What's at stake in Japan?
What's at stake in Japan?
Posted 10:15pm (Mla time) Feb 19, 2005
By Rina Jimenez-David
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A15 of the February 20, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
THE PHILIPPINE government now finds itself in the most embarrassing position of backtracking on an advocacy that it has championed globally and even petitioned other countries to address seriously.
The issue is trafficking in human beings, particularly of women and children for purposes of prostitution, and it has indeed become a serious problem because of the thousands of women and girls who are lured to leave their homes on the promise of finding gainful work abroad, only to end up ensnared in forced prostitution, also known as "white slavery." (Why? Because it's a "cleaner" form of slavery? Not from the women's point of view, I bet.)
A position paper prepared by 10 organizations working with migrant women workers says that while the issue of trafficking has been around for decades, only since the 1990s has it received "high visibility and action on the part of the international community." As a result of persistent NGO advocacy from women's and migrants' groups, human trafficking is now "universally condemned and criminalized." The Philippine government has readily embraced this cause, promoting resolutions addressing the global trafficking of women and girls in the United Nations since 1994. It also actively supported and promoted the adoption of the UN Optional Protocol on Trafficking in Persons Especially Women and Children. In 2003, the Philippine Congress passed the "historic" law against human trafficking, after years of advocacy by women's groups. This law has since been hailed by other governments as one of the "most comprehensive and progressive" laws addressing the issue of trafficking.
So why do I say that the government is now backtracking from this advocacy and embarrassing itself in the eyes of the world?
* * *
THE JOINT position paper, sponsored by the Development Action for Women Network, BATIS Center for Women, BATIS-AWARE, Center for Migrants Advocacy, Coalition Against Trafficking in Women-Asia Pacific, Kanlungan Center Foundation, Scalabrini Migration Center, Third World Movement Against the Exploitation of Women, WomenLead and Philippine Migrant Rights Watch (PMRW), traces the background behind the recent move of the Japanese government limiting the granting of working visas in Japan to entertainers who have received at least two years' training outside Japan or in foreign institutions. This move has received widespread criticism not just from entertainers, recruiters and talent managers, but even from other migrant groups and some Filipino officials.
Since 1995, says the paper, the international community has stepped up its efforts and policies to curtail trafficking around the world. The European Community passed its own policies, while the United States, Thailand and the Philippines enacted their own anti-trafficking laws. South Asian countries, on the other hand, sought to address cross-border trafficking through the SAARC Convention.
As one of the prime "receiving" countries of migrant women, most of them entertainers, Japan "found itself being criticized for not doing enough to address trafficking in its own territory." Two years ago, the Japanese government began consulting NGOs and government agencies in other countries, including the Philippines, on what it could do to institute stronger measures against trafficking. "An Interagency Coordination Mechanism on Trafficking in Persons was created in April 2004. Subsequently, in September 2004, official missions were dispatched to the Philippines, Thailand and Colombia to consult and inform the governments of the action plan to be implemented by Japan," the position paper states.
Say the organizations: "Though these actions came a bit too late, we affirm that these are steps in the right direction."
* * *
EVEN as Japan sent signals that it would soon begin cracking down on the illicit trafficking business, in the Philippines, say the migrant organizations, several consultations on the problems and issues of overseas performing artists were taking place among government, NGOs and civil society. "However," it adds, "it seems that the Philippine government itself had not seriously taken steps to prepare a contingency plan in the event of possible policy changes from Japan."
How much is at stake in this new Japanese policy on the migration of foreign entertainers to their shores?
Financially, we're talking hundreds of millions of pesos in remittances. Nearly 300,000 Filipinos, the vast majority of them women entertainers at bars and nightspots, currently work in Japan. Filipino officials estimate that up to 77,000 of them entered the country illegally.
But is money the only consideration in this situation? What about the welfare and safety of the women and their children? What about that elusive thing called national dignity?
* * *
THIS is what the position paper has to say of the situation of our women "artists" in Japan:
"Trafficking of women and children in Japan has almost always been associated with the entertainment/sex industries which are heavily controlled by syndicates like the Yakuza. The studies show a pattern of sexual and labor exploitation without recourse to legal remedies from the Japanese government which previously had no legal standards on trafficking cases. Various methods and degrees of coercion and control are employed to compel women even with legal papers to give in to the sexual advances of customers even in legally operating bars and entertainment establishments. In the worst of cases, women are virtually imprisoned, enslaved and subjected to the most horrendous violations."
Is this the sort of regime we wish to continue, even if only for five years?
Posted 10:15pm (Mla time) Feb 19, 2005
By Rina Jimenez-David
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A15 of the February 20, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
THE PHILIPPINE government now finds itself in the most embarrassing position of backtracking on an advocacy that it has championed globally and even petitioned other countries to address seriously.
The issue is trafficking in human beings, particularly of women and children for purposes of prostitution, and it has indeed become a serious problem because of the thousands of women and girls who are lured to leave their homes on the promise of finding gainful work abroad, only to end up ensnared in forced prostitution, also known as "white slavery." (Why? Because it's a "cleaner" form of slavery? Not from the women's point of view, I bet.)
A position paper prepared by 10 organizations working with migrant women workers says that while the issue of trafficking has been around for decades, only since the 1990s has it received "high visibility and action on the part of the international community." As a result of persistent NGO advocacy from women's and migrants' groups, human trafficking is now "universally condemned and criminalized." The Philippine government has readily embraced this cause, promoting resolutions addressing the global trafficking of women and girls in the United Nations since 1994. It also actively supported and promoted the adoption of the UN Optional Protocol on Trafficking in Persons Especially Women and Children. In 2003, the Philippine Congress passed the "historic" law against human trafficking, after years of advocacy by women's groups. This law has since been hailed by other governments as one of the "most comprehensive and progressive" laws addressing the issue of trafficking.
So why do I say that the government is now backtracking from this advocacy and embarrassing itself in the eyes of the world?
* * *
THE JOINT position paper, sponsored by the Development Action for Women Network, BATIS Center for Women, BATIS-AWARE, Center for Migrants Advocacy, Coalition Against Trafficking in Women-Asia Pacific, Kanlungan Center Foundation, Scalabrini Migration Center, Third World Movement Against the Exploitation of Women, WomenLead and Philippine Migrant Rights Watch (PMRW), traces the background behind the recent move of the Japanese government limiting the granting of working visas in Japan to entertainers who have received at least two years' training outside Japan or in foreign institutions. This move has received widespread criticism not just from entertainers, recruiters and talent managers, but even from other migrant groups and some Filipino officials.
Since 1995, says the paper, the international community has stepped up its efforts and policies to curtail trafficking around the world. The European Community passed its own policies, while the United States, Thailand and the Philippines enacted their own anti-trafficking laws. South Asian countries, on the other hand, sought to address cross-border trafficking through the SAARC Convention.
As one of the prime "receiving" countries of migrant women, most of them entertainers, Japan "found itself being criticized for not doing enough to address trafficking in its own territory." Two years ago, the Japanese government began consulting NGOs and government agencies in other countries, including the Philippines, on what it could do to institute stronger measures against trafficking. "An Interagency Coordination Mechanism on Trafficking in Persons was created in April 2004. Subsequently, in September 2004, official missions were dispatched to the Philippines, Thailand and Colombia to consult and inform the governments of the action plan to be implemented by Japan," the position paper states.
Say the organizations: "Though these actions came a bit too late, we affirm that these are steps in the right direction."
* * *
EVEN as Japan sent signals that it would soon begin cracking down on the illicit trafficking business, in the Philippines, say the migrant organizations, several consultations on the problems and issues of overseas performing artists were taking place among government, NGOs and civil society. "However," it adds, "it seems that the Philippine government itself had not seriously taken steps to prepare a contingency plan in the event of possible policy changes from Japan."
How much is at stake in this new Japanese policy on the migration of foreign entertainers to their shores?
Financially, we're talking hundreds of millions of pesos in remittances. Nearly 300,000 Filipinos, the vast majority of them women entertainers at bars and nightspots, currently work in Japan. Filipino officials estimate that up to 77,000 of them entered the country illegally.
But is money the only consideration in this situation? What about the welfare and safety of the women and their children? What about that elusive thing called national dignity?
* * *
THIS is what the position paper has to say of the situation of our women "artists" in Japan:
"Trafficking of women and children in Japan has almost always been associated with the entertainment/sex industries which are heavily controlled by syndicates like the Yakuza. The studies show a pattern of sexual and labor exploitation without recourse to legal remedies from the Japanese government which previously had no legal standards on trafficking cases. Various methods and degrees of coercion and control are employed to compel women even with legal papers to give in to the sexual advances of customers even in legally operating bars and entertainment establishments. In the worst of cases, women are virtually imprisoned, enslaved and subjected to the most horrendous violations."
Is this the sort of regime we wish to continue, even if only for five years?
posted by Dante at 12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home