Illegal worker debacle puts ASEAN in poor light
Illegal worker debacle puts ASEAN in poor light
The Straits Times, Asia News Network, Singapore
It is hard to imagine that the fate of illegal immigrants can place under stress the good relations that have long existed among three of ASEAN's closest neighbors. These are law breakers who have breached sovereign borders and worked without proper papers. If Malaysia, the recipient nation, wants them shipped out for security and economic reasons (among them Indonesian involvement in serious crime in Kuala Lumpur-Petaling Jaya), the nations of origin can have no cause to protest. It should not matter that Malaysia had in the recent past of its construction and plantation boom tolerated the illegals' presence and benefited from their labour.
It is also irrelevant that Indonesia and the Philippines, from where many of the illegals came, stand to gain in two ways from their nationals' continued absence from home: Repatriated income and some relief for their own serious unemployment. The numbers involved are large. Malaysian reports say there are 1.5 million to two million foreign workers in the country, most of them Indonesians and half of them believed illegal. There are half a million Filipinos in the East Malaysian state of Sabah. There is no telling how many of these are legal residents, as infiltration across the Sulu Sea is easy.
What is disappointing, from the standpoint of ASEAN accommodation, is that Malaysia's program to regularize its labour deployment has been regarded in Indonesia and the Philippines as an assault on their citizens' rights. To judge from a protest by Philippine Foreign Secretary Blas Ople, and an extraordinary outburst from Dr Amien Rais, Speaker of Indonesia's highest legislative body, relations can get problematic. Dr Amien described as "unIslamic" legal sanctions against illegals caught after an amnesty expired.
This was a reckless misrepresentation. If he meant to play to a domestic gallery, he ought to choose a domestic issue. Malaysia on its part has advised its citizens not to travel to Indonesia, after some Malaysian holidaymakers in Medan were allegedly harassed by police, and protesters had burned a Malaysian flag and broken down the gate of the embassy in Jakarta. In the confusion, the travel advisory has grown into a travel "ban" in Indonesian reckoning. In this climate of escalation and baiting by ambitious politicians, relations can get needlessly tense.
This must be avoided. The three governments should be aware that squabbling of this nature would not present ASEAN in a favorable light in those overseas quarters still assessing Southeast Asia after the terrorist arrests, the air pollution and the lingering effects of the 1997-1998 financial decline. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad is correct not to rise to the bait, saying that anti-Malaysian remarks and acts did not represent the official Jakarta position. It would help cool tempers if Jakarta and Manila government representatives distanced themselves from the street and media agitation.
The Malaysian government should be vigorous in investigating allegations that the immigration authorities had acted harshly in deporting overstayers. Filipino babies have reportedly died in holding centers, and there have been complaints of insensitive treatment in the search for overstayers.
Indonesia can object to the caning and jailing of illegals, but ought to also acknowledge this is a judicial prerogative. Still, the entire process of repatriation, followed by a partial policy reversal after the construction sector reported it could not function without Indonesian labour, could have been better thought out. It is possible the adverse fallout may have been exaggerated. If so, this is not helping to calm the situation.