by Shahanaaz Habib
Much to its dismay, Malaysia has found itself blacklisted in the US State Department 2009 Trafficking in Persons report. Its Tier 3 ranking indicates that Malaysia has just not done enough to combat human trafficking. US ambassador to Malaysia James Keith shares his views on the situation.
Q: Since the release of the US’ Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report 2009 that downgraded Malaysia to Tier 3, have the Malaysian authorities come to the US embassy to see what needs to be done?
A: They have. We have had a number of very good meetings with a range of Malaysian officials. It’s been the Americans, NGOs and Malaysian officials talking in the same room about the same issues. Off the top of my head, I’d say we have had half a dozen meetings or more at different levels with the Malaysian government. The atmosphere has been very good in terms of a desire to get to the facts, and deal on the basis of the facts, and move forward with a real sense of concern for the victims.
The Women, Family and Community Development Ministry has already established a shelter. There is a very real palpable sense that the Malaysian government has decided it really needs to do something. You can see that – from the words of the Foreign Minister highlighting the issues at the NAM summit to actions like the Malaysian authorities sitting down to talk about specific issues and the arrests announced just days ago. So we are seeing across the board a very clear and tangible sense that the Malaysian authorities want to use the anti-trafficking law in a way that is meaningful.
>But some of the language coming out of Malaysia has been to ask the US why the downgrade when the country has done a lot?
>It’s an evolving situation. Certainly, much of the information must have been available to the Malaysian authorities because they were able to take action and make the arrests. We would continue to share whatever information we can and do everything in our power to make this a partnership. Secretary of State (Hilary) Clinton made it clear when the announcement was made that our desire is to partner – to relieve the suffering of these victims.
>Have the authorities shown the political will to address trafficking of labour, particularly of migrant workers?
>In Malaysia, there are three areas we have been working on. We have a good track record of working with the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry on the sex side of it, and we’ll keep working on that. The ministry was kind enough to let me visit one of the shelters for women and one next to it for children. This is an area where we have established good foundation and I am very confident we will continue to build on that.
No doubt you are familiar with the Senate Foreign Committee’s report on allegations of officials’ complicity in the trafficking of refugees and this is related to the most recent arrests (of five senior Johor immigration officials for allegedly trafficking Myanmar refugees).
It is quite clear in this area too that the Malaysian authorities have decided that they have enough evidence to act and there is genuinely the kind of activity that deserves official scrutiny.
The third major area is labour. This is a lot more complicated. In Malaysia there are provisions for both trafficking as we define it –“victims who are coerced” and people who are smuggled – who are not victims but willing participants who evade and break the law – which is a very different set of problems. Both are captured in Malaysia’s anti-trafficking law and both are very serious problems that deserve serious attention. But the main one we are talking about is coercive trafficking of victims. This is an important distinction. They are victims and that’s why shelters are so important. They need to be removed from the criminal element and housed with other victims, not with criminals. So it’s been important for us to work through the complexity on the labour side. One thing we think is important is that shelters be established for men in connection with labour trafficking.
There is a serious problem associated with trafficking and men, women and children are potentially involved in labour trafficking either in agriculture or in factories. So it’s both in the countryside and an urban phenomenon. We have had good interaction with the police, Attorney-General’s chambers, the Foreign Ministry and other interested parties. And, of course, the NGOs are focusing on this area too.
> A shelter for trafficked men?
> If you are mixing criminals of different sorts, that’s one thing. But if you are mixing victims with criminals, that’s a mistake even from a fully rational point of view. What the police is trying to do is remove the victims from bad elements, including associations with those who trafficked them. If you mix the perpetrators and victims, that, of course, has a chilling effect on what the victims are willing to say. But if you can separate them in shelters, that gives you an opportunity not only to care for them – because they are not criminals – but also, before they return to their home countries, to get evidence or ensure you can get access to them over time so that they can collect evidence to prosecute the criminals who are responsible. So the shelters are an integral part. The Malaysian government is more than willing to recognise that and is talking about the creation of more shelters.
> But doesn’t this seem to be at a very surface level? So far only 141 victims have passed through the shelter (for women), which is a very small number.
> I don’t pretend to know the true dimensions of the problem. That is something we will find out as the Malaysian authorities tell us. But if the implication is that we need more shelters, that is a good conclusion to draw. From my perspective, we are farther along on the women and children’s side because we have been working at it together for longer. I just don’t know what precisely the plans are but it seems having shelters for men trafficked – which would be more on the labour side – but also more shelters for children is appropriate as part of the next step. I really do think the numbers (trafficked) are larger than the numbers of those in the shelters.
> Immigration officials were charged for human trafficking only after the TIP report was out. Is this a reaction to the Tier 3 status?
> You have to ask the Malaysian authorities about the timing. The Senate Foreign Committee report is something of a comment about globalisation. The first response lies with the Burmese authorities. They are the ones responsible for their citizens coming in from Thailand to Malaysia as refugees. Malaysia deserves credit for helping the UN process the refugees. There has been a long period of back and forth with the Malaysian government on this subject. I suspect the Malaysian authorities have had a long time to develop the information that came out. It did not develop over just several weeks. I have to leave it to the Malaysian authorities to reflect on the precise timing of the announcement. Regardless, this is a very welcome development. The Malaysian authorities deserve credit for taking on a serious problem in a serious way.
> Is there a time period for Malaysia to respond to the report?
> Hundred days (Oct 1) from the announcement, but we shouldn’t be focused on that. That’s a process on the American side but I wouldn’t put it as a timetable for Malaysia to respond. It is not a coercive tool from the Americans.
Malaysia is getting serious for its reasons – to protect its own interests and citizens. I think the investigations done and resources applied show a seriousness of purpose. Looking at the American process, there are annual reports that are put out and a review period in which we take a look at the decision, ramifications and after-effects. And there is an opportunity for us to review. It is a relatively short period of time and it is rare that there would be a change in a short period of time. What matters is not really what the American ranking is or timing for the next ranking but the situation on the ground and the extent to which it changes.
Many years ago, South Korea was in Tier 3. A year later they were in Tier 1 because they took on with absolute conviction a programme to reverse the situation that existed years ago. Obviously, we’d love to see Malaysia match the record and move very quickly not because of any American perspective but solely out of concern for the victims.
These are very serious issues we are talking about.
On the labour side, there is a process and it takes time for the Government and societies to work out. We are not looking so much at the tier system but at getting a dialogue or disccussion on these serious issues. That is what our partnership is based on – mutual interest and mutual respect – with the Malaysian authorities to change the situation on the ground so that trafficking is less of a problem not only here but in the region. This is an important issue for Asean to take up because it is an important regional issue. It starts in Burma (Myanmar) and spreads to other countries in Asean. But first and foremost, the Burmese government should take some responsibility for this.
> Are the other countries also in Tier 3 taking the report seriously? Some would say what’s the big deal about being in Tier 1, Tier 2 or 3?
> In some ways, I agree it is not about the tier system but the situation on the ground. But if you see the victims and talk to them – these are people whose lives are just shattered. Most of them have been completely sincere and honest in the way they got into this. They thought they were paying someone to help them in a legitimate way or were getting a legitimate job only to discover they have been cast into a personal hell. They are really shattered people who need help. It’s not about tiers and government. It’s about people in the end.
Certainly tradition, history and culture are bound up in this in many countries and some take the suffering of these victims more seriously than others. I am gratified to see the Malaysian authorities take the suffering of these victims so seriously.
The Women, Family and Community Development Ministry has already established a shelter. There is a very real palpable sense that the Malaysian government has decided it really needs to do something. You can see that – from the words of the Foreign Minister highlighting the issues at the NAM summit to actions like the Malaysian authorities sitting down to talk about specific issues and the arrests announced just days ago. So we are seeing across the board a very clear and tangible sense that the Malaysian authorities want to use the anti-trafficking law in a way that is meaningful.
>But some of the language coming out of Malaysia has been to ask the US why the downgrade when the country has done a lot?
>It’s an evolving situation. Certainly, much of the information must have been available to the Malaysian authorities because they were able to take action and make the arrests. We would continue to share whatever information we can and do everything in our power to make this a partnership. Secretary of State (Hilary) Clinton made it clear when the announcement was made that our desire is to partner – to relieve the suffering of these victims.
>Have the authorities shown the political will to address trafficking of labour, particularly of migrant workers?
>In Malaysia, there are three areas we have been working on. We have a good track record of working with the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry on the sex side of it, and we’ll keep working on that. The ministry was kind enough to let me visit one of the shelters for women and one next to it for children. This is an area where we have established good foundation and I am very confident we will continue to build on that.
No doubt you are familiar with the Senate Foreign Committee’s report on allegations of officials’ complicity in the trafficking of refugees and this is related to the most recent arrests (of five senior Johor immigration officials for allegedly trafficking Myanmar refugees).
It is quite clear in this area too that the Malaysian authorities have decided that they have enough evidence to act and there is genuinely the kind of activity that deserves official scrutiny.
The third major area is labour. This is a lot more complicated. In Malaysia there are provisions for both trafficking as we define it –“victims who are coerced” and people who are smuggled – who are not victims but willing participants who evade and break the law – which is a very different set of problems. Both are captured in Malaysia’s anti-trafficking law and both are very serious problems that deserve serious attention. But the main one we are talking about is coercive trafficking of victims. This is an important distinction. They are victims and that’s why shelters are so important. They need to be removed from the criminal element and housed with other victims, not with criminals. So it’s been important for us to work through the complexity on the labour side. One thing we think is important is that shelters be established for men in connection with labour trafficking.
There is a serious problem associated with trafficking and men, women and children are potentially involved in labour trafficking either in agriculture or in factories. So it’s both in the countryside and an urban phenomenon. We have had good interaction with the police, Attorney-General’s chambers, the Foreign Ministry and other interested parties. And, of course, the NGOs are focusing on this area too.
> A shelter for trafficked men?
> If you are mixing criminals of different sorts, that’s one thing. But if you are mixing victims with criminals, that’s a mistake even from a fully rational point of view. What the police is trying to do is remove the victims from bad elements, including associations with those who trafficked them. If you mix the perpetrators and victims, that, of course, has a chilling effect on what the victims are willing to say. But if you can separate them in shelters, that gives you an opportunity not only to care for them – because they are not criminals – but also, before they return to their home countries, to get evidence or ensure you can get access to them over time so that they can collect evidence to prosecute the criminals who are responsible. So the shelters are an integral part. The Malaysian government is more than willing to recognise that and is talking about the creation of more shelters.
> But doesn’t this seem to be at a very surface level? So far only 141 victims have passed through the shelter (for women), which is a very small number.
> I don’t pretend to know the true dimensions of the problem. That is something we will find out as the Malaysian authorities tell us. But if the implication is that we need more shelters, that is a good conclusion to draw. From my perspective, we are farther along on the women and children’s side because we have been working at it together for longer. I just don’t know what precisely the plans are but it seems having shelters for men trafficked – which would be more on the labour side – but also more shelters for children is appropriate as part of the next step. I really do think the numbers (trafficked) are larger than the numbers of those in the shelters.
> Immigration officials were charged for human trafficking only after the TIP report was out. Is this a reaction to the Tier 3 status?
> You have to ask the Malaysian authorities about the timing. The Senate Foreign Committee report is something of a comment about globalisation. The first response lies with the Burmese authorities. They are the ones responsible for their citizens coming in from Thailand to Malaysia as refugees. Malaysia deserves credit for helping the UN process the refugees. There has been a long period of back and forth with the Malaysian government on this subject. I suspect the Malaysian authorities have had a long time to develop the information that came out. It did not develop over just several weeks. I have to leave it to the Malaysian authorities to reflect on the precise timing of the announcement. Regardless, this is a very welcome development. The Malaysian authorities deserve credit for taking on a serious problem in a serious way.
> Is there a time period for Malaysia to respond to the report?
> Hundred days (Oct 1) from the announcement, but we shouldn’t be focused on that. That’s a process on the American side but I wouldn’t put it as a timetable for Malaysia to respond. It is not a coercive tool from the Americans.
Malaysia is getting serious for its reasons – to protect its own interests and citizens. I think the investigations done and resources applied show a seriousness of purpose. Looking at the American process, there are annual reports that are put out and a review period in which we take a look at the decision, ramifications and after-effects. And there is an opportunity for us to review. It is a relatively short period of time and it is rare that there would be a change in a short period of time. What matters is not really what the American ranking is or timing for the next ranking but the situation on the ground and the extent to which it changes.
Many years ago, South Korea was in Tier 3. A year later they were in Tier 1 because they took on with absolute conviction a programme to reverse the situation that existed years ago. Obviously, we’d love to see Malaysia match the record and move very quickly not because of any American perspective but solely out of concern for the victims.
These are very serious issues we are talking about.
On the labour side, there is a process and it takes time for the Government and societies to work out. We are not looking so much at the tier system but at getting a dialogue or disccussion on these serious issues. That is what our partnership is based on – mutual interest and mutual respect – with the Malaysian authorities to change the situation on the ground so that trafficking is less of a problem not only here but in the region. This is an important issue for Asean to take up because it is an important regional issue. It starts in Burma (Myanmar) and spreads to other countries in Asean. But first and foremost, the Burmese government should take some responsibility for this.
> Are the other countries also in Tier 3 taking the report seriously? Some would say what’s the big deal about being in Tier 1, Tier 2 or 3?
> In some ways, I agree it is not about the tier system but the situation on the ground. But if you see the victims and talk to them – these are people whose lives are just shattered. Most of them have been completely sincere and honest in the way they got into this. They thought they were paying someone to help them in a legitimate way or were getting a legitimate job only to discover they have been cast into a personal hell. They are really shattered people who need help. It’s not about tiers and government. It’s about people in the end.
Certainly tradition, history and culture are bound up in this in many countries and some take the suffering of these victims more seriously than others. I am gratified to see the Malaysian authorities take the suffering of these victims so seriously.
No comments:
Post a Comment