Integration or ritualism? A rights-based framework for migrant workers in ASEAN
Jorge V. Tigno, University of the Philippines — Diliman
Twenty months after the establishment of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Economic Community (ASEANEC) — a regional grouping of Southeast Asian countries aimed at furthering economic, political and security cooperation — concerns have been raised about whether the hype generated has fizzled out. One particular area of concern is protecting and promoting the rights of migrant workers. Although a framework exists in the form of the 2007 ASEAN Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers, there are still a lot of problematic areas to be worked out.
ASEAN accounts for nearly a tenth of total worldwide cross-border movements of migrant workers — a total of around ten million people, of whom almost seven million are working within the ASEAN states themselves. Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand are the major destinations for foreign workers, while Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Philippines and Viet Nam constitute the most important sources of migration flows in ASEAN. Movements within and from the sub-region are predominantly for purposes of employment, mostly in production process and low- to medium-skilled job categories and sectors (e.g. household servants, agricultural workers, construction and factory work etc.) In more than a few instances migrants work under harsh and exploitative conditions. A substantial proportion of the migrants are women.
The challenge to ASEAN is in harmonizing standards for protecting and promoting the rights of these types of migrants, especially in the receiving areas where resistance to more rights-based norms and conventions are strong. It is clearly the case that ASEAN has not managed cross-border labour mobility as well as it should, despite the existence of pertinent protocols. Much of the labour movement that takes place in the region is handled by private recruitment entities and brokers which can, at times, undermine efforts to protect and promote the rights of migrants. Moreover, critical gaps and divergences exist both in terms of institutional capacities, approaches and norms between member-states as regards upholding the rights of migrants, particularly between authorities in sending and receiving areas. Irregular movements persist and are growing in numbers. The vulnerabilities of migrants continue, despite the onset of the broad-based integration scheme envisioned by ASEAN.
Not all states have the capacity or the willingness to engage in rights promotion and protection, particularly when it involves foreigners — even when they’re close neighbours. Such migrant workers are a ready and cheap source of labour. This is one reason why there’s a high degree of uncertainty, ambiguity, or ad hocness found in the migration policies of states in Southeast Asia.
Any regional human rights framework agenda on labour mobility must include (a) a common guiding set of goals, principles, and norms regarding mobility, rights and development; and (b) a common set of rules that “dictate” the actions of its component members specific to where mobility is to take place, by whom, and for what purpose(s), including c) an effective system for specifying and administering sanctions for non-compliance. So far, ASEAN has only managed to fulfil one of these three conditions.
The ASEAN integration project is a largely state-centric approach to building a regional community. It will be difficult to establish the genuine building blocks for a regional human rights mechanism unless and until states are able to willingly accede to common norms and standards. As long as states resist any attempt to weaken, question or de-legitimize their capacity to determine who gets to enter, stay and leave their jurisdictions, it will be difficult to establish an effective migrant rights framework for the region. Ultimately, however, the “show must go on” and this explains the ritualistic move towards building a regional community (in name, at least).
Jorge Villamor Tigno is professor at the University of the Philippines in Diliman and is currently the chairperson of its Department of Political Science. He holds a doctoral degree in public administration from the same university. He is also the Secretary-General of the Philippine Migration Research Network (PMRN) and a member of the governing boards of the Social Weather Stations (SWS) and the Institute for Strategic and Development Studies (ISDS).
