This is Ethiopian Review Policy Research Center’s series on From Dictatorship to Democracy extracted/quoted from books and articles published by Albert Einstein Institution and similar sources.
In preparation for a united front, Ethiopians need to answer what their common goals are. One of their primary goals that binds every one in the country is Ethiopiawinet, i.e., to belong to one nation called Ethiopia. TPLF’s (Meles’) impractical constitution, Article 39, the Right to Secede and the ongoing Kilil experimentation are distractions to the Region’s stability.
It is nothing more than a version of the time honored traditional divide-and-conquer ploy of tyrants’s administration of their government, by keeping the people divided.
Hope some of our ethnic groups stop falling to this ploy, and focus on accelerating our march to genuine democratic society.
Genuine Democratic Governance is the Way Forward for Peace, Unity and Prosperity.
The following clip art explains the justification for Ethiopiawinet. CLICK: Our Common Goal – ETHIOPIAWINET
Donor Funds Should Not Facilitate Abuse of Indigenous Groups
The Ethiopian government’s villagization program is not improving access to services for Gambella’s indigenous people, but is instead undermining their livelihoods and food security. The government should suspend the program until it can ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in place and that people have been properly consulted and compensated for the loss of their land.
Jan Egeland, Europe director at Human Rights Watch
(London) – The Ethiopian government under its “villagization” program is forcibly relocating approximately 70,000 indigenous people from the western Gambella region to new villages that lack adequate food, farmland, healthcare, and educational facilities, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. State security forces have repeatedly threatened, assaulted, and arbitrarily arrested villagers who resist the transfers.
The report, “‘Waiting Here for Death’: Forced Displacement and ‘Villagization’ in Ethiopia’s Gambella Region,” examines the first year of Gambella’s villagization program. It details the involuntary nature of the transfers, the loss of livelihoods, the deteriorating food situation, and ongoing abuses by the armed forces against the affected people. Many of the areas from which people are being moved are slated for leasing by the government for commercial agricultural development.
“The Ethiopian government’s villagization program is not improving access to services for Gambella’s indigenous people, but is instead undermining their livelihoods and food security,” said Jan Egeland, Europe director at Human Rights Watch. “The government should suspend the program until it can ensure that the necessary infrastructure is in place and that people have been properly consulted and compensated for the loss of their land.”
The government says the “villagization” program is designed to provide “access to basic socioeconomic infrastructures” to the people it relocates and to bring “socioeconomic & cultural transformation of the people.” But despite pledges to provide suitable compensation, the government has provided insufficient resources to sustain people in the new villages, Human Rights Watch said.
The residents of Gambella, mainly indigenous Anuak and Nuer, have never had formal title to the land they have lived on and used. The government often claims that the areas are “uninhabited” or “under-utilized.” That claim enables the government to bypass constitutional provisions and laws that would protect these populations from being relocated.
The report is based on more than 100 interviews in Ethiopia in May and June 2011, and at the Ifo refugee camp in Dadaab and Nairobi, Kenya, where many Gambellans have fled.
“My father was beaten for refusing to go along [to the new village] with some other elders,” a former villager told Human Rights Watch. “He said, ‘I was born here – my children were born here – I am too old to move so I will stay.’ He was beaten by the army with sticks and the butt of a gun. He had to be taken to hospital. He died because of the beating – he just became weaker and weaker.”
The Villagization Program
The Ethiopian government is planning to resettle 1.5 million people by 2013 in four regions: Gambella, Afar, Somali, and Benishangul-Gumuz. Relocations started in 2010 in Gambella, and approximately 70,000 people there were scheduled to be moved by the end of 2011. Under the Gambella Peoples’ National Regional State Government Plan, 45,000 households are to be moved during the three-year program. The plan pledges to provide infrastructure for the new villages and assistance to ensure alternative livelihoods. The plan also states that the movements are to be voluntary.
Instead of improved access to government services, however, new villages often go without them altogether. The first round of forced relocations occurred at the worst possible time of year – the beginning of the harvest – and many of the areas to which people were moved are dry with poor-quality soil. The nearby land needs to be cleared, and agricultural assistance – seeds and fertilizers – has not been provided. The government failure to provide food assistance for relocated people has caused endemic hunger and cases of starvation.
Human Rights Watch’s research showed that the forced relocation policy is disrupting a delicate balance of survival for many in the region. Livelihoods and food security in Gambella are precarious. Pastoralists are being forced to abandon their cattle-based livelihoods in favor of settled cultivation. Shifting cultivators – farmers who move from one location to another over the years – are being required to grow crops in a single location, which risks depleting their soil of vital nutrients. In the absence of meaningful infrastructural support and regular supplies of food aid, the changes for both populations may have life-threatening consequences, Human Rights Watch said.
The resident of one new village told Human Rights Watch: “We expect major starvation next year because they did not clear in time. If they [the government] cleared [the land] we would have food next year but now we have no means for food.”
Commercial Land Investment
The villagization program is taking place in areas where significant land investment is planned or occurring. The Ethiopian government has consistently denied that the resettlement of people in Gambella is connected to the leasing of large areas of land for commercial agriculture, but villagers have been told by government officials that this is an underlying reason for their displacement. Former local government officials confirmed these allegations to Human Rights Watch.
One farmer told Human Rights Watch that during the government’s initial meeting with his village, government officials told them: “We will invite investors who will grow cash crops. You do not use the land well. It is lying idle.”
“We want you to be clear that the government brought us here… to die… right here,” one elder told Human Rights Watch. “We want the world to hear that government brought the Anuak people here to die. They brought us no food, they gave away our land to the foreigners so we can’t even move back. On all sides the land is given away, so we will die here in one place.”
Mass displacement to make way for commercial agriculture in the absence of a proper legal process contravenes Ethiopia’s constitution and violates the rights of indigenous peoples under international law.
From 2008 through January 2011, Ethiopia leased out at least 3.6 million hectares of land, an area the size of the Netherlands. An additional 2.1 million hectares of land is available through the federal government’s land bank for agricultural investment. In Gambella, 42 percent of the total land area is either being marketed for lease to investors or has already been awarded to investors, according to government figures. Many of the areas that have been moved for villagization are within areas slated for commercial agricultural investment.
“The villagization program is being undertaken in the exact same areas of Ethiopia that the government is leasing to foreign investors for large-scale commercial agricultural operations,” Egeland said. “This raises suspicions about the underlying motives of the villagization program.”
Role of Foreign Donors
Foreign donors to Ethiopia, including the United Kingdom, United States, World Bank, and European Union, assert that they have no direct involvement in the villagization programs. However, the multi-donor Protection of Basic Services (PBS) program subsidizes basic services – health, education, agriculture, roads, and water – and local government salaries in all districts in the country, including areas where new villages are being constructed and where the main activity of local governments is moving people.
As a result of their potential responsibilities and liabilities, donors have undertaken assessments of the villagization program in Gambella and in Benishangul-Gumuz and determined that the relocations were voluntary. Human Rights Watch’s field-based research and interviews with residents, however, indicates that the moves have been coerced.
International donors should ensure that they are not providing support for forced displacement or facilitating rights violations in the name of development, Human Rights Watch said. They should press Ethiopia to live up to its responsibilities under Ethiopian and international law, namely to provide communities with genuine consultation on the villagization process, ensure that the relocation of indigenous people is voluntary, compensate them appropriately, prevent human rights violations during and after any relocation, and prosecute those implicated in abuses. Donors should also seek to ensure that the government meets its obligations to respect, protect, and fulfill the economic and social rights of the people in new villages.
“It seems that the donor money is being used, at least indirectly, to fund the villagization program,” Egeland said. “Donors have a responsibility to ensure that their assistance does not facilitate forced displacement and associated violations.”
Alemayehu G Mariam
From the International Slave Trade to the International Maid Trade
In the days of the Atlantic slave trade, the Middle Passage was the journey of slave trading ships from the west coast of Africa to the New World. Portuguese, British, French, Spanish, Dutch and other slave traders maintained outposts along the African coast to transact their business with their local slave raiding partners. Millions of African slaves were sold or traded for manufactured goods or raw materials. In the grueling journey, the slaves were often shackled and chained to the floor to gain maximum cargo capacity. Many died from disease, starvation, dehydration and suffocation. Many also committed suicide by jumping overboard. Those who resisted their masters were beaten and even killed. Plantation owners treated the slaves like cattle; and those working in the fields were often flogged and beaten. Female slaves were the objects of sexual desire and abuse by their masters. The law required runaway slaves (“fugitive slaves”) who escaped their bondage to be returned to their masters who punished them severely.
There is a Middle Passage of sorts taking place today from Ethiopia to the Middle East. It is what lawyer Khaled Ali Beydoun and others have described as the Ethiopian “Maid Trade”. Today a network of unscrupulous modern-day slave-traffickers (“human traffickers”) and “private labor employment agencies” operating under license by the ruling regime in Ethiopia transship thousands of young Ethiopian women to various parts of the Middle East to work as domestic servants in what amounts to “contract slavery” with little follow up and monitoring to ensure their well-being and welfare in their host countries.
The plight of Ethiopian women domestic workers in the Middle East has been documented in Bina Fernandez’s survey research (Ch. 7). In 2009, “over 74,000 people risked their lives to enter Yemen en route to Saudi Arabia, of which 42,000 were Ethiopians.” According to official data, 91% of the Ethiopian domestic workers in the Middle East were single women, 83% between the age of 20–30 age group, 63% had some secondary education, 26% were illiterate and 71% Muslim and 93% earned US$100–150 per month. Some of these women “officially registered with the government as a migrant worker”. Others “worked through illegal brokers who are viciously exploitative [and] often take the women’s money and sometimes abandon them in the desert before they even reach Somalia.”
The “Middle Passage” of Middle East “contract slavery” for the young Ethiopian women is unspeakably harrowing. Their working conditions are described as slave-like, except, as Beydoun argues, “Shackles and whips have been replaced by more inventive designs to dehumanize, suppress, and subsequently enslave persons for economic or sexual purposes.” Fernandez reported that the women live-in domestic workers she interviewed were “on-call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and working between 10 and 20 hours daily.” Some of the women pulled “double duty– that is, cleaning or doing laundry for a second household, usually a relative of their employer.” Most of these women got “only one day off a month, or no break at all.” Many of these women experienced “complete physical exhaustion” and often suffered “mental breakdown” unable to “tell what day of the week it was, or what time it was.” They faced extreme physical, mental and sexual abuse. In August 2011, the world witnessed the shocking video of Shweyga Mullah, a young Ethiopian woman who cared for two of Moammar Gadhafi’s grandchildren in Libya. Because Shweyga refused to beat one of the grandchildren, Gadhaffi’s daughter-in-law “tied her hand behind her back, taped her mouth and poured boiling water on her scalding her entire body.” She suffered first degree burns over her entire body. Extreme physical and sexual abuse of Ethiopian domestic workers is not uncommon elsewhere in the Middle East as documented by Al Jazeera in 2009 in the United Arab Emirates.
Fernadez further found that that “verbal abuse by employers is commonplace” including “racial insults and discriminatory behaviour (such as separate food and dishes for them) as is non-payment or underpayment of wages. To escape their conditions, some are forced to become “runaways”. They end up doing “live-out domestic workers, brewing and selling illicit liquor, or engaging in sex work.” But they are trapped. Fernandez explains, “Their lack of legal status makes them vulnerable to greater exploitation if they are detected, as they risk blackmail, imprisonment, and/or deportation. If they wish to leave voluntarily, they often have to pay highfines for exit visas.”
On the other hand, Beydoun argues that the young Ethiopian women trafficked in the “maid trade” in Lebanon are often clueless about “what their commitment entails, and the imminent risks and hazards they will likely endure during migration and employment.” They face enormous dangers including “overcharging of fees; debt bondage; falsification of documents; deception with regard to the nature and conditions of employment, contract substitution, exploitation and abuse, lack of preparation for employment abroad, including lack of predeparture training; forced/coerced recruitment, including being kidnapped or sold to illegal recruiters or traffickers; hazardous journey to the country of destination.”
Tears of the Ethiopian Maids
In a recent Youtube video, an unnamed young Ethiopian woman confronts a representative of the regime of Meles Zenawi in a meeting hall in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The words of this young woman in the 2 minute video are so powerful, so overwhelming and so penetrating that the listener is brought to convulsive tears. She complains about the mistreatment and dehumanization she and other maids continue to face in life and in death in the UAE, and laments the depraved indifference of her “government” to speak up, defend and protect them from gross abuses of human rights.
…. If we run away from [our abusive employers], there is a chance we can die. There is a woman who tells us to run away. But they don’t help us. If [we] run away, we need money to pay for rent and food. [We] don’t have to run away. As much as possible, it is better to help [us]. When we live in this country [UAE], sometimes we die. Many of us are buried here. Why must an Ethiopian be buried in the Emirates? Why is that our government does not check on us, follow up on our conditions, ask about us? Why should I be buried in a foreign country? It does not matter if we are Christian or Muslim. This question has deprived me sleep. When I bow to pray, I have not been able to do so properly. Only God knows. All I do is cry. Even our dead bodies must not be buried in this country. [There was a domestic worker accused of killing her employer.] It is possible she may have done something wrong. Her government should stand and defend her and advocate for her. She should be punished as appropriate [if she is guilty] by her family or the law… We learned [within a few days of her arrest] that she was killed by the authorities [in the Emirates].
As she concluded her statement, this young woman cries out in pain, her voice quivering, tears in her eyes and pleading for an answer from someone, anyone:
Where is Ethiopia’s flag? I can’t take it anymore. I can’t take it anymore…!!!!
It was enough to make a grown man cry. It would be impossible to find a more patriotic, resolute, unwavering, steadfast and true-to-the-core Ethiopian than this young woman!! When those who have a chokehold on power declare with depraved indifference that “Ethiopia’s flag is a piece of rag”, this unnamed young Ethiopian woman cries her heart out looking of her lost Ethiopian flag. Bless her heart!
The Response of Zenawi’s Regime – Blame the Maids!
The response of Meles Zenawi’s regime to the plight of these women is morally calloused and depraved. Fernandez reported: “The term ‘runaway’ was used in a pejorative sense by one Ethiopian government official and several of the PEA [private employment agency] representatives during interviews, to describe these women as delinquents who abandon their contractual responsibilities because they do not want to work hard, and want an easy life.” Beydoun argues that the ruling regime’s efforts to combat trafficking in Lebanon were symbolic and ineffective despite the fact that an inter-agency anti-trafficking task force had been established to deal with the problem. He concluded, “Trafficked women are particularly vulnerable where their own governments fail to adequately protect them.”
Since 1998, Zenawi’s regime has put in place a “Private Employment Agency Proclamation No. 104/1998”, which provided for licensing of private employment agencies and the prosecution of illegal brokers. In 2009, this Proclamation was repealed and updated by the “Employment Exchange Services Proclamation No. 632/2009”, which required private employment agencies, among other things, “not to recruit a job seeker below the age of 18 years; not to terminate the contract of employment before acquiring the consent of the worker in writing, get approval from the Ethiopian embassy or consular office to form a new contract or to modify the existing one, register a worker sent abroad, within fifteen days, with the nearest Ethiopian embassy or consular office.” The “private employment agency which sends workers abroad” is mandated to ensure that the working conditions in the host country not “be less favorable to an Ethiopian than the rights and benefits of those who work in a similar type and level of work in the country of employment.” The foreign employer is required to pay the “visa fee of the country of destination, round trip ticket, residence and work permit fees and insurance coverage” for the worker. Moreover, “any private employment agency which sends a worker abroad for work” must deposit cash or post bond in the minimum amount of USD$30,000 for up to 500 workers “for the protection and enforcement of the rights of the worker.”
The real penalty for violation of the Proclamation No. 632 is suspension, revocation or cancellation of license of the employment agency. Though various stiff criminal penalties are provided in Article 40, there is little evidence of serious prosecution of human traffickers. According to a 2010 State Department report, “Between March and October 2009, the [Federal High Court’s 11th Criminal] bench heard 15 cases related to transnational labor trafficking, resulting in five convictions, nine acquittals, and one withdrawal due to missing witnesses. Of the five convictions, three offenders received suspended sentences of five years’ imprisonment, two co-defendants were fined, and one offender is serving a sentence of five years’ imprisonment.”
Similarly, according to a 2011 UNHCR report, “The [Ethiopian] government showed only nascent signs of engaging destination country governments in an effort to improve protections for Ethiopian workers and obtain protective services for victims.” Moreover, “although licensed employment agencies must place funds in escrow in the event a worker’s contract is broken, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has never used these deposits to pay for victims’ transportation back to Ethiopia.” But the regime has readily come to the rescue of other victims of human traffickers according to the same UNHCR report: “In 2010, Ethiopia granted asylum to 1,383 Eritrean refugees deported from Egypt, many of whom claim to have been brutalized by Rashaida smugglers operating in the Sinai – including conditions of forced construction labor – or have fled Eritrea to escape situations of forced labor associated with the implementation of the country’s national service program.” While it is noble and morally commendable to assist any victim of human trafficking and human rights abuse, it is also true that charity begins at home.
What Can Be Done to Help Ethiopian Women Caught Up in the “Maid Trade”?
The international movement of labor is a fact of international life. For a poor country such as Ethiopia where unemployment is high, workers who migrate abroad are a source of much needed financial support for their families, and a source of remittances for the country in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. But slavery, by any other name including contract slavery”, is still slavery. It is just as cruel, oppressive, exploitive, dehumanizing and degrading. These women are extremely vulnerable and have no rights and no means of support to vindicate their rights. Various commentators have argued that the demand for Ethiopian domestic workers will continue long-term as they are considered cheaper and more obedient. In other words, they are considered “model maids” who put up with a lot of abuse in quiet desperation.
One can point to international legal and moral obligations to help out these women and effectively combat human trafficking camouflaged as migrant labor. Among the relevant Conventions and protocols include: the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, the United Nations Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea, and Air, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and its two related protocols. Discussion of legal and moral state obligations under these Conventions would be an exercise in futility. Talking law to those who sneer and thumb their noses at the rule of law is a waste of time. So is making a moral plea or appealing to conscience as both presuppose the existence of a moral plane of discussion. All that can be done is explain what can be done!
If the problem of “contract slavery” in the Ethiopian “maid trade” is going to be addressed effectively, serious criminal investigations and prosecutions must be pursued against violators. The aggressive crackdown that has long been directed at the independent press in Ethiopia should be re-directed to the gangs of criminal human traffickers. Various scholars and researchers have offered effective recommendations to deal with the problem including the provision of domestic skills training in a Middle Eastern context to Ethiopian women in attempt to lessen their vulnerability, working with NGOs as partner organizations to monitor their working conditions and working with host countries to make it easy for these workers to use the banking institutions. Some have suggested ways of improving access to the criminal justice system of the host country by providing a confidential complaint reporting process for abuse and wage payment related issues and legal assistance, expanding victim services such as shelters and hotlines engaging civil society and faith-based groups to offer assistance. There are lessons to be learned from the experiences of other countries such as the Philippines which maintains an Overseas Employment Administration Agency to secure the interests of Filipino workers throughout the world.
Slavery By Any Other Name
Slavery was not abolished in Saudi Arabia and Yemen until 1962. A year later it was abolished in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In the 1950s, Saudi Arabia had an estimated 450,000 slaves, nearly 20 percent of the population. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that “contract slavery” of domestic servants continues in these countries. The deep tracks of slavery do not vanish easily in the desert sand in a mere 50 years. The vast majority of the Ethiopian domestic workers end up in these three countries. In 2009, “over 74,000 people risked their lives to enter Yemen en route to Saudi Arabia, of which 42,000 were Ethiopians.” The “kafala” or sponsorship system in the Gulf States gives disproportionate power to the sponsor (employer) in the “contract” relationship. If the worker breaks her contract, she bears the cost of her return ticket and will likely pay fines and pay debts to the employment agency that arranged the sponsorship. There is no running away from “contract slavery” particularly since the migrant worker is required to surrender her passport (if legally in the country) to the employer. Through the maids may be able to run away from their cruel employers, they cannot hide. They are frequently arrested as fugitive workers, not unlike fugitive slaves of yesteryears. Unable to change their circumstances, these women endure in quiet desperation often for years.
Slavery by any other name is still slavery. In truth, there can be no “contract slavery” since only free men and free women can enter into any contracts, which leaves many of the Ethiopian women domestic workers as nothing but slaves and at best indentured servants. Article 4 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees that “No one shall be held in slavery or servitude, slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.” We must all do what we can to help our Ethiopian sisters to rise up from “contract slavery”!
“Where is Ethiopia’s flag?”
Previous commentaries by the author are available at: www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/ and http://open.salon.com/blog/almariam/
