Faiza Mardzoeki

old articles: about John Howard and Indonesian Migrant Wokers

Howard dan Ancaman Demokrasi

Faiza Mardzoeki

Australia saat ini dipimpin oleh Perdana Menteri yang telah menang dalam pemilihan sebanyak empat kali. Dialah John Howard, seorang politisi yang sudah aktiv sejak muda di Partai Liberal, sebuah partai berhaluan kanan dan konservatif. John Howard satu-satunya politisi yang menang empat kali berturut-turut dalam pemilu sepanjang sejarah Australia. Bahkan saat ini John Howard menguasai suara mayoritas di parlemen, baik di Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat maupun di Senate. Dengan posisi mayoritas ini, nyaris kebijakan-kebijakan Howard yang diluncurkan selalu tercapai. Seperti ketika satu juta rakyat seluruh Australia turun ke jalan-jalan menolak pemerintah mendukung Amerika dalam melakukan invasi ke Irak, pada kenyataanya pemerintahan Howard justru menjadi salah satu “teman setia Amerika” dan yang rajin mengirim pasukannya ke Iraq.

Pada saat ini Howard kembali meluncurkan kebijakan yang tidak populer di mata masyarakat dan mendapat penolakan hingga memaksa sebagian rakyat Australia turun ke jalan lagi. Kebijakan baru ini terungkap dalam Anti Terrorism Bill (2005) dan IR Laws (Industrial Relation Law). Kedua kebijakan ini dianggap oleh sebagian masyarakat Australia sedang mengancam sendi kehidupan masyarakat sipil di Australia.

Howard’s Anti Terrorism Bill (2005)
Rancangan UU anti Teroris ini sedang diusulkan di Parlemen untuk di syahkan. Pasal-pasal yang dianggap bisa membahayakan kehidupan sipil antara lain bahwa melalui UU ini bisa menangkap orang yang “dicurigai” berkhianat kepada negara dan bisa dipakai untuk “mengamankan” siapaun dia yang mengajak atau mengeluarkan kata-kata atau pendapat yang menentang pemerintahan. Hal ini dipakai sebagai legitimasi pemerintah untuk menghindari serangan teroris. Belum lama ini, sebelum Rancangan UU ini disyahkan, polisi dan badan intelejen Australia telah melakukan upaya pengamanan dan penangkapan kepada sejumlah orang yang “dicurigai” sedang merencanakan tindakan terror. Aksi ini ditujukan ke pada sejumlah keluarga muslim di suburb Australia, di Melborune dan Sydney. Kemudian, sekitar tiga bulan yang lalu, seorang aktivis perdamaian dari Amerika, Scott Parkins, ditangkap di sebuah café di Melbourne dan ditahan selama empat hari kemudian dideportasi tanpa melalui proses tuduhan. Pada waktu itu Parkins akan berbiacara di sebuah seminar gerakan perdamaian di Amerika dan bagaimana perang di Iraq telah memberi untung bagi perusahaan-perusahaan besar Amerika.

Sampai sekarang Rancangan UU ini masih ditolak oleh masyarakat Australia, antara lain dari pimpinan gereja-geraja, para pengacara dan kelompok sipil lain. Setidaknya sudah ada dua kali demonstrasi menolak Rancangan UU ini.

Howard’s Industrial Laws (the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Bill 2005)

IR laws ini sedang diusulkan ke parlemen dan dikampanyekan secara besar-besaran oleh Howard melalui media-media besar Australia seperti Sydney Morning Herald. Pemerintahan Howard sudah membelanjakan puluhan juta dollar rakyat untuk berbagai iklan menkampanyekan kebijakannya. Apabila IR Laws ini sudah disyahkan menjadi produk UU, maka hampir seluruh hak-hak kaum buruh akan mengalami perubahan mundur dan semakin mempersulit posisi kalangan pekerja. Work Choices Bill 2005 diyakini oleh kalangan pekerja adalah sebuah hukum baru yang akan semakin mempersulit posisi tawar buruh dengan para pengusaha. Misalnya, dalam hukum baru itu disebutkan bahwa tidak ada lagi system negosiasi buruh yang diwakili serikatnya menghadapi para pengusaha. Program works choice ini mengusulkan agar diberlakukan system “individual negotiation”, yaitu calon pekerja yang bermasalah akan melakukan perundingan secara individu menghadapi pengusaha. Para pengusaha bisa memecat pekerja dengan tanpa memberi alasan. Selain itu hak tunjangan-tunjangan pekerja tidak akan diberikan berdasarkan perlindungan UU. Hak kunjungan serikat buruh ke tempat pekerja semakin dipersulit. Sejak diusulkan Work Choices Bill 2005 ini setidaknya ada sudah dua kali demonstrasi besar sejak bulan Juni lalu. Tanggal 15 November kemarin adalah demonstrasi terbesar sepanjang tahun 2005. ACTU (Australia Council Trade Union) mengakui sedikitnya 500 ribu orang turun ke jalan di seluruh Australia. Bahkan puluhan truk-truk memblokade jalan-jalan, terutama di sepanjang suburb Homebush, ketika melakukan protesnya.

Oposisi pura-pura?
Kelompok Oposisi di parlemen, yaitu Partai Buruh yang diketuai Kim Beazley, seorang mantan akademisi ahli pertahanan dan pernah jadi menteri pertahanan Australia mengantongi 45 persen suara di Parlemen. Dengan posisi ini, sangatlah sulit bagi Beazley untuk mengcounter kebijakan-kebijakan Howard. Kecuali kalau ada gerakan sipil yang luas. Namun, gerakan sipil atau ekstra parlementer sudah tidak diminati lagi oleh Partai Buruh. Saat ini Beazley rupanya lebih suka menunggu “ambil waktu’ pemilu mendatang untuk bisa memenangi pertarungan dengan Partai Liberal. Sangatlah sulit melihat Beazley sebagai opoisi Howard. Bagaikan Pepsi dan Coca-cola kalau kita mau mebandingkan. Dalam banyak hal Liberal dan Partai Buruh nyaris sama.

Sebagai oposisi, Partai Buruh setuju dengan Perang Iraq, dan terhadap Anti Terorism Bill 2005, pun tetap mengamini. Meskipun terlibat dalam demonstrasi menolak Howard’s IR Laws, Partai Buruh dibawah Beazley ini tidak secara tegas menolak Howard’s IR Law. Dalam demonstrasi kemarin, Beazley mengatakan di depan ribuan orang saat demonstrasi di Brisbane, seperti yang dilansir Sudney Morning Herald bahwa “ This is about the Americanisation of our industrial relation system”- Ini adalah Amerikanisasi system hubungan industri kita- . Si Beazly ini terlalu “pura-pura” menyampaikan sentimen anti Amerikanya. Hal ini sangat dibutuhkan guna meraih simpati masyarakat untuk mengalahkan Partai Liberal yang sudah menang empat kali berturut-turut. Partai Buruh memang berjanji apabila menang, pemilu mendatang, akan “merevisi” beberapa pasal Howard’s IR Laws. Tetapi Partai Buruh tidak mau menyatakan akan menolak kebijakan-kebijakan pokok seperti memperluas system negosiasi individual. Memang dalan sejarah pemerintahaan Australia adalah Partai Buruh itu sendiri yang memulai memperkenalkan system negosiasi individual ini.

Howard dengan kalemnya berkata bahwa meskipun ribuan buruh turun ke jalan, mereka akan tetap seperti biasa, ke pantai dan tetap ada pesta barbequ. Artinya tidak akan ada gejolak dan IR Law akan tetap mulus. Tetapi dengan turunnya ke jalan 500 ribu kaum buruh, dengan adanya penolakan dari seluruh pimpinan gereja dan banyak organisasi masyrakat, sudah mulai juga ada tanda-tanda popularitas John Howard mulai menurun. Dalam semua polling-polling Partau Buruh sudah mulai mengungguli Partai Liberalnya Howard, meskipun Howard tetap mengungguli Beazley secara pribadi. Akankah Partai Liberal dan Howard terus menurun dalam popularitas? Mungkin kartu mainnya Howard tinggal satu: apakah dia akan berhasil mentakut-nakuti rakyat Australia tentang adanya ancama riil dari pihak terroris?

Dengan demikian langkah-langkah Howard akan menemui jalan toll bebas hambatan. Tapi berakibat pada ancaman kehidupan demokrasi.

—————-

Examine the causes of Indonesian women working abroad and the weaknesses in the regulations protecting women migrant domestic workers

Faiza Mardzoeki

Since the middle of 1970s, the number of women in Indonesia recruited to work overseas has risen greatly. According to Komnas Perempuan (Indonesian National Commission on Violence against Women) the number of migrant workers in 2002 was 1,355,694. These workers are spread across the globe, concentrated particularly in Asia and the Middle East. The main reason pushing women in Indonesia to become migrant workers outside is poverty. However, poverty is only one factor. Other factors include: the increasing demand from the destination countries; Indonesian workers are relatively lower paid; cultural factors (the chance to go for the hajj pilgrimage); emergence of more recruitment agencies which actively promote and entice with the promise of big salaries; and, government policies which favor the business of exporting migrant workers. Meanwhile, there is still very limited protection of their rights. There are only in the ministry level decrees and these are more expressing the interests of migrant workers agencies rather than migrant workers. As a result, Indonesian migrant workers are in a very vulnerable position and need more protection. This essay explores the factors pushing women in Indonesia become migrant domestic workers and the weaknesses in the regulation protecting women.

The role of poverty as a factor in the growth of the number of Indonesian women migrant workers can be seen from the history of both internal and external migration in Indonesia, (especially during the new order period and up until now) which is will discussed bellow. The migration history is divided into three periods. The first was the colonial period. Cheap and massive labour was recruited to plantations outside of Java such as in Sumatra. The second period was the postcolonial era when Indonesia got independence from the Dutch in 1945. Later in this second period, (that is from 1956 to 1960) Indonesia, under president Sukarno focused on internal migration, called transmigration. The major program was to reduce the population from Java, which has the biggest population in Indonesia and move it to outside Java, such as Sumatra, Papua and Kalimantan.

The third period is the New Order period, beginning in 1965. Since the beginning of 1970s, the priority of president Soeharto’s policies was growth oriented development strategy with industrialization, which coincided with the oil boom (Komnas Perempuan&Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia, 2003, p.8). Meanwhile, to attract foreign investments, Soeharto’s government had created a program to promote cheap labour (Komnas Perempua & Solidaritas Perempuan CARAM Indonesia, 2002, p. 3-5). As a result, the agricultural sector was “abandoned” by the people and they moved to the industrial realm. The women who worked in the agricultural sector also lost their work and were grabbed by factories for cheap labour. However, in 1982, the oil price fell and affected the Indonesian economic situation. One of the dramatic effects of the economic devastation was massive unemployment (Dick, et al, p. 210).

In addition, the economic crisis, which hit Asia in mid 1997, also included Indonesia. The data from the National Socio-Economic Survey, held in February 1988 showed that employment in manufacturing had fallen by 13% and the number of poor people increased significantly. Also the inflation in mid 1998 hurt the poor because food prices rose more rapidly (Dick, et al, p. 239). Consequently, there are many people go abroad for work (including the massive number of women who work as maids). Currently more than 70% of Indonesian external migrant workers are women (Komnas Perempuan & Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia, 2003, p.7)

These women are spread across in many countries, particularly in Asia (Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan) and also the Middle East.
This 70% figure indicates that there is feminization of poverty with the result that many poor women are forced to go abroad to seek jobs (Komnas Perempuan and Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia, 2003, p. 31). These women are from 18 to 45 years old and they have to solve the problem of family’s poverty. Normally they come from very remote areas, such as from villages in outer provinces. Nowadays many migrant workers also come from urban areas as a result of the decreasing number of industries in Indonesia (Krisnawaty & Mardzoeki, 1999, p.7)

Many studies have shown that these women are very poor and lack a higher education. The average education is junior high school, even sometimes elementary school only. Their husband, children or parents burden these women with the responsibilities for the survival oh their families. Furthermore, there are plenty of opportunities for women especially in “the domestic sphere” or to work as maids – jobs that “only” women can do. Women are considered for these jobs because of so-called “comparative advantage” – they are paid cheaper wages than men; there is stereotyping that women have “nimble fingers” and also industry believes that women are only “the supplementary earners” (Wichterisch, 2000, p. 2).

Beside the main factor mentioned above, there is also other factor promoting this process. There are cultural factor that can push international migration processes. For example since 1980 until now, Saudi Arabia remains the largest destination country for migrant domestic workers for the reason that they hope they will get the chance to go for hajj pilgrimage (Komnas Perempuan and Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia, 2003, p.9).

Then, the increasing activities business by labor agencies. The agents are very aggressive promoting “ the big salaries” to the villages. Many brokers come to the villages to promote work abroad. The brokers do aggressively recruit abundant people especially women (Komnas Perempuan & Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indoensia 2003, p. 17).

People, who are tempted to go abroad, eventually must pay to the brokers’ 1.000.000 rupiah average. In spite of having no money, the brokers offer loans to them. In this process, they become trapped into debt by accumulating interest due to be paid later after they receive their salaries. After the dealings between brokers and the candidate migrant workers (including with the families), the brokers send them to the labour agencies for document’s administration process and training in particular work, especially house chores. Normally they have to wait three months or more. Furthermore, the agencies make an agreement with the destination agencies in order to look for their employer. Afterwards, the agency sends them to the destination agency when they find the employer (Komnas Perempuan and Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia, 2003, p.25)

It is clear that the major actors playing an important role in the industry of overseas migrant workers are agencies and businessmen (Tirtosudarmo, 2005, p.19)

Another major factor pushing women in Indonesia go abroad to seek job is the government policy after the 1997 economic crisis, which consciously encourages labour export. There are three Ministerial level decrees of legal instrument on migrant worker’s exist at the level of Ministerial decrees. First, Indonesian Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration’s Decrees on the management and protection of migrant workers, namely: Labour Ministerial Decree, No: 104A/Men/2002 on the Placement of Migrant Workers overseas. Second, The Labour Ministerial Decree No 157 year 2003 on Insurance. The last is the Directive of the Director General of Development and Placement of Overseas Migrant Workers No: KEP-321A/D P2TKLN/2002 on Technical Instruction for The Protection of Overseas Migrant Workers. There are many critics who say these regulations are more expressing the interests of recruitment agencies and business rather than protect women migrant workers. This is can be seen in two important clauses: Clause 10, which is appoints recruitment agencies as the representatives of migrant workers in insurance agreement and clause 11, which revises the tripartite to mediation between migrant workers and agencies forum. For mediation, the working unit in charge with placement of overseas migrant workers is appointed as mediator. However, there are no sanctions for recruitment agencies, which are not present in the mediation process (Komnas Perempuan and Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia, 2002, p.15-16)

However, in Indonesia, legal protection toward migrant workers is very weak and it does not address migrant workers rights. As result Indonesian migrant workers, especially women are in a very vulnerable position and need more protection. Evidence that there is vulnerable can be shown by some cases of violations, for example the testimonies from two women victims (who worked overseas as a maids).

First, is the testimony from Nirmala: “She (Employer, ed) then threw boiling water on me. One day she got upset while I was ironing. She said the clothes had not been properly ironed and slapped me. She took the iron from my hand and pressed it against my breast” (Nirmala Bonet in an interview with the BBC, Kuala Lumpur, 21 May 2004, www.thejakartapost.com). The employer was abusing Nirmala because the employer was not satisfied with Nirmala’s work. Migrant workers do not have bargaining position when they have a conflict with an employer.

Another anecdote, quoted from a letter from Sopiah, a migrant worker from West Java to an Indonesian agent who had dispatched her from Indonesia. She later died, falling from a third floor window in Beirut, Lebanon: “ We hear the cry of our people as they are beaten, the scream of the Indonesian people as they are tortured to their very heart and soul like animals, as if they were a thousand needles piercing our breast. You know, that today 4 November 1999, Teteh (A old sister, ed) Odah was tortured. I saw with my eyes the blood stream from the cuts on her lips, and saw too her swollen and black and blue cheeks” (Mardzoeki and Krisnawaty, 1999, p. 22). In this case, Sophia was a hostage and was tortured by agent when waiting for her employer.

Nirmala and Sophia were physically and psychologically abused and do not have work agreement directly with employers because agreements only occur among agencies.

The argument that women migrant workers are very vulnerable also can be shown from the numbers of physical and psychologically violation during work period. Kompas, the National daily newspaper in Indonesia reported that there were 2, 239, 565 cases involving Indonesian migrant workers that are 80% are maids who put their cases in many non-government organizations in Indonesia (Kopbbumi and Solidaritas Perempuan) during 2002. This included 33 deaths, 107 beatings and rapes, and 1 person under threat of capital punishment (Kompas, June 2, 2003). Two years later, Koppbumi and Solidaritas Perempua, non-government organizations, which are concerned to advovate migrant workers issues, reported that there are 118 women in gaols in Saudi Arabia acused of prostitution. 48% of these women have been accused of adultery. (Koppbumi, 2004)

In addition, there are also violations of labour rights such as working longer than 8 hours a day, heavy work burden, violation of contracts and no work safety. In Singapore, 50 women migrant workers fell from high-rise building between January 1999 and September 2001 and 38 % of these were accidents caused by unsafe working conditions (Komnas Perempuan&Solidaritas Perempuan, 2002, p. 27).

Furthermore, these women had been the target of violation when they return home, for instance injured caused of employer’s abuses and traumatic problem. The Central Police Hospital, which has been assigned as the referral hospital for sick and injured returnees coming through the main international airport in Jakarta, has documented a total 560 patients who are migrant worker returnees for the years 200 to 2002. All of them are women, and 80 % are treated because of some violent act, physical as well as psychological (Koppbumi, 2004)

Moreover, Irene Fernandes a director of Tenaganita, a women’s organisastion in Malasyia said that the large number from total of over 230.000 domestic workers is a reflection of not only abuse, but a structured, institutionalized system of employment that is exploitative (Tenaganita, May 2004).

The systematic abuse of Indonesian women migrant workers is a product of many factors that are mentioned above. They all represent of violations basic of human rights. The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women of 1993, article 3 says: “(a) The right to life; (b) The right to equality; (c) The right to liberty and security of person; (d) The right to equal protection under the law; (e) The right to be free from all forms of discriminations; (f) The right to highest standard attainable of physical and mental health; (g) The rights to just and favorable conditions of work; and (h) The right not to be subjected to torture, or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

For these reasons, there are urgently needed recommendations or solutions to solve or effectively respond to the violation of women migrant worker’s rights. One recommendation is bilateral and multilateral agreements between Indonesia and the destination countries. International laws are urgently needed to address the rights and dignity of all human being, women, men and children without any discrimination. This could happen if there was political will, both, in the destination and sending countries. Agreement is needed include the ratification of all states involved to the 1990 UN Convention on the Protection of migrant workers. It is also crucial that domestic service (maid) should be recognized as formal work. Domestic workers should have the equal legal protections as other workers. Finally, it is necessary to have laws of protection of Indonesian migrant worker’s rights.

To conclude, Indonesian women are forced to become migrant workers by many factors. The state systematically endorses which is can be seen in practice that the regulations are tend to favour agencies. The result, is there is an increasing number of women who go overseas to seek jobs with high risk and vulnerable to violations. In addition, the cultural factors solidly encourage people to go overseas especially to Saudi Arabia because of religion reasons. Because of this, there is urgently need the migrant worker’s law to protect their rights.

Glossary:
Komnas Perempuan – Komisi Nasional Perempuan (Indonesian National Commission on Violence against Women).
Solidaritas Perempuan Caram Indonesia (Indonesian Women’s Solidarity for Human Rights, National Indonesian Women Organization)
Koppbumi- Konsorsium Pembela Buruh Migran Indonesia (A Consortium of Indonesian Non Government Organizations to defend migrant workers Rights)
Tenaganita – Women Organization in Malaysia
UN Convention- United Nations Convention
CEDAW- The Convention on Eliminations of Discrimination Against Women

Bibliography:
CEDAW- The Convention on Eliminations of Discrimination against Women htpp://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw.htm.

Dick, H, Houben, V J.H, Linblad, J.T, & Wie, Thee Kian, The Emergence of a National Economy, An Economic History of Indonesia, 1800-2000, ASAA SouthEast Asia Publication Press in associate with KITLV Press, Leiden, 2002.

Indonesian country report to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrant, Kuala Lumpur 2002, Indonesian Migrant Domestic Workers: Systematic abuse at home and abroad, published by Komnas Perempuan (Indonesian National Commission on Violence against Women) & Solidaritas Perempuan, CARAM Indonesia, 2002.

Kompas (Indonesian daily newspaper), June 2, 2003

Kopbbumi 2004, Annual Report of Violation of migrant workers

(Nirmala Bonet in an interview with the BBC, Kuala Lumpur, 21 May 2004) www.thejakartapost.com

Mardzoeki, F & Krisnawaty, T, Saat kau berpangku tangan maka korban berjatuha,the Collection letters from Sopiah, published by Solidaritas Perempuan, Jakarta, 1999

Tirtosudarmo, R 2005, Cross-border migration in Indonesia: Inward looking policy, emerging non-state actor and The Nunukan tragedy, unpublished paper

A press statement, released by Tenaganita (Malaysian Women Organization), May 2004

Witchterich, C 2000, The Globalize women, Zed Books, London, New York

—————-

CONDITIONS AND POSITION OF INDONESIAN MIGRANT WORKERS

This paper was presented at Amnesty International Confrence,
Fremantle, Perth 2004
CONDITIONS AND POSITION OF INDONESIAN MIGRANT WORKERS

by: Faiza Mardzoeki[1]

“ we hear the cry of our people as they are beaten, the screams of the Indonesian people as they are tortured to their very heart and soul like animals, as if they were a thousand needles piercing our breast. You know that today is Wednesday 4 November, 1999, Teteh Odah was tortured. And I saw with my own eyes the blood stream from the cuts on her lips, and saw too her swollen and black and blue cheeks . . . Yeyet helped drag her from the chair to the floor … Sir, we are not animals, we do not wish to be treated like animals. (a quote from a letter by Sopiah, a migrant worker from Karawang in West Java to the Indonesian agent who had despatched her from Indonesia. She later died, falling from a third floor window in Beirrut, Lebanon, trying to escape from being imprisoned by an agent in Lebanon.)

“ .. that day, 7 November 1999, at about 6 am, Tan Sri (my boss) decided to stay at home and not leave for work. At the same time, his wife had to take her child to Singapore on some business. “Please, Child, get me a drink,” said Tan Sri. As his maid, of course I attended to his request. Soon after, I took a glass of water to his bedroom. Suddenly Tan Sri grabbed my arm and pulled me on to the bed. Like a starving lion, without saying as much as a by-your-leave, he tore off my clothes. he pinned me down so I could not move … “ (a quote from the testimony of Srini, a migrant worker from Wonosobo, Central Java, who was raped by her employer in Malaysia. The Consortium for the Defence of Indonesian Migrant Workers acted as advocate in this case in 2002.)

““ She then threw boiling water on me. One day she got upset while I was Ironing. She said the clothes had not been properly ironed and slapped me. She took the iron of my hand and pressed it against my breast” (Nirmala Bonet in an interview with the BBC, Kuala Lumpur, 21 May, 2004. Nirmala Bonet, 19, from Timor, Indonesia was tortured over months by her employer in Malaysia. She then succeeded in escaping. The case is now being handled by the Indonesian embassy as well as Indonesian and Malaysian non-government organisations.

These stories are not fiction but real examples of violence experienced by Indonesian women migrants working overseas. These are just three of the hundreds, in fact thousands, of such cases.

Poor women from the villages are part of the growing number of impoverished people in Indonesia. The lack of employment in the villages of Indonesia and the need for countries with more developed economies for unskilled labour has resulted in millions of poor Indonesian women gambling with their fate, particularly in Asia. I say “gambling” because they leave with minimal information and formal protections. These women are called TKW (Tenaga kerja Wanita – Female Labour) in Indonesia.

These women who seek work outside Indonesia usually work as maids. Others are forces to become sex workers, or work as plantation or factory labourers, or work in cleaning services. They find work in the categories of employment at the bottom of the heap, often called the 3 Ds work – Dirty, Difficult and Dangerous.

The process

The process of a working migrating to work overseas is more complex than that experienced in internal migration (urbanisation). It is not just a question of a kind of “natural” individual drive to seek to fulfil basic needs. It is also connected to various structural factors such as the impoverishment of different parts of the world, the weakness of international institutions, and forms of slavery in the international labour market, whether open and crude or disguised.

Governments play an important role in this system. The Indonesian government’s role is revealed through the policies it implements. The New Order government’s policy was first manifested in the Ministry of Labour regulation No 4/1970 on the mobilisation of labour for overseas. The government viewed this issue as having two aspects: one related providing opportunities for facilitating the trade in manpower services and the other related to guaranteeing the opportunity for people to find work, which is a responsibility of government. The manpower business side of things assumed the big portion of government attention as is proven by the continuos stream of new regulations regarding this aspect. This was not balanced by a similar attention paid to the aspect of protecting the rights of the women workers, especially as regards giving them adequate protection while overseas.

This neglect shows up in two areas. First, it can be seen in the results, the actual experiences of the women. Second, it shows in the absence of regulations protecting the workers. Domestic service as maids) is not recognised as work in the ‘formal sector’ and given legal protection. Indeed there are still no laws protecting migrant workers overseas in general. Indonesia has also not ratified the 1990 United Nations convention on the protection of migrant workers.

Indonesia did sign a Memorandum of Understanding with Malayisa on migrant workers in May, 2004 but it did not contain any provisions relating to domestic workers, i.e. maids. This is despite the fact that there are 160,000 Indonesian women working as maids in Malaysia, 23% of all Indonesian migrant workers listed as working in Malaysia as of June, 2002..

The trade in women workers

Since the 1980s there have been many reports in the media and by human rights groups and non-government organisations, including by KOPBUMI, Migrant Care, Solidaritas Perempuan and Tenaganita in Malaysia. They all report appalling conditions. Thousands, even millions, of these women have left for overseas with no health or work safety condition guarantees and not even with a guarantee of a job.

There is certainly plenty of evidence of how profitable it is for the agents operating in Indonesia. I have often travelled among the villages from where many of these women come, in West and East Java. At the very bottom of the ladder, the parents of prospective migrant workers or their parents have told me that they must pat at least Rp 500,000 per head. The agents operating at he village level will take the candidate workers to the local town, where they must another Rp50,000 changes hands. The agents in the town will then take the women to the agents who arrange the departure for overseas to whom they just pay between Rp 200,000 and 1 million rupiah. It is this final agent that will make the connection with another agent overseas.

The whole system operates very systematically and tidily.

This system delivers women to the female labour market in Malaysia, Singapore, Hongkong, the Middle East, Taiwan, Korea and the United States. There are about 4 million Indonesian overseas workers. 70% are women and 70% of these women work as maids.

Violence towards women migrant workers

Violence towards women migrant workers continues to grow. According to Wahyu Susilo from KOPBUMI, there were 2,239,565 cases involving Indonesian migrant workers[2]. This included 33 deaths, 107 beatings and rape and one person under threat of capital punishment, i.e. execution[3]. Just 3 years later, there were 99 maids who died from falling from high up in Singapore apartment buildings, There are 118 women in gaols in Saudi Arabia accused of prostitution according to KOPBUMI and Solidaritas Perempuan. 48% of these have been accused of adultery.

The Malaysian research and advocacy group, Tenaganita reported 50,000 cases of maids running away from their employers during 2003. According to Tenaganita: “This large number from a total of over 230,000 domestic workers is a reflection of not only abuse but a structured, institutionalised system of employment that is exploitative.”[4] In April 2004 we were startled by the report that there were 7 cases of maids in Singapore, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia under threat of execution after being charged with various things: mainly, killing their male employers. The research carried out by migrant worker groups all show that these workers were in very precarious situations, experiencing great violence, and were trying to defend themselves. Given the many reports of beatings, rape and attempted rape by employers, claims by maids that they were defending themselves must receive significant credence.

According to the Indonesian National Commission on Violence Towards Women there at least 20,000 women return to Indonesia every year suffering from some form of violence: physical, psychological or sexual. Typical cases include:

Ø In 2001, Imas, originally from Cianjur, was sent home from Saudia Arabia pregnant. She gave birth on the flight home, in the aircraft toilet. In a state of extreme stress and confusion, especially as nobody in her family knew of her pregnancy, she wrapped the baby in tissues and tried to flush it down the toilet. She was arrested on arrival in Jakarta for attempted murder of the baby. She was threatened with a jail sentence. At her trial she was assisted by the Solidaritas Perempuan group. After several expert witnesses were called, Imas was found not guilty. With Imas’s agreement t, the baby was later adopted.
Ø In 2001, an East Javanese woman, Boniyem was sent home dead. According to a letter from her employer, she killed herself. Solidaritas Perempouan demanded a full investigation, but none ever occurred.
Ø In May 2004 Sulastri fell from the20th floor of an apartment building in Singapore. In the same month, news emerged of the vicious torture of Nirmala Bonat by her female employer.
Ø Many workers experience robbery or even sexual attack after arrival at Jakarta airport. It should be noted that migrant workers are channelled through a separate terminal in Jakarta. This discriminative practice also makes them targets of violence and trickery, as there is little control in this area.
Ø These workers are also forced to work long and uncertain hours, low wages and no holidays while there passports and documents are held by their employers.

It is often very difficult to investigate the violence suffered by these women as it all takes place behind closed doors.

Of course, there is also a psychological suffering involved in all these experiences. many women experience great shame and can be shunned on return home to their village.

Some must suffer the additional burden of spending time on death row, even though they are sometimes found not guilty later on. This was the experience, for example, with the famous case of Nasiroh, who was raped by her employer but fought back. She was accused of murder. In Saudi Arabia the penalty is death by beheading. She was later freed after being found not guilty.

Violence and the violation of human rights

All these cases, including the cases of Nirmala Bonet, Nasiroh, Sopiah and thousands of others, represent a violation of basic human rights. They all are violations of the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women of 1993. Article 3 of this declaration guarantees: “(a) The right to life; (b) The right to equality; (c) The right to liberty and security of person; (d) The right to equal protection under the law; (e) The right to be free from all forms of discrimination; (f) The right to the highest standard attainable of physical and mental health; (g) The right to just and favourable conditions of work; and (h) The right not to be subjected to torture, or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

We can see that there are three actors involved in these violations:

Ø first, governments who issue the discriminative and exploitative regulations and allow the violence to continue
Ø second are the manpower agencies that more concerned with profit that protection of the workers
Ø third are the immediate employers of the maids who often exploit, humiliate and treat maids with extreme violence.

Recommendations.

It is clear that this trafficking in women brings suffering to many women: all forms of discrimination as well as violence and even death. There us an urgent need for governments to pass laws to provide the necessary protection. This will require, of course, the necessary political will.

Urgent actions include:

Ø the ratification of all states involved of the 1990 UN Convention on the protection of migrant workers. It is ironic that many countries that use or send many migrant workers, such as Indonesia, have not ratified the convention.
Ø domestic service (i.. employment as maids) must be recognised as formal work. Use of the term “informal sector” must be ended. Domestic workers must have the same legal protections as other workers.
Ø there must be bilateral and multilateral coordination in the implementation of such protection

An agenda for Amnesty International

1. There needs to be a campaign educating the community and raising the issues of the structural vulnerability of women migrant workers employed as domestic workers (maids). This can be combined with a campaign demanding that maids be granted all the protection which is their right under the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women.

2. there should be a campaign to ensure that these domestic workers have assistance to legal aid and an adequate legal defence when charged for acts against their employers

3. there should be a campaign to win justice for the real victims in these cases who are more often the migrant workers themselves, suffering under both structural injustice as well as acts of violence by their employers. There should be a campaign to demand the release of women imprisoned in Saudi Arabia for “adultery”, “looking at men” and other such crimes, while men guilty of violence against tjheir maids go free.

4. Maids threatened with the death sentence for killing their employers, often charged on the basis of statements from their employers, should be important cases used in Amnesty’s campaign against the death penalty.

[1] Faiza Mardzoeki has been an activist in the women’s rights movement since 1997 involved in campaigning for Indonesian migrant workers and projects to use art and culture to raise awareness on women’s rights issues. She is a member of the West Australian Branch Committee of Amnesty International. This presentation was ade as part of the programme of the Amnesty International Australian conference on violence against women in Perth, 4-6 June, 2004.

[3] Kompas, June 2, 2003.
[4] Press statement, Tenaganita, malaaysia, Irene Fernandes, May, 2004.

————————-

Malaysia and Indonesia both exploit workers
this article has published in The Jakarta Post

Faiza Mardzoeki,
Women’s Solidarity for Human Rights (Solidaritas Perempuan), Jakarta

Since Malaysia passed Immigration Act No. 1154 2002 in August, there has been a mass deportation of migrant workers from there. The new law applies to those workers not possessing legal documents and also to their employers. The new law imposes penalties of caning, fines as well as prison terms for both parties. Like an avalanche, the flight of fleeing workers has led to thousands being left stranded on the island of Nunukan, which lies on the border between neighboring Tawau and East Kalimantan.

Figures for the period up until August show that 350,000 people have passed through the island, with 70 deaths occurring among these workers and their families as a result of a delayed reaction from the Indonesian government.

Criticism and protests against the Malaysian government need to be stronger. But the Indonesian government is equally guilty of unjust and inhumane policies. It is false nationalism to oppose the policies of only one government.

Our government has been extremely slow in responding to the emergency situation, and even gives the impression of being unconcerned. The President apparently prefers to travel the world rather than visit her people who are suffering so much.

Mahathir’s government is meanwhile applying a double standard in handling the issue of Indonesian migrant workers. Most of these workers are in the construction or plantation industries, while the remainder are in domestic service. They are paid low wages and interviewed workers say they are constantly harassed by the police — but say they prefer to return because of even lower wages and less certainty in their own country. According to data from the Indonesian Consortium for the Defense of Migrant Workers (KOPBUMI), 700 Indonesian workers have been arrested and placed in detention camps, and 23 have been sentenced to caning.

The Malaysian government has unfairly accused Indonesian workers as being behind past riots and unrest in that country. This is in fact a form of discrimination toward Indonesian workers. The Malaysian government should also be prepared to investigate the repressive practices of its police, who use threats and violence in raids known as Operasi Pengenyahan (drive-out operations) and also extort migrants for money.

As it has often been noted, Malaysia’s prosperity would not have been possible without Indonesia’s workers. Its plantations, the nation’s pride — the Petronas Towers, its international airport and the Formula I racing circuit are all the result of the hard work of Indonesian migrant workers, many of whom suffered during the construction of these buildings.
The Indonesian and Malaysian governments have used, and abused, these migrant workers. For Indonesia, these workers reduce unemployment at home, while the government continues to be unable to create adequate employment for the rest of the country. The workers have become a major source of foreign exchange and contribute an average of Rp 23 billion per year to the economy. The Ministry of Manpower revealed there were 387,304 workers sent overseas last year.

At the same time, Malaysia needs these workers to carry out work in the “3D” category — dirty, dangerous and difficult — the type of work that locals are reluctant to be engaged in.
The mass deportations have provoked tension between both countries. Resolving these problems in the future requires an approach that goes beyond just fixing up documents.
The Indonesian government needs to learn to listen to its people. To date, the government has only looked upon migrant workers as commodities bringing in foreign exchange. The only regulations the government has produced are rules relating to those for labor placement.
The government needs to stop viewing these people as a commodity and see them as people with human rights that have to be protected. There should immediately be a new law extending this protection to Indonesian migrant workers. Indonesia needs to quickly ratify the United Nations Convention on the protection of Migrant Workers and their Families.
The Malaysian government needs to have their eyes opened to see that their police are also violating the human rights of these workers. They need to review their laws on these matters. They should respect the principles laid down in the international conventions on migrant workers.

Now is the time for these two governments to take these issues seriously. The two countries need each other. There needs to be a bilateral agreement that gives protection to the Indonesian migrant workers and it should be accompanied by a high level of labor diplomacy that is in the principles of justice.
These are the tasks ahead of Megawati and Mahathir. But perhaps this is all beyond them and someone else needs to take over?
printer friendly send to a friend

Wajah TKI kita = budak yang tergadaikan
Artikel ini pernah dimuat di Sinar Harapan

Oleh Faiza Mardzoeki

Nunukan, di Kalimantan Timur, di dekat perbatasan dengan Malaysia Timur, adalah sebuah pulau kecil, sebuah kabupaten sebenarnya. Tetapi bukan lagi sekedar kabupaten, sekarang sudah menjadi wilayah darurat rakyat terlantar dan memang terlantarkan.

Sejak bulan Maret sampai dengan bulan Agustus sudah ada 107,000 orang Indonesia, kaum buruh perkebunan dan konstruksi, tiba di kabupaten Nunukan datang dari Malaysia. Diantara 5-7 Agustus 47,506 orang tiba di pulau kecil itu. Ada pekerja yang kemudian pulang ke daerah asalanya, biasanya Indonesia Timor, ada juga yang berhasil kembali ke Malaysia. Pada waktu saya berada di sana, tanggal 11 – 16 Agustus, menurut sumber di SATGAS Penanggulungan TKI yang dibentuk oleh Pemda, ada paling sedikit 24 ribu orang yang masih tertahan di sana. Dan penduduk Nunukan sendiri hanya sekitar 30 ribu orang. Wilayah ini hanya menjadi Kabupaten pada tahun 2001. Fasiliitas-fasilitasnya masih sedikit. Sekarang kebupaten ini dengan hanya 30 ribu penduduk haris menanggung lebih dari 100 ribu orang terlantar selama enam bulan.

Pekerja-pekerja konstruksi dan perkebunan ini kembali ke Nunukan dalam kapal besar Angkatan Laut sesudah bekerja di Malaysia. Sebagian besar dari kaun pekerja ini kembali ke Nunukan di Indonesia membawa sekitar 150 ringgit (Rp337500) sebagi bekal menunggu proses pembuatan dokumen untuk kembali ke majikannya di Malaysia. Uang bekal ini merupakan pinjaman dari majikan atau Agency. Nanti uangnya akan dipotong dari upah mereka kalau sudah kembali di Malaysia. Mereka tiba sebagai budak tergadaikan.

Tiga ratus ribu rupiah biasanya habis dalam kurang dari seminggu. Sebagian besar dari pekerja-pekerja ini yang saya lihat terlantarkan dimana-mana, tidak ada penginapan. Mereka harus urus diri: tidur di gedung-gedung yang belum jadi, di pinggir jalan. Mereka menyebar di hampir semua celah untuk cari tempat tidur dan berlindung. Ada juga yang bisa dapat tempat di rumah penduduk. Banyak rumah penduduk, yang sudah sempit juga sebenarnya, berisi sepulah pendatang dari Malayisa, kadang-kadang lebih. Ada juga yang bisa tinggal di tenda-tenda barak yang disediakan – tetapi saya hanya lihat 10 tenda di seluruh Nunukan!

Agency-agency, yaitu makelar-makelar tenaga kerja, yang mendapat pekerjaan mengurus nasib mayoritas pekerja-pekerja ini. Para buruh ini, laki-laki yang banyak kurus kering, antre untuk mendapat makanan dua kali sehari. Ikan asin dan sayuran, setiap hali, tak pernah ganti. Inipun buruh harus berhutang lagi pada Agency-Agency.

Buruh-buruh ini semua pada mengeluh bahwa untuk menjamin makanan dan mengurus dokumen untuk kembali ke Malaysia hutang mereka pada Agency bisa membeludak sampai 1500 ringgit (Rp3,375,000). Nanti kalau berhasil kembali ke Malaysia melalui agency tersebut upahnya dipotong tiap bulan. Upah mereka di perkebunan atau konstruksi di Malaysia hanya upah budak juga: sekitar 6-8 ringgit. Untuk hidup layak di Malaysia membutuhkan sekitar 15 ringgit sebagai standar minim. Dengan gaji maksimum 8 ringgit per hari, kemudian dipotong untuk melunasi hutang ke Agency dan majikan, standar hidup nanti di Malaysia akan jatuh dibawah kehidupan budak.

Untuk mereka yang mau pulang ke daerah asalnya, mereka harus coba hidup dengan bekal Rp300 ribu sampai di desanya: di Flores, di Ambon, di Jawa atau Makassar.

Setiap celah yang bisa untuk berlindung bersisi manusia. Air yang sangat kurang: air minum maupun air mandi. Untuk mandi bayar Rp2,000 per orang pada wiraswasta pencari untung: untuk mebuang air bayar Rp1000. Untuk air minum tergantung pada pemberian dari Agency, pada waktu ambil ikan asin dan sayurnya. Di luar itu tidak ada air, keculai mampu beli air botol.

Tidak heran kemudian kalau penyakit mulai mewabah. Menurut dokter di PUSKESMAS Nunukan, Dr Edi, 55% dari semua orang yang lapor ke PUSKESMAS menderita infeksi saluran pernafasan atas. Penderita diarrea merupakan 18%; demam 15%,kemudian ada juga yang kena Malaria, disentri dan TBC. Menurut data PUSKESMAS, sampai dengan tanggal 15 Agustus, sudah 12 orang meninggal. Menurut Pak Vincentius, Ketua Kerukunan Umat Nusantenggara (KUN), ada 10 orang lagi yang juga meninggal karena sakit. Tentu saja dengan hanya satu PUSKESMAS dan satu POSKO Kesehatan untuk puluhan ribu orang, tidak heran juga kalau statistik penyalit dan kematian sebenarnya lebih daripada itu.

*

Diantar oleh sukarelawan KUN, saya berkunjung ke rumah penduduk, sebuah rumah kayu terdiri dua petak berisi satu keluarga, suami isteri dan empat anak, berumur dari dua bulan sampai empat tahun. Pak Blas, seorang buruh serabutan, memberi perlindungan pada 10 orang pekerja terbuang dari Malaysia. Keluarga ini yang juga mencari makanan untk 10 orang ini, sesuatu hal yang berat sekali untuk keluarga miskin ini. “Apa dapat bantuan dari Agency atau pemerintah?” saya tanyaakan pada Bu Blas. “Sama sekali tidak,” jawabnya, “tapi mau bagaimana lagi, ini kan sesama manusia, sesama orang Flores juga.”

Saya ngobrol dengan Pak Tomas, lelaki berumur 45 tahun, tetapi berwajah 80 tahunan, matanya menarawang, berbadan kurus, . “Saya sudah bekerja di Malaysia sejak tahun 1983. Tiba di sana tanpa bekal dan tanpa paspor. Kerja di perkebunan coklat, kemudian dipindahkan ke perkebunan kelapa sawit sampai saat saya dibuang.” Dia ceritera bahwa upahnya sering hanya sampai 7 ringgit, setengah dari kebutuhan minim untuk hidup layak. Pak Tomas ini, yang pumya isteri dan empat anak di Flores, juga jarang sempat kirim uang ke sana: “Sering habis,” dia mengeluh. Dia ceritera dia rindu sama isterinya, tetapi di Flores, katanya, tidak ada pekerjaan.

Pak Thomas masih menunggu kabar dari Agencynya apakah mereka akan urus supaya dia bisa kembali ke perkebunan sawit yang sudah menjadi tempat dia selama hampir 22 tahun. “Saya tanya terus kesitu, belum juga ada kabar.” Terlantarkan tanpa uang sama sekali; ditinggalkan dan didiamkan selama ini oleh Agency; nasibnya sama sekali tidak jelas.

*

Di daerah Sungai Bolong berlindung sekitar 10,000 manusia Indonesia: laki-laki, perempuan dan anak. 10 ribu pekerja terdeportasi ini berlindung dibawah tenda terpal diurus oleh agency P.T. Kaltim, atau dikenal dengan sebutan Penampungan Haji Ali. Tenda terpal ini dibangun di pinggir jalan raya di dekat sebuah pasar dimana orang mencoba survive dalam situasi sepadat-padatnya. Juah di belakang ada sekitar 12 WC di tutup terpal untuk melayani 10,000 orang. Sekali lagi bayar Rp1000 setiap kali berak.

Di tempat ini saya ketemu dengan Joko, 23 tahun tamatan SMA, berasal dari Solo. Dia juga ingin balik ke Malaysia untuk bekerja. Dia tadinya bekerja sebagai buruh kebon kelapa sawit sudah tiga tahun. Kalau Joko marah-marah: “Tolong suruh Ibu Mega kesini, lihat kondisi kami. Banyak yang sakit tidak diurus. Sudah ada yang meninggal.” Joko juga ceritera bahwa dia lebih senang bekerja di Indonesia. “Di Malaysia,” dia bilang, “saya tidak tenang, dikejar-kejar polisi, sekarang dibuang begitu saja.” Tetapi, dia mengeluh: “Di Indonesia tidak ada pekerjaan.”

“Saya ikut saja dengan rombongan besar teman-teman yang dibuang kesini. Tak ada uang sama sekali.” Joko juga sekarang nasibnya juga sudah tergadaikan pada P.T. Kaltim. Mengurus dokumen dan semua “pelayanan” di Penampungan Haji Ali juga menciptakan hutang juga buat Joko.

*

Salma, perempuan 31 tahun, lagi demam di Posko Kesehatan TKI, yang berletak juga dekat dengan PUSKESMAS. Matanya berair merah; badannya panas. Dia lagi antri untuk diperiksa doktor. Saya ajak dia ngobrol. Salma sebenarnya lahir di Sabah, Malaysia dari orang tua pekerja yang merantau ke perkebunan Sabah, berasal dari Jawa Timur. “Tak bisa jadi warganegara Malaysia,” katanya, “karena saya ‘Jawa Indon’. ‘Jawa Indon’ juga tak boleh sekolah lewat SD,” katanya. Pada akhirnya dia kerja di sebauh kedai di gaji 600 ringgit (Rp1,320,000) per bulan.

Salma disuruh “pulang” ke Nunukan oleh agencynya untuk urus paspor. Orangtuanya sudah punya dan tetap di Sabah. Tetapi tergadaikan juga si Salma karena kunjungannya ke Nunukan juga terbayar dengan berhutang ke Agency. Salama belum tahu jumlah hutangnya karena itu diurus antara agencdy dan majikannya di Malaysia.

*

Pemerintah cuek saja

Menurut Bapak Edi, staf Departemen Sosial yang dikirim ke Nunukan, Departemen Sosial sudah sediakan 1.3 milyard rupiah untuk pelayana sosial di Nunukan. Katanya Pak Edi baru 350 juta yang turun, yang sebagin besar untuk obat-obatan.

Memang saya bisa saksikan berjalannya POSKO Kesehatan, yang berisi hanya dua doktor untuk melayani puluhan ribu orang. PUSKESMAS yang juga kerja keras adalah PUSKESMAS Kabupaten yang juga melayani penduduk Nunukan sendiri.

Dimana lagi wujud dari respons pemerintahan? Seratus ribu lebih manusia warganegara Indonesia berbondong-bondong dibuang ke Nunukan dalam keadaan tergadaikan ke agency-agency dan majikan-majikan di Malaysia. Puluhan ribu orang ini mendarat di sebuah pulau berfasilitas sedikit dan hanya berpenduduk sekitar 30 ribu.

Ini jelas-jelas sebuah situasi darurat yang membutuhkan penanangan darurat juga. Dimana tim respons darurat yang bisa membangun perlindungan, memberi pelayanan kesehatan – dan tidak hanya satu dokter – bersama cepat-cepat mengurus dokumen-dokumen yang dibutuhkan pekerja-pekerja ini. Rakyat Indonesia ini, yang terpaksa mencari pekerjaan di luar ini, juga semakin tergadaikan sebagai budak dengan sisitem berhutang untuk membiayai pemulangannya, makanannya selama di Nunukan kemudian pengurusan dokumen. Semua ini seharusnya menjadi tanggung pemerintah Indonesia, kalau pemerintah Indonesia memang berprinsip tidak mau melihat warganegara menjadi budak tergadaikan.

Pengalaman kaum pekerja merantau yang diperbudakkan ini menunjukkan suatu hal yang jelas. Buat sebagain besar mereka – mereka yang berusaha kembali bekerja di Malaysia – penderitaan dan semakin berhutangnya mereka adalah akibat kegagalan politik luar negeri pemerintah Indonesia dan kebrutalan pemerintah Malaysia. Menagapa mereka harus berhutang ke Nunukan, hanya untuk kembali ke Malaysia lagi. Mengapa 23 orang harus mati – dan itu di Nunukan saja, bukan di tempat-tempat lain.

(Faiza Mardzoeki adalah Koordinator Divisi Pendidikan dan Pengorganisasian Solidaritas Perempuan.)