RECOMMEND (234)

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PLUSONE

MORE

E-MAIL

PRINT

TEXT SIZE

Richard Horsey, a liaison officer for the International Labour Organization, has served the UN agency in and outside Rangoon for the last 10 years. He ended his assignment on June 4 and is succeeded by Stephen Marshall. Horsey spoke recently with The Irrawaddy about what the ILO has been able to achieve in Burma during his tenure.

Question: Do you feel frustrated about the lack of progress on labor issues in Burma during your time with the ILO?

Answer: Of course, I would have liked to achieve more, and in a shorter period. But at the same time, I am not frustrated. We have to recognize how far there is to go, but we should not forget how far we have come.

Ten years ago, when I first became directly involved in this issue, there was no dialogue at all between Burma and the ILO, and the authorities denied there was any problem—variously claiming that there was no forced labor, or that it was a cultural-religious tradition, or that it was necessary in order to develop the country in the absence of any outside assistance.

The process of dialogue with the ILO that started in 1999 led to the issuing of Orders banning forced labor, which made the practice illegal—at least on paper. Around this time, the authorities reversed their policy of using forced labor on big, national infrastructure projects, and this had a significant impact on the ground.

The next step was to have a permanent presence of the ILO in Rangoon to facilitate progress on the implementation of the Orders. We got this in 2002, and since then we have been trying in various ways to improve the implementation of the Orders—by ensuring they were distributed widely and in various ethnic languages, for example. After trying for several years, there is now an independent complaint mechanism in place. There is still a very long way to go, and progress is slow. But at least now there is progress.

Q: We continue to see reports of forced labor in various parts of Burma, despite the implementation of the complaint mechanism. In which area of the country is forced labor most prevalent?

A: Forced labor continues to be a very serious problem. It exists all over the country but is particularly serious in the remote border areas where there is ongoing insecurity, as well as in northern Arakan State, where the problem is related to broader issues of discrimination against the Muslim population.

Q: What has the complaint mechanism revealed about the incidence of forced labor in Burma?

A: I think we have to be careful not to assume that the complaints received by the ILO give a full picture of the problem. For example, it is obviously difficult for people in more remote areas to contact the ILO, and we can therefore expect to receive fewer complaints from those areas. But that should certainly not be taken as an indication of how serious the problem is in those areas.

The complaint mechanism is not a tool for mapping the nature of the problem, nor is its aim to capture a significant proportion of the cases in the country. Its purpose is to demonstrate that people who continue to impose forced labor can be held to account—even sent to prison—and this can contribute to a change in the prevailing climate of impunity.
 
Q: The ILO estimated in 2005 that about 20 percent of forced labor cases around the world were state-imposed, including in Burma. Can you say to what degree forced labor is initiated by, or specifically benefits, the state?

A: Forced labor in Burma is predominantly imposed by the state—meaning the army and local civil authorities. This makes it different from most other countries of concern, where the practice tends to be imposed by the private sector and private landowners rather than by the state. In Burma, non-state actors, such as some ceasefire armed groups and non-ceasefire groups, also make use of forced labor, but on a much smaller scale.

Q: International and exile media groups often report on the practice of portering in conflict areas, particularly in eastern Burma. Is the ILO able to access these regions?

A: Portering for the army in situations of conflict is one of the most serious forms of forced labor.