Ibrahim Awad assumed duties as the Director of the International Migration Programme at the International Labour Organization (ILO) in Geneva on 11 July 2005. Previously, he was the Director of the ILO Subregional Office for North Africa.
What are the biggest challenges to the implementation of the rights contained in the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families?
Protection of the rights of migrant workers started with the ILO itself, at the beginning of the 20th century. In the Preamble to the Constitution, protection of the interests of workers in countries other than their own was included as one the main objectives of the ILO. In July 1939, the first Convention on Migration for Employment was adopted. This document never entered into force due to the outbreak of WWII. Ten years later, in 1949, the first ILO Convention on Migration for Employment (Revised) was finally adopted and entered into force in 1952. This Convention outlines the process of migration, access of migrant workers to public employment services, and includes an article on equality of treatment and non-discrimination. Forty-eight States are parties to the Convention today. Supplementary provisions were adopted in 1975 which built on the experience and the new challenges emerged during 25 years of massive labor migration flows. New problems came to light as a result of an increase in migration which are addressed by this supplementary document, including detailed provisions with respect to equality of treatment and non-discrimination, and migration in abusive or irregular situations. As a consequence to several States closing doors to official migration in the early 70s, irregular migration increased, generating abusive situations in which migrants were forced to work for lower wages and without social security.
A long process of negotiation amongst governments, employers and workers, facilitated by the ILO Secretariat, led to the adoption of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families in 1990. This important document draws extensively from preceding ILO Conventions and the corpus of international human rights law, and addresses issues covered in previous documents, while exploring new ground. Protection of migrants in irregular situations is particularly emphasized. To date, forty-one States have ratified this Convention. Amongst States that have ratified the Convention only one is a country of destination, Argentina, which provides a set of sophisticated national policies for the protection of migrant workers.
Most recently in 2005, the ILO adopted a Multilateral Framework on Labor Migration. This is a non-binding document, but nonetheless significant as it is the result of intense negotiations with all parties to the ILO. Binding and non-binding texts are complementary to implementation of protection of migrant workers. This text in particular provides an expansion of the concept of social integration of migrant workers, prevention of abusive migration, migration and development, and outlines a set of suggested policies on how to put in practice these principles.
The body of binding and non-binding documents provides guidance to governments on how to implement policies directed to the protection of rights of migrant workers. Nonetheless, the international legal system is such that governments only become part of a Convention when and if they choose to do so. While developing a framework for international cooperation is crucial in the protection of migrant workers and their families, as migration happens between States, governments retain full sovereignty to formulate their migration policies. Sometime States do not want to be bound by particular provisions and this is why they may be hesitant to ratify a Convention. In other cases, States may claim that their internal system for the protection of migrant workers is sufficiently strong, sometimes even more sophisticated than international provisions, and do not deem necessary to become part of any of the existing Conventions.
From the list of countries that have ratified this Convention we see that most of the developed countries in North America and Europe - the ones which receive the most migrant workers- are not parties to this instrument. Are you aware of any civil society efforts to encourage their ratification of the Convention?
The NGO community is very active in this respect and collaborates closely with the Office of the High Commissioner in campaigning for ratification of the Convention. A major campaign for ratification, involving both international organizations and a great number of NGOs, is being coordinated by the Office of the High Commissioner, under the responsibility of Ms Carla Edenlobos, Secretary of the Committee of Migrant Workers.
Does the ILO have an understanding with these states as to which of the provisions in the Convention cause them difficulties and which ones they support and abide by?
International binding and non-binding instruments for the protection of social workers are important to develop principles, to provide guidelines and to outline best practices. It should not be overlooked that, beyond the international framework, it is at the national level that policies must be implemented. The way forward lies in developing sophisticated, comprehensive national policies that address problems in detail and implement them appropriately. To do so, it is important to invest resources in conducting research to produce solid statistics and extend knowledge on migrant workers’ situations and problems. Only an extensive knowledge base will allow governments to formulate well structured policies. Resources must then be invested in institutions that formulate those policies, and in mechanisms that implement them and that monitor their implementation. It is important to underline that protection of migrant workers must be carried out whether or not a country has ratified the Convention, and no country claims to be exempt from protecting migrant workers because it has not ratified related international conventions.
In the context of the slow-down in global economic development some governments are responding to pressures from their people to reserve jobs for their citizens and to reduce the intake of migrants, or even to send migrant workers to their country of origin. What is the ILO doing about this? Could you comment on what you think the UN should be doing?
The ILO, as other international organizations, can only intervene when asked to do so by a member State. Nonetheless, the perspective of the ILO in this regard is that all efforts should be made by governments to resist the increase in xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment on their territory. Migrants who contributed to economic growth should not pay the price of a downturn they are not responsible for. If employment of a migrant worker has to be terminated, this should be done in full conformity of law and it should be ensured that workers have the right to enjoy the fruit of the work already undertaken.
In situations like the current economic crisis, blanket policies are never effective as not all sectors and not all professions are necessarily affected by the crisis. While the construction sector may have suffered from the current downturn, the health sector has continued to grow in several countries. Policies that block immigration as a whole may discourage migration to sectors where there is demand. Additionally, in some countries, entire professional sectors have been shunned by native workers and, while it is predictable that some workers may decide to return to these sectors, this does not mean that all will do so. This will depend from the country, the sector, the profession. Policies should thus be realistic, otherwise they will create space for abusive conditions and this is not in the interest of anyone, least of all of native workers.
To what extent do you think the UN’s commitment to achieving the MDGs is strengthening the protection of the human rights of migrant workers and their capacity to obtain decent work?
Any progress in social and economic life, in any country, will necessarily result in better conditions of employment for migrants. If a country is poor this will necessarily reflect on the conditions of life and work of migrants. First of all, as economic and social development progress, there will be less need for people to leave their native countries to seek employment elsewhere. Secondly, advancements in any of the MDG areas, for example lower child mortality or better access to water, will reflect positively on conditions of work, life and social integration of migrant workers.
How can a better recognition and protection of the human rights of migrant workers discourage irregular and clandestine migration in abusive conditions?
Once a government has fully recognized the rights of migrant workers, migration would simply not be irregular. Irregular and clandestine migration in abusive conditions is not only detrimental to migrant workers but also to the societies and native workers of both countries of destination and of origin. Protection of migrant workers should be seen from a broader perspective and not just as dry laws. Effective measures of social integration are needed to prevent ensuing social tensions. Good integration policies are thus important for the migrants as well as for the societies that receive them.
