Modern Slavery: A Fight, Not Yet Won

October 29, 2018/in ASEAN Notes/by aseansc

Photo by Lisa Kristine (https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/2110986/modern-slavery-and-american-photographer-who)

The term slavery may sound a little bit old, but in fact, slavery still exists in this era with a new term: modern slavery. The term modern slavery is an umbrella concept, capturing various form of exploitation that affects the vulnerable workers worldwide. According to World Slavery Index, modern slavery can be defined as the condition in which a person treats others as their property, so that the person’s (slave) freedom is seized and exploited for the benefit of the person who practices slavery; people can be hired and thrown away like goods.

Today, migrant workers have become an important factor Southeast Asia’s economy as countries increasingly relies on the availability of cheap labor. This condition has made an ideal environment for the practice of human trafficking in the region, which currently affects many industries such as fisheries, agriculture, construction and domestic work. Some major cases of modern slavery occurred in Thailand and Indonesia.

Thailand

An investigation by the Guardian back in 2014 exposed severe cases of modern slavery on Thai fishing boats. The seafood business goes into the supply sold by supermarkets in the US, UK and Europe. In 2015, the European Union enacted a “yellow card” on Thailand under its illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing framework, threatening to ban Thai fisheries imports if the government flopped to clean up its fishing industry, especially labor rights violations. The Thai government responded the threat with broad programs of reforms including new laws to regulate and improve working conditions for migrant fishermen.

However, unfortunately, it remains capitalized with human rights abuses. Report shows that migrant fishermen from all over ASEAN continue to be trafficked on to fishing boats, received physical abuse, experienced lack of food and are often unpaid for their work or paid less than the minimum wage.

Legal strengthening is one solution to counter the practices of modern slavery. In addition, resistance can be taken through ensuring that seafood vendors are responsible for ensuring the supply chain is free from rights abuse. Buyers and retailers have to comprehensively play their part to be smart customers and eventually break the chain; the lesser the demand, the lesser the supply. Supermarkets, buyers and retailers sourcing seafood from Thailand, have yet to bring transparency and accountability to their supply chains.

Indonesia

According to data from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and BNP2TKI, about 5 million Indonesian working abroad as migrant domestic workers, where the majority of them are women. The lack of employment in Indonesia has contributed as the driving factor on why many Indonesian choose to work abroad. In addition, the big amount of salary earned abroad rather than in Indonesia is also the reason for supporting this decision. This situation has then encouraged a number of Indonesians to become migrants, which later supported the occurrence of modern slavery practices.

One of the reasons why modern slavery is so high in migrant workers is the lack of safety assurance and standard work experience procedures that should be provided to them. This absence can ultimately expose Indonesian migrant workers to exploitation, both for working hours and salaries. In addition, this absence also paves way for sexual harassment and abuse toward female workers.

The presence of law that regulates the protection of migrant workers is vital to ensure the safety of migrant workers in the future. However, even though the law exists, it has not been implemented optimally. The recent case of torture of Indonesian migrant workers from NTT, Adelia Faso, is an evidence of weak legal functions regarding the protection of migrant workers in Indonesia and Malaysia.

In addition, this incident also illustrates the weakness of PJTKI in providing comprehensive pre-departure training to prospective migrant workers. For example, migrant workers who will go to Arabia only get limited knowledge about their work, not about the rights as workers, and aspects of the culture and character of the destination country. Whereas, the lack of understanding regarding the rights and obligations as workers may lead to poor performances and, often, the violation of rights and the occurrence of torture against them.

One of the ways to protect these “foreign exchange héroes” (pahlawan devisa) is to closely monitor and supervise the supply process of migrant workers on a regular basis. The government should ensure that prior to deployment, the migrant workers have to pass the proper training that includes all-around work and cultural education of recipient country, which is held by sending agencies. This precautionary measure also includes rigorous screening that will hold workers without complete and legal documents to go abroad.

This initial prevention effort also includes maximizing the role of relevant sending agents, where the government ensures that these agents have notified migrant workers of their rights and obligations. Therefore, pre-departure, government and relevant sending agents could ensure the mental and physical conditions of prospective workers must be 100% ready before departure.

Conclusion

The efforts to counter modern slavery practices in ASEAN is illustrated in The ASEAN Convention against Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (ACTIP). The Convention serves as a legal document that integrates the overall regulation for ASEAN’s efforts in opposing modern slavery, especially human trafficking have yet to obliterate modern slavery as a whole. Adopted at the 27th ASEAN Summit in November 2015, the Convention is considered as an imperative commitment for ASEAN to deliver more effective counter-trafficking efforts. The Convention supports the UN Protocol to Suppress, Prevent and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (UN TIP Protocol, 2000) and implemented its definition on trafficking – it became apparent that modern slavery is a fight not yet won. The roots of modern slavery can be traced to the limited knowledge and awareness of workers. Because those who are most vulnerable to the practice of human trafficking are people in rural areas in ASEAN. Indeed, more needs to be done to solve this problem; commitment has to be strengthen, and this issue needs to be socialized to the public more.

Raissa Almira is an intern at the ASEAN Studies Center, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada

Latest Articles

Public Lecture on “Navigating Contemporary Challenges: Indonesian Diplomacy in a Chanching Global Changes”September 15, 2024 - 8:54 am
Partnership Policy Review Kick Off – “Strengthening the ASEAN Charter: Review of Regional Mechanisms and Policy Recommendations”September 12, 2024 - 7:19 am
ASEAN Spice: The Connecting Culture of Southeast AsiansJune 1, 2024 - 3:49 am
RELIGION: BOON OR BANE FOR DEMOCRACY?December 20, 2023 - 12:32 am

Facebook

RELIGION: BOON OR BANE FOR DEMOCRACY?December 20, 2023 - 12:32 am
In December 2022, the Indonesian government passed a law that penalizes sex outside marriage. This is only one of the many changes in the criminal code that observers warn of the increasing conservatism in the country.

Indonesia houses the largest Muslim population in the world and is also a republic whose democratic experiences and milestones have been widely studied by scholars within and beyond the region. This makes Indonesia a compelling case for reflection on the nexus and tensions between religion and democracy. Is religion compatible with democracy? What opportunities and challenges does the “Islamic Renaissance” entail in the country? Democracy on Religion

Liberal democracy espouses secularism, the separation of church and state, and freedom of religion. In an “ideal” democratic system, the state must not endorse nor support any specific religion while guaranteeing the free exercise of religion among citizens. This is essential in a democracy for many reasons. Religious freedom is a crucial civil right that enhances citizens’ individuality and relations with others. It stops one religion from dominating society, hence promoting diversity and co-existence. At the same time, it prevents policies from being framed according to religious beliefs, which may result in discrimination and repression of fundamental human rights.

Religion and its Tensions with Democracy: The Case of Indonesia

This is particularly important for Indonesia. While the country is predominantly Muslim, Indonesia also has many ethnolinguistic groups with different cultures and practices. It is a challenge in itself to build one nation with an immensely heterogeneous society. The diversity in the country resulted in years of ethnic conflict and violence. Even a religious minority, the Ahmadiyya, faces intimidation and oppression in the exercise of their faith. Indonesia’s dilemma points to the longstanding debate in human rights discourse and practice – are human rights universal, or are they relative to culture and local customs? While I am more inclined to support the former, it is important to be aware and carefully consider the context of a country when designing human rights advocacy and interventions.

However imperfect, the democratization process in Indonesia has assisted in facilitating efforts for reconciliation and balancing competing interests in the country. Recently, the President stunned the world when he acknowledged past grave human rights abuses in the country, including an anti-communist purge in the ’60s and the arrest of democracy activists during the Suharto presidency.

Indonesia sits in between secularism and theocracy. The country’s fundamental law espouses Pancasila, which is the foundational political theory of Indonesia. Through its five principles, Indonesian society believes in one God and aspires to create a just and civilized humanity, unity, democracy, and social justice for all. This tells us that, by principle, Indonesia gives importance to pluralism and citizenship. Scholars and practitioners of the law also adopt legal pluralism and believe that different legal systems are complementary rather than contradictory. For example, community practices and customs are considered along with national and local regulations in settling disputes and conflicts at the village level.

However, in recent years, Indonesia has seen the expanding role of Islam in the country’s social and political life. Aside from Islam being a “source of ethical and cultural guidance”, many Islamic organizations have secured formal power, which allows them to easily introduce measures within the state apparatus that cement their own interests. Hardliner Islamic groups have also proliferated, and fundamentalist thought and practices are becoming more and more widespread. Islamic identity politics have also been evident since Widodo coalesced with conservative Islamic factions and appointed Amin, an influential Islamic figure, as his vice president. The new penal code tends to be more religious than secular. This has implications for Indonesia’s supposed secularism and diversity. How can the Indonesian government best represent the interests and aspirations of all?

As Indonesia continues to modernize and extend its economic and political ascendancy in the region, rapid changes in its social relations and dynamics are also expected. This demands a more careful look at the kind of laws and “social controls” that the government enforces. Suppose conservative forces are forwarding laws in the name of protecting tradition and keeping Indonesian values in check. In that case, it should not be at the expense of fundamental civil and political liberties, nor should it be to repress vulnerable groups even further, such as women, LGBT+, and ethnic communities. Admittedly, this is easier said than done. Hence, political representation must reflect the diversity and vibrance of Indonesian society. If only one group dominates political and policy discourse, it ultimately jeopardizes the general will.

When religion becomes the yardstick for crafting rules and policies, it creates biases, whether intended or not. Propositions that are credible and necessary but “contradictory” to a certain religion may be rejected simply because they do not fit the personal convictions of decision-makers. Integrating religion into politics usually leads to oppressive and harmful policymaking. Religion is also a form of heuristics or cognitive shortcut that devalues deliberation and discussion. Instead of scrutinizing issues, people may resort to using their religion as the sole basis for their position on a particular matter. Democracies ought to be deliberative and pluralistic.

Human rights activists and organizations in Indonesia have sounded the alarm on many changes in the criminal code that could stifle individual freedoms and lead to setbacks in the country’s democratic progress. Aside from banning sex outside marriage, the government also reinstated laws that criminalize insulting the President and other state officials and institutions. They also increased the punishment for blasphemy. These laws can be disproportionately used against individuals and groups with legitimate criticisms and concerns about the government. It may also render already marginalized communities even more vulnerable. Religion, Populism, and Repression

This trend is not only unique to Indonesia. Much of the world has seen the rise of “nationalist” movements, often within the pretext of religion and safeguarding culture. India’s Modi has exhibited Hindu nationalist tendencies, which have meant greater intolerance against the Muslim minority in the country. Myanmar’s Tatmadaw has weaponized Buddhism to rally support from the public and account for its atrocities.

The use of religion to justify repressive and oppressive regimes is apparent. Religion is an effective tool to unify a group of people and subject them to a specific set of beliefs and values, which may be highly prejudiced and absurd. Religion acts as a moral compass that defines what is right and what is wrong. Because religion is subjective, it can easily be manipulated to serve political objectives. Populists and autocrats can bastardize religion to create a public enemy, instill an “us vs them” mentality, and sow further polarization.

Failed democracies thrive out of fear, whether it is real or manufactured. Religion can be a potent force to ingrain this fear. This hysteria against change and modernization is easy to whip up when people already have preexisting beliefs. It is not too difficult to segregate people and label them as the “other”. When this distinction is entrenched, it is convenient to normalize discrimination and violence.

It is said that Indonesia is a model for “Moderate Islam” when compared to the Middle East; the “Indonesian way” can complement Western values and democracy. It also has the potential to correct Islamophobia and promote Islam as a religion of peace. On the other hand, if Indonesia cannot find its balance and condone fundamentalist and hardliner Islamic groups to flourish, Indonesia will certainly regress in its hard-won democratic gains.

Religion has inherent contradictions with democracy. Subscribing to a religion and structuring a supposedly diverse society using its tenets is monopolistic and can bring about intolerance. It is paramount for democracies to ensure that civil, political, and socioeconomic rights are not deprived based on religion and other forms of cleavages. The access and exercise of power should be as widely distributed as possible. Public office should not be limited to certain political clans or religious organizations. For instance, at the village level, cultural and socioeconomic elites must share power and administration with vulnerable and historically marginalized groups. There are more reasons and illustrative cases, present and past, to posit that religion is more of a bane than a boon to democracy. At the moment in world history when (dis)information is fast and instant, we must maintain vigilance in dealing with autocratic agendas in the guise of “respecting” values and tradition. It is easier to believe and conform than to reflect and deliberate. But democracy dies when we rely on shortcuts to define what is good for us. Democracy dies, slowly and deliberately, when we allow a few to sabotage our freedoms and liberties to increase their own. Demagogues and despots are usually cunning and do things “in the name of God”.

REFERENCES

Evans, M. S. (2014). Religion and political decision making. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 53(1), 145–163. http://doi:10.1111/jssr.12088

Evans, T. (2012). Separation of Mosque and State in Indonesia. Policy, 27(4), 35–39.

Głodek, A., & Grzywacz, A. (2020). Indonesia – between religion and democracy, Warsaw: Boym Institute. Retrieved from https://instytutboyma.org/en/indonesia-between-religion-and-democracy

Jaffrey, S. (2020). Is Indonesia Becoming a Two-Tier Democracy?, Washington D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Jamaluddin, M., Chen, H. & Watson, A. (2022). Indonesia bans sex outside marriage as parliament passes sweeping new criminal code, Jakarta: CNN.

Klinken, G. v. (2019). Living in a Sacred Cosmos: Indonesia and the Future of Islam. Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia, 175(1), 81–135. http://doi:10.1111/jssr.12088

McWilliams, E. (2018). Democracy in Indonesia: A Progress Report, Washington D.C.: The Foreign Service Journal.

Nagda, A. (2020). The Diplomat. [Online] Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2020/03/the-islamization-of-indonesias-foreign-policy/

Omelicheva, M. & Ahmed, R. (2018). Religion and politics: examining the impact of faith on political participation. Religion, State, and Society, 46(1), 4–25.

The World Factbook. (2023). Indonesia, s.l.: Central Intelligence Agency.

Wieringa, S. E. (2006). Islamization in Indonesia: Women Activists’ Discourses. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 32 (1), 40–27.

Short Biography:

Kay Conales is a student of the Asia Pacific-Master of Arts in Human Rights and Democratization of the Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies (IHRP) of Mahidol University (Thailand). She also studied in the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences (FISIPOL) of APMA’s partner-university Universitas Gadjah Mada (Indonesia). She can be reached through e-mail at ksconales@gmail.com.

Modern Slavery: A Fight, Not Yet Won

ASEAN STUDIES CENTER UGM

CONTACT US