为,若新加坡政府仍执意处决纳嘉,形同野蛮行为。 拉维在记者会上指出,在《滥用毒品法令》33B(3)(b)条文中,裁定精神障碍豁免于刑责的门槛很高,但在联合高CPRD公约下,纳嘉有很多方面都符合条件。 在2013年,新加坡毒品法令修法,让毒骡犯只有在极有限的条件下才能逃过死刑,例如嫌犯需取得公共检察官(PP)的实质援助证书(certificate of substantive assistance),或者能证明在犯罪时经受精神异常。…

众筹两万元担保金 田柳金诉讼入禀上诉庭

曾卷入与国大诉讼持久战的田柳金(Jeanne-Marie Ten 译音),近期有意再入禀上诉庭,上诉此前高庭对其诉讼的判决。但首先她必须先支付高达两万元的担保金(security for costs)。 她目前正在网络平台发起众筹,向网民解释其诉讼来龙去脉,并吁请网民支持。她说,她必须在本月22日筹到两万元,并在26日提呈上诉通知,否则诉讼将不受理。 “据我所知,不论是英国还是马来西亚法庭,都没有所谓提成担保金的要求,但遗憾的是,这就是新加坡当前的处境。”她也非议如果在上诉陈情前还有先支付一笔费用,那么法律中保障国人有上诉的权益之意义何在? 2018年7月,高庭驳回田柳金起诉国大疏忽、违反合约、滥用职权及威胁的官司,指田没足够凭据证明指控。 但田柳金坚信,她有理由再把高庭裁决入禀到上诉庭,“在去年的书面判决,其实高庭也指国大也有不当之处”,但她认为尽管有大量文件证据,惟高庭并没有为她被开除和职涯被毁掉,要国大负起责任。 田柳金过去曾是国大设计与环境学院的硕士生,2002年入学。不过她指其导师于2004年利用她的学术研究成果,为一项个人学术作业申请津贴,尔后获教育部八万元津贴。但是之后导师拒绝在该报告中加入田的名字。 担心学术职涯受影响,当时田柳金也曾要求换导师,不过她指责校方站在导师一方,几经投诉都不得要领,她投诉到副教务长后,校方才召开调查委员会调查此事。 田柳金在2005年2月完成论文,但她表示数月后国大开出让田毕业的新条件:必须接受大学对于导师的处置。而田柳金的准硕士资格在2006年9月被剥夺。…