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.