On human trafficking in Malaysia

With reference to the recent case of the alleged trafficking of Lannie Erecito, a Filipino national in Penang, I am disturbed at the response of the Malaysian media, public and of a number of politicians towards the MSNBC reporting. These responses have ranged from being incredulous to actively disputing the credibility of the abovementioned report. Unfortunately, these reactions appear to be based on the denial that such an illicit industry actually exists in Malaysia.

The sad reality is that Malaysia is both a sending and recipient country in the business of trafficking humans. There have been many documented cases encountered by the Women’s Aid Organisation whereupon women from China, Indonesia and the Philippines are recruited on the pretext of an opportunity for better employment in Malaysia but are instead coerced or forced into prostitution. They were forced to service clients in brothels, karaoke bars and saloons; in many cases, they were paid poorly or not at all. In a series of interviews with women in detention in 2003 and 2004, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) also found evidence of human trafficking in Malaysia. There have also been several cases reported in the international media whereupon Malaysians have been trafficked to other countries such as the United Kingdom and Germany. In the past, Malaysians have also been arrested overseas for running human trafficking syndicates.

The nature and dynamics of human trafficking are extremely complex. More often than not, unfortunately, in countries such as Malaysia, the burden of proving to the authorities that a person has been trafficked falls heavily upon the survivor. In fact, in countries such as Thailand and Indonesia where human trafficking is acknowledged as a serious existing problem, refuge and protection for the survivor are arguably easier to obtain.

The current legal requirement for employers to hold on to their employee’s passport is one of the many conditions conducive to exploitation and abuse of such individuals but shrouded by the veil of legitimacy. Currently in Malaysia, survivors of sex trafficking escaping from captivity and running to the authorities might not lead towards salvation and justice. Failure to prove that you have been trafficked could mean being charged with immigration offences (your passport, which is proof that you entered the country legally is held by the recruiter or employer), detention and deportation by immigration authorities or worse, returned to your legal “employer”.

In the news report, the agent can be heard to say that the threat of prostitution was used as a ploy to scare and motivate the women to repay the initial investment. The business partner, who was a doctor, was also heard in the report talking about the six figure investment amount. When was the last time you heard of someone being trained to sing at nightclubs at a cost of RM 200,000 per person and then required to be bonded for eight years to recoup the investment? However, advocates working in this field will recognise that this is a common ploy by human traffickers to snare victims in financial bondage.

Lannie was also quoted as saying that “everything was fine” in front of the police officers of the Georgetown police headquarters. This was held against her as proof that she was not held against her will and not trafficked into the country as alleged. However, consider the fact that she was interviewed by the police with the alleged perpetrator sitting right next to her! Interviewing the victim together with the alleged perpetrator reminds me of the absurd practice whereupon a rape survivor is required to identify her assailant by coming face to face and tapping him on the shoulder. Already having gone through enough psychological trauma and possible threats of physical harm, it is too much to ask for a person to do whether the experience is of being trafficked or raped. It is not surprising that there is little or no evidence in such cases. Often, it is a case of the survivor’s word against the perpetrator. The latter could be an individual or the representative of a crime syndicate with the resources and ability to threaten your life, family and friends whether in Malaysia or back in your home country. The dynamics of this power over another human being cannot be overstated.

Consider the following legal statutes in international law regarding human trafficking: the 1949 Convention for the Suppression of the Trafficking in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others condemns both domestic and international trafficking, eliminates the requirement that recruitment be coercive or abusive, making trafficking possible even with the consent of the victim, and makes profiting from prostitution illegal. In 1994, the United Nations adopted a resolution on “Trafficking in Women and Girls’’ which broadened the definition of trafficking to include exploitation not only for purposes of prostitution but for all types of forced labour. This resolution recognized that often women knowingly agree to be transported across or within borders, legally or illegally, but are unaware of the exploitation that awaits them. This resolution states that trafficking be defined by the “end goal of forcing women and girl children into sexually or economically oppressive and exploitative situations’’. Malaysia’s 2007 Human Trafficking Act recently passed in Parliament, is an effort to aggressively address these issues and bring the country in line with international conventions on human trafficking.

However, effective enforcement remains necessary to ensure that the law is able to be translated into proper action and to protect those most in need and that victimisation of survivors of human trafficking do not occur.

Rela must get its act together

I wrote this response to Razali Haji Mohamed Yassin who was obviously covering for his boss, the DG of Rela.

-------------------

I refer to the letter written by Razali Haji Mohamed Yassin (The Star, June 19) who wrote on behalf of the Director-General of Rela, in response to my comments regarding the Ikatan Relawan Rakyat Malaysia.

His letter only further highlights and demonstrates the issues behind the concerns of Malaysians anxious of the perceived increased in powers entrusted to Rela.

In fact, several of Razali's points contradicted those of his boss, the Director General in the latter's published interview (The Star, June 10), and are poor reflections of an organisation which is supposed to be involved in the enforcement of the law and assisting the police.

Razali's statement that the authority given to Rela since March 2005 is limited to only 290 Rela officers appointed by the Government, is a case in point. It is very obvious that the people at the platoon level didn’t get the memo concerning this as there have been too many occasions during operations where individual Rela members have, imbued with perceived vested authority, acted with impunity like "little Napoleons" and with little regard or respect of issues such as human rights and dignity.

Razali stated that there was confusion of Rela's authority which has raised questions about the integrity of Rela. I would agree to this and add that there also exists continued confusion within Rela's own ranks as to what it can and cannot do, which is an injustice to the men and women who have contributed their time to be part of this voluntary body. I refer back to the interview with the DG, who accurately relates and appears to condone the actual conduct (not wearing uniforms and being enraged at being asked for identification) of officers and members during undercover operations against illegal immigrants.

However, I am glad that Razali clarified and highlighted the requirement for the wearing of Rela uniforms during operations and the need for all personnel to produce identification when requested to do so by the public. These two critical issues, featured prominently and alarmingly during the interview with the DG, are necessary to prevent the abuse of power and corruption.

It is unfortunate that Rela, which has and continues to be a tremendous asset involved in social development programmes and humanitarian operations from the individual village up to the national level, has been dragged into the issue of illegal immigrants. Razali implies in his letter that illegal immigrants are exclusively responsible for the spread of social ills and diseases in this country, and that Rela needs to help the Government in dealing with this problem. I content that Rela has no role in this and should not be involved.

Razali should also drop the paternalistic tone in his response ("everyone should be thankful for Rela's contribution..") as his letter has failed to address the Malaysian public's and my own continued concern and reality of allegations of violence, abuse of power, and criminality amongst a group of individuals who are insufficiently trained. The continued disconnect of the policy makers in the Ministry of Home Affairs and the failure to acknowledge and address the reality on the ground is an alarming yet familiar trend which must speedily be addressed.

I have tremendous respect to the thousands of Malaysians who have volunteered their time and energy to any organisation which contributes to the well-being of the country. However, refusing to address the concerns of the public regarding the proper conduct of Rela members and failing to provide and enforce clear guidelines, training, direction and mandate to this voluntary body, is a continued disservice to these women and men.

To earn the respect of the Malaysian public, Rela must get its act together

Response from Rela

Yesterday, The Star published a response to my and somebody else's letter, written by Razali Mohamed Yassin of Rela, Ministry of Home Affairs:

Rela doing a great job
The Star (19 June 2007)

I REFER the letters written by Azrul Mohd Khalib (The Star, June 12) and SH (The Star, June 13).
Rela welcomes any comments, ideas or responses that can improve its efficiency and role.

Up to May 31, Rela had 480,023 participants, of which 43,1867 are Relawans and 48,156 Relawatis. They come from different backgrounds and education levels and are of various ages.

The authority that was given to Rela since March 2005 was for only the 290 Rela officers appointed by the Government. The 480,023 Rela participants were not vested with this authority.

This has to be clarified, as many parties are confused over Rela's authority so much so it has become a major issue, raising questions about the integrity of Rela.

Rela members are only given the authority when they are involved in operations that are led by at least one Rela officer.

Their authority will only last during the duration of the operation and shall expire once the operation is completed.

Members of Rela are required to wear their uniforms during any operation and the public can request identification from members of Rela if they are suspicious of their actions.

A Rela member can also be identified by his name and platoon number that appears on the uniform.
Between Jan 1 and June 13, Rela arrested 18,445 illegal immigrants in 3,713 operational areas.
The increasing number shows the commitment and sacrifices of Rela members who are willing to help the Government deal with the influx of illegal immigrants.

An allegation that Rela members are only interested in the payment of RM80 for each illegal immigrant is not true.

The Government has also declared that the problem of illegal immigrants is the second biggest problem after drugs.

This issue is serious as illegal immigrants cause problems for the country, including the spread of social ills and diseases.

Everyone should be thankful for Rela's contribution, which has to be seen positively because there have not been enough volunteers in this country.

Rela's sense of patriotism and responsibility has to be respected and it is unfair if some of us try to deny its contribution and call for the force to be disbanded.

Rela is not just involved in operations but also in social activities, human development and socio-economic programmes.

Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO), associations and individuals should help Rela overcome its weaknesses and come out with suggestions, ideas or guidance so that the Government can continue to support and protect Rela against unnecessary criticism or comments.

The suggestion to disband Rela is not practical.

RAZALI BIN HAJI MOHAMED YASSIN,
On the behalf of the Director-General,
Ikatan Relawan Rakyat Malaysia (RELA)
Ministry of Home Affairs.

Rela and accountability (or lack thereof)

I refer to the article "Rela chief: We want more power" (4 June 2007) published in Malaysiakini and an interview titled “Ever Rela to help” (Sunday Star, 10 June). These interviews with Rela’s Director General (DG) Datuk Zaidon Asmuni went a long way towards explaining the mindset behind the many recent actions and dealings of this organization.

My read from these articles is that Datuk Zaidon is overly influenced by his past employment as the Pahang Immigration Department director which has severely coloured his judgement and interpretation of the mandate entrusted to Rela (People’s Voluntary Corp). It appears that the DG has treated the amendment to the 1972 Regulations as a blank check for Rela as far as illegal immigrants are concerned.

Rela is neither a professional law enforcement organisation nor is it the Immigration Department or the Police Force. However, this almost half a million strong volunteer force has now received and utilised powers which are, in many instances, equal to and beyond those given to our normal law enforcement bodies. The rationale that it is cost effective to utilise a large volunteer force to conduct the business of law enforcement is not good enough to justify the empowering of this organisation without the necessary checks and balances. It places good and useful citizens in the unfair and impossible position of enforcing the law without knowing the law. A 10 day course is inadequate training when Rela’s powers and responsibilities are similar to those of professional law enforcement entities.

The wearing of uniforms is a case in point. The DG stated the similarities between the police and Rela in the conduct of operations, particularly those which are covert/ plainclothes. He did this to justify the absence of uniforms worn by Rela personnel during raids. However, as they are not professional law enforcement officers, it becomes absolutely necessary to wear the Rela uniform at all times. It does not make sense, as stated by the DG, that wearing the uniform is a “dead giveaway” for a bogus Rela member as in the case of the Batu Maung robbery which involved 10 uniformed individuals. The uniform represents accountability, recognition, transparency and respect. If abuses of power and corruption can occur amongst the police force (uniformed and plainclothes), you can be sure that Rela will not be exempted from this human weakness. We must know who we are dealing with at all times.

For the DG to justify the “walloping” of illegal workers and wave off allegations of violence and mistreatment by Rela members as “in response to something that happened” is irresponsible and dismissive of the actual incidents which are abuses of power by Rela officers. The latter are often armed with chotas (wooden/ bamboo sticks) while the workers are usually unarmed. Injuries of illegal workers cannot all be explained away as escape attempts. Who is in a position of power and who is vulnerable, especially with easily angered Rela members?

Anyone, whether employers or the workers themselves, has a right to challenge or question Rela members, especially if they come around without uniform, refusing to show their identity cards or kad kuasa and unaccompanied by police. If that questioning makes them angry, then I must point out that professional law enforcement involves accountability and responsibility.

The DG also stated that members did not go through background checks. How do you know if someone has a bad record without background check? Due to the new powers given to Rela under the amended 1972 legislation, it should now be necessary to screen people before they are allowed to wear the uniform (or not wear it as the case maybe). With powers akin to the police such as entry without a warrant, powers of arrest, conducting covert or plainclothes operations, there is no excuse not to have background checks on prospective Rela members. The possibility and probability of abuse and mistreatment are higher without a mechanism of check and balance.

Following the issue of background checks, racial profiling seems to be a practice of Rela in law enforcement. According to the DG, a Mat Salleh (Caucasian) is easily determined as a legal tourist while an Indian looking individual could not possibly be. Double standards, prejudices and racial profiling must cease to be acceptable practices.

Human rights abuses are not about Rela officers being naughty. In fact, euphemism of an act signifies the lack of seriousness in which the action is regarded. There have been reported and documented police cases almost every month for 2007 whereupon victims have reported transgressions which range from molestation, abuses of power and corruption to blatant robbery. A 10 day basic training course for Rela members is not good enough and must include human rights and law enforcement basics. Just learning from actual operations is not good enough.

The DG stated that we must choose between security and human rights, and insinuated that we can’t have both. We are not at war and neither is Malaysia a country experiencing internal violence. We do not need to choose between security and human rights. The Malaysian people are assured and feel safef with a security mechanism which is both accountable and respects human rights.

It was a mistake to give Rela arbitrary powers to detain illegal immigrants, leaving open the possibility to widespread abuse by members taking advantage of a vulnerable population (demanding bribes, stealing handphones, rice cookers, TV sets, money). The amendment must be rescinded as it has no mechanism of accountability, disciplinary action and does not accommodate professional training catering to the new set of responsibilities.

Rela cannot and should not be entrusted with more power. Its existing responsibilities have been abused by a growing number of individuals who have suddenly realized how they may profit from it. As long as Rela views itself as not needing to be accountable to anybody, it does not deserve to be treated like a law enforcement body as it does not subject its personnel to disciplinary action in the event of complaints. The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), through its commissioner N. Siva Subramaniam, had in fact noted in May 2007 that many of the Rela officers had not heard of human rights and thought themselves of being above the law.

I believe that the amendments in March 2005 to the 1972 Essential (Ikatan Relawan Rakyat) Regulations making it possible for Rela to detain illegal immigrants were a mistake. It was a response to past and current populist, alarmist and xenophobic beliefs that illegal immigrants are flooding the country and taking away local jobs. Yes, the whole world knows about Rela but for the wrong reasons: abuse of human rights, arbitrary arrests, robbery and mistreatment of detainees. It’s time for this to stop.

Closure? Not so fast...

Like many Malaysians, I too was appalled, yet not surprised, at the recent vulgar innuendoes uttered by the two Members of Parliament, Bung Mokhtar Radin and Mohd Said Yusof. These two individuals whose many past antics in and out of Parliament have included spouting out sexist and racist remarks and allegedly being involved in corrupt practices, continue to be a stain and disgrace on the honour and integrity of the Parliament of Malaysia. That they will continue to be unrepentant (the recent apology was probably painfully extracted under pressure from the political leadership) and are likely to repeat their childish and chauvinistic behaviour despite the uproar of the recent controversy, is also not surprising and is probably expected on the basis of past similar performances. That they continue to represent the Barisan National despite everything they have said and done, is a disgrace to the coalition and should be treated as such.

It is time for our Prime Minister to call these two to account for their behaviour. Least he forget, the rakyat is best served in Parliament by those who are the best that we can find and who appreciate and value the virtues of respect, honour, integrity and honesty. We should not resort to retain those who are clearly disdainful of these values and who continue to represent and perpetuate a culture of impunity. As a rakyat of this country and a voter, I call on the Prime Minister to suspend these two individuals, to drop them from the coming elections, and demonstrate to other Parliamentarians the need to be accountable for what they say and do. If you or the Deputy Prime Minister as the Government Whip are able to punish BN MPs who vote against or abstain from supporting government sponsored bills, surely this requires very little effort. This continued culture of impunity in Parliament whether on issues of gender chauvinism or corruption, must end.

I was also appalled to note the lack of support to Fong Po Kuan by the chairperson of the Parliamentary Caucus on Gender Equality, Rozaidah Talib. She is obviously unworthy of the role and responsibility entrusted in the position of the Parliamentary Caucus chair. Rather than supporting the effort to censure the duo, she instead placed the blame on Fong and the opposition benches whom she stated were becoming too emotional and restrained herself from wanting to “blow the matter out of proportion”. Ms. Rozaidah should be reminded that gender equality is more than just having a seat at the table, it involves obtaining the respect of all regardless of gender. Who else should play a major role in creating this environment and preventing the reoccurrence of such incidences in Parliament if not the Caucus chair. I call on Ms. Rozaidah Talib to resign from the position of chairperson of the Parliamentary Caucus on Gender Equality, as she would no longer inspire confidence, credibility and integrity in the protection of this issue.