Thailand Must End Its Own Rohingya Atrocity

Shop High-Quality Music Equipment from Monoprice at Walmart.com!

This article is part of “Southeast Asia: Refugees in Crisis,” an ongoing series by The Diplomat for summer and fall 2015 featuring exclusive articles from scholars and practitioners tackling Southeast Asia’s ongoing refugee crisis. All articles in the series can be found here.

In May 2015, gruesome mass graves were unearthed in southern Thailand, revealing scores of bodies belonging to mostly Rohingya refugees who had been victimized by human traffickers. The discovery placed Thailand under a global spotlight exactly at the time when the country was seeking to be upgraded by the United States in terms of its handling of human trafficking.

$5 DVD's at Second Spin Offer Ends Nov 13 or while supplies last

Seeking to distance itself from any guilt, the ruling regime charged at least 85 persons with complicity in the scandal, including Army General Manas Kongpaen. Thailand also agreed to offer humanitarian assistance to Rohingya refugees and convened a regional conference on Rohingya and Bangladeshi migrants, which indirectly blamed Myanmar. Though Myanmar bears primary responsibility for the Rohingya crisis, Thailand’s own deplorable treatment of the Rohingya must immediately come to an end. The fact remains: the line between security officials and human traffickers in Thailand has become increasingly blurred. And Thailand has yet to be held accountable.

The Rohingya are a Muslim people of southwestern Myanmar, though neither Myanmar state authorities nor most Burmese accept their right to legally exist as citizens. The Burmese military practiced ethnic cleansing of Rohingya in 1978, 1992, and 2012-2013. Rohingya have also suffered from violent attacks by Buddhist Burmese nationalists and suffer discrimination throughout Myanmar.

Waves of Rohingya have fled to Bangladesh. But by 2006, Bangladesh was overcrowded with refugees and many Rohingya decided to go to Malaysia instead. Doing so meant transiting through Thailand. Getting through Thai territory by land or water was difficult. First, human traffickers which brought most Rohingya through Thailand, were exploitative. Second, there were numerous health challenges. Third, Thailand’s military has been waging a heightened war against a Malay-Muslim insurgency in far southern Thailand, the very area Rohingya needed to transit to reach Malaysia. Given the insurgency, the mindset of many Thai security officials was hostile toward southern Thai Muslims. It was not difficult to extend that paranoia to the Rohingya, who Thai soldiers feared might join the revolt. Thus, Thai army and navy patrols routinely detained Rohingya refugees and either deported them back to Myanmar or — less frequently — helped their boats on to Malaysia.

Then Malaysia shifted its policy, refusing to register any new Rohingya. Those transiting through Thailand now found themselves stranded there, with others continuing to arrive. In 2008, Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej proposed sending all the Rohingya to a draconian immigration facility on a deserted Thai island. Though the idea was never implemented, the policies Thailand has used are not much better.

Thailand has never signed the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 protocol. As such, the country has no specific international legal responsibility to safeguard refugees or asylum seekers. Nevertheless, Thailand has signed other human rights agreements, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which arguably cover the rights of stateless Rohingya in Thailand. But a lack of enforcement has made these instruments ineffective. This has meant that Thailand has dealt with Rohingya as it sees fit.

Turning a blind eye to any international obligations to respect refugee rights, the Thai military initiated a new “pushing out” policy in which Rohingya, after surviving the harrowing ordeal of reaching Thailand across the sea, were now held on a remote island for two days. Then boatloads of them were towed out to international waters, their engine would be cut, and they would be set adrift with little food or water. The policy — which saw hundreds of Rohingya bodies later wash up on Asian beaches — was meant to deter potential Rohingya refugees from coming to Thailand. The strategy was tasked out to Gen. Manas Kongpaen of the Thai military’s Internal Security Operations Command (ISOC). Manas himself had gained infamy for participating in the massacre of Thai Muslims at Krue-Se mosque in 2004, though a court later acquitted him of any wrongdoing.

Under the Abhisit government, the “push-back” program was suspended, and instead a program of deportation or the indefinite detention of Rohingya was implemented. Whilst not as immediately condemnable as the “push-back” program, it was only facilitated by the Thai police joining forces with human traffickers. Deportation back to Myanmar has only led to imprisonment by Myanmar authorities, escape back into Thailand, or, most commonly, the handing over of Rohingya to human traffickers who smuggle Rohingya to Malaysia. Since most Rohingya could not pay the traffickers, they were forced into human slavery to work off the debt. Such a policy financially benefited local Myanmar security officials and smugglers alike while providing a clandestine solution to the returning Rohingya deportees.

In 2013, a Reuters investigation revealed that Thai police had admitted an official Thai policy of removing Rohingya detainees using a similar alliance between Thai security forces and human traffickers. As the policy was official, it had to have been sanctioned by Thailand’s senior-most security officials on down. It commenced following the 2012-2013 Myanmar state atrocities against Rohingya, which had exacerbated the latest Rohingya exodus abroad, including to Thailand. The strategy amounted to this: Thai authorities sold Rohingya detainees to traffickers who spirited them through a series of savage jungle camps (involving regular beatings and rapes) close to Malaysia, where relatives of the Rohingya had to pay ransom for them. Those who could not be ransomed were sold as slaves, or they died. A related report revealed that the Thai Navy had beaten Rohingya boatpeople and sold them to traffickers.

This relationship between the authorities and the traffickers is officially sanctioned. In light of this, the May 2015 discovery of mass graves finds not only alleged collaboration between Thai security officials and traffickers but instead growing evidence that in several cases the soldiers and traffickers are one and the same. Thus, it appears that the trafficking of Rohingya, for certain Thai security officials, represents not only a way to rid Thailand of detainees considered a security threat but also a means of making profits from refugee misery connected to human smuggling and slavery.

While initial responses by Thailand to the 2015 Rohingya crisis appeared to be positive, Thai security policymakers must answer some probing questions. First, do the mass graves not represent the logical result of Thai security forces’ intentional policy of trafficking Rohingya? Second, how could the Thai state allow Gen. Manas Kongpaen, earlier implicated in the Krue Se massacre, to locally lead ISOC’s Rohingya policy from 2008 until 2015? Third, as the current defense minister is the same as in 2009 — Prawit Wongsuwan — why was he not earlier successful in stopping human rights violations by Thai security officials against Rohingya? Fourth, if such trafficking was an intentional Thai policy, to what extent is Thailand guilty of crimes against humanity?

With global attention focused on Myanmar’s horrendous mistreatment of Rohingya, Thailand’s own human rights violations against them — though occasionally surfacing in public — have persisted as a secret sideshow. That sideshow has perpetuated a brutal system of human trafficking and prevented the Rohingya — currently Southeast Asia’s most brutalized ethnic minority — from reaching political asylum abroad. It is high time for Thai policymakers, with sufficient support from international actors, to either allow Rohingya at least the temporary right to asylum or ethically assist in moving Rohingya on to third countries.

Five bishops learn about refugee abuse in Malaysia

BY DENNIS SADOWSKI 

Catholic News Service

WASHINGTON (CNS) — Exploitation and discrimination abound among refugees from Myanmar’s ethnic minority communities who have landed in Malaysia, a five-member contingent from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops learned.

The extent of the struggles facing the Rohingya people, Muslims who have been denied recognition by the Myanmar government, and other ethnic minorities was disappointing to experience, said Kristyn Peck, associate director of children’s services for Migration and Refugee Services at the USCCB.

Hundreds of refugees from Myanmar’s ethnic minority communities flood Malaysia each month in the hope of a better life, only to find themselves being exploited, ignored or trafficked for sex and labor. Many have left Myanmar because their pleas for basic rights have been ignored by longtime military rulers as well as by recently elected civilian leaders.

Some Rohingya have fled only to be trapped aboard boats at sea as countries have refused them entry.

The delegation also met refugees from war-torn Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, all of whom are vulnerable to poverty, extortion and trafficking.

The contingent, including two bishops who chair USCCB committees, heard from immigrants, their advocates and Catholic and nongovernmental social service providers who described how non-Malay newcomers are often mistreated. In some cases, they are confronted on the street by police seeking bribes equal to about $12.50 under the threat of detention.

“The people who are fleeing Myanmar are so vulnerable to exploitation and trafficking while they’re seeking refugee status. That process of seeking protection takes years and years,” Peck said.

However, gaining refugee status does not guarantee that refugees are protected because Malaysia is not a signatory to the 1951 Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees and they remain vulnerable until they leave the country,” Peck explained.

The USCCB delegation is considering recommending in a future report that the Malaysian government provide work permits, that more countries accept refugees and those nations accepting them boost quotas, she said.

“It is shocking. What I think is so upsetting to me we are familiar with these issues. We’re familiar with the suffering experienced by and how vulnerable immigrant and refugees are,” Peck told Catholic News Service in an interview from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in mid-August, two weeks into a tour of four Southeast Asia nations that ended Aug. 20.

At a shelter outside of Kuala Lumpur — which Peck declined to identify because of the threat that traffickers would track them down — the contingent watched a performance by a small group of child refugees, all unaccompanied by an adult. Peck said it was readily apparent they were traumatized. Some had been forced to beg on the street;others had been forced to work for little or no pay while being mistreated by traffickers.

“We were advised they were not in a place to talk about their experience,” Peck said.

In other meetings, including with the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and Kuala Lumpur Archbishop Julian Leow Beng Kim and his staff, the USCCB representatives learned that detention “is not a great place.”

Peck said the group heard how the detention facilities are crowded, often mixing men, women and children, and toilet facilities are few.

Despite several requests, the group was unable to meeting with Malaysian government officials to hear their point of view, Peck said.

“It would have been nice to have their perspective,” she told CNS.

Those reports will include one to the USCCB at its annual fall assembly in November. The findings also will be shared in meetings on Capitol Hill and with the Department of State when the status of Southeast Asia refugees is discussed.

Despite the difficulties facing refugees, the State Department upgraded Malaysia’s status on human trafficking from Tier 3, the lowest level, to the Tier 2 Watch List in its 2015 Trafficking in Persons Report.

Under the rankings, Tier 3 countries are considered those not adhering to standards under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act and are not taking steps to do so. Tier 2 Watch List countries do not comply with the act’s minimum standards “but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.”

The report said that the majority of people who are trafficked in Malaysia are among the 2 million documented and more than 2 million undocumented foreign workers in the country.

Sarah Sewall, undersecretary for civilian security, democracy and human rights at the State Department, said at a briefing when the report was released July 27 the upgrade reflects Malaysia’s efforts to reform its response to trafficking.

She cited reforming victim protection services, adopting a pilot project to allow a limited number of trafficking victims to leave government facilities for work, consulting civil society in drafting amendments to anti-trafficking laws and increasing trafficking investigations and prosecutions from 2013 to 2014 as positive steps.

Despite the increased prosecutions, the number of convictions declined, which, Sewall said, was cause for concern.

“We also remain concerned with the restrictions on victims detained in government facilities and in adequate efforts to address pervasive passport retention by employers,” she said. “The TIP Report documents these concerns and will continue to work over the course of the next year with the government to impress upon them and support their efforts for change.”

In Congress and elsewhere, talk has emerged that the upgrade came to allow Malaysia to fully participate in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal being negotiated among the U.S. and Asian countries.

Sewall declined to address the issue, saying that the State Department assessed Malaysia’s status only as it pertained under the 15-year-old Trafficking Victims Protection Act.

Malaysia was the third stop on the USCCB contingent’s agenda. They also visited Myanmar, Thailand and Indonesia, exploring the status of minority communities, refugees, unaccompanied migrating children and people being trafficked for sex or labor throughout the region.

The contingent included Bishop Oscar Cantu of Las Cruces, New Mexico, chairman of the Committee onInternational Justice and Peace; Auxiliary Bishop Eusebio L. Elizondo of Seattle, chairman of the Committee on Migration; Kevin Appleby, director of migration and refugee policy for the USCCB; and Matthew Wilch, refugee policy adviser for the bishops.

http://catholicphilly.com

Children of women migrants suffer In Malaysia

Migrants Are stuck in destination countries due to lack of travel documents

Plight of 300 children born to undocumented Nepali women migrants in Malaysia

HIMALAYAN NEWS SERVICE

KATHMANDU: More than 300 children born to undocumented Nepali women migrants in Malaysia are currently languishing in the Southeast Asian country due to lack of legal clarity on whether or not they should be issued documents to travel to Nepal with their mothers. 

According to the General Federation of Nepalese Trade Unions (GEFONT), there are around 300-400 such children in Malaysia waiting for a legal passage to Nepal.

The problem arises when the migrant woman worker gets pregnant because the company for which she works does not allow her to work there and also refuses to allow her to stay at the company hostel. 

In most cases related to pregnancy, it has been noticed that women who are pregnant run away from the company and this makes her status illegal in the destination. Her problem further worsens if the father of the child is not a Nepali. 

“If the husband is not a Nepali national then the Nepali embassy cannot issue travel documents to the child because the issue of citizenship of the husband complicates matters,” said executive director at the Institute of Foreign Affairs who is also former ambassador to Malaysia Dr Rishi Raj Adhikari.

Adhikari also pointed out that if both the mother and father of the child are Nepalis then travel documents can be issued but they have to produce a birth certificate of the child. 

Regarding this, coordinator of GEFONT Support Group, Malaysia (Nepali Migrant Workers’ Association) Bed Kumar Khatiwada said: “Most women do not deliver their child in a hospital because her status at this point is illegal as she had run away from the company after being pregnant. Hence, she is unable to submit a birth certificate of the child in the embassy due to which the entire problem starts.”

Considering the intensity of the matter, member of foreign department (Migration Desk) GEFONT advocate Nisha Baniya opined that the state needs to address this case because a large number of its public (women migrant workers with their children) in many other destination countries including Malaysia are making rounds at the Nepali embassy seeking help.

All most every migrant working in Malaysia are facing the same problems with this situation and many clinics are offering them abortions for their profits and it costs RM 500 to 800.

Up to 4 million Burmese working abroad

Nearly four million Burmese are now working in foreign countries, according to recent Parliament discussions.

Legal migrant workers are on strike in this file photo taken in a factory in Khon Kaen, Thailand, early this year. Photo: Mizzima

Around 10 to 12 percent of Burma’s 60 million population have left the country to find jobs, said Lower House Speaker Shwe Mann.

There are 137 licensed overseas employment service agencies and 14 local services in Burma, according to the Labor Department.

Earlier this month, Mizzima reported that around 150,000 Burmese refugees and migrants now living in Thailand would be given government aid to voluntarily return to Burma, according to officials of the Ministry of Social Welfare and Resettlement.

The ministry is now drawing up a plan in cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Ministry of Immigration, according to domestic reports.

The plan would mostly affect Karen and Mon nationalities, who would receive aid for their cost of living and career opportunity training during their return, said officials.

“Initially, we will work on accepting those in Thailand who want to come back to Burma after being scrutinized,” Than Htut Swe, the director-general of the Ministry of Social Welfare and Resettlement, told local media.

A certificate of identity would be issued to any Burmese migrant worker in Thailand who wants to return home for good, said the report, excluding law breakers who would have to face the charges against them.

“We are trying to carry this out after it was submitted to the president’s office. The president has also highlighted the issues about refugees and migrant workers during his recent trip to Thailand,” Than Htut Swe said.

Recently, Burmese officals also discussed streamlining the migrant worker hiring process in cooperation with Thai authorities.

In July, Mizzima reported that Thailand plans a major overhaul in how Burmese migrant workers can enter and work in Thailand, according to the Minister of Labour.

Thai Labour Minister Phadermchai Sasomsap said that Thailand wants to change the system with workers only being brought here via government-to-government contracts in the long run.

The minister cited agreements discussed during President Thein Sein’s visit to Bangkok in July.

The “government-to-government contracts” would last for two years and not exceed four years, he said.

In regard to a Dec. 14 deadline in Thailand to register as illegal migrants, he said it would be the final date.

He Thein Sein specifically asked for help from Thai authorities to make it easier for Burmese workers to send money home, as well as get skills and career training, plus better welfare and protection from abuse by employers.

In March, Burma's Parliament approved a Labor Organization Law, which covers protecting employees' rights, and setting up good relationship between employers and employees as well as forming labor associations systematically and freely.

The Labor Organization Law has been enacted in accord with the provisions of the International Labor Organization, said officials.