2005 November

Bad Records

In the last full week of November, sentences were handed down in two legal cases that established records of a dubious sort.

Sazarina Madzin was sentenced to 10 months imprisonment after being convicted of abusing her domestic worker on 79 occasions - the highest number of maid abuse charges ever filed against a defendant in Singapore.

The Min Yek was fined $15,000 for prostituting her domestic worker. This was the first time that a Singapore employer had been convicted of pimping for the domestic worker in her employment.

In both cases, the abused employees were Indonesian and close to the current minimum age for employment as a domestic worker: Wiwik Setyowati, Sazarina's employee, is 22 and Awunningsih, The's worker, is 24. The printed reports of the case are not explicit, but it would appear that neither of the workers had time off: Wiwik was only able to reveal how she had been ill-treated after running away, and Awunningsih revealed what had happened to her after being taken for a medical check-up by the agency that had helped arrange her hire to The.

A difference between the two cases is that, whereas Sazarina's fitted into a familiar pattern of a stressed working mother giving vent to her feelings upon a person who is under her power, The's behaviour seemed much more calculated and exploitative: during her trial, her lawyer claimed that she suggested that Awunningsih act as a prostitute 'out of sheer sympathy'. The pocketed $230 out of the $310 she collected from five men, giving just $80 to the woman she was supposedly so ready to help.

---

A letter concerning the The Min Yek case was sent by TWC2's vice president to 'The Straits Times'. Unfortunately, it was not published in the print edition, though it did appear on the online forum:

Dear Sir/Madam,
                       I suspect that readers who saw the report on the conviction of an employer for prostituting her domestic worker ('Fined $15,000 for pimping her maid', Selina Lum and Theresa Tan, 22/11/'05) would have shaken their heads and thought, 'Whatever next?'

The case once again highlights the vulnerability of domestic workers who have the misfortune to be taken on by unscrupulous employers.

The defendant's lawyer's claim that the worker was 'a willing party ready to provide sexual services so that she could make extra income to repay her debt to her agent' should not go unchallenged. Very few women who engage in prostitution do so by free choice; many are physically coerced, while others are driven by economic or social circumstances.

In this instance, it was reported that the worker in question was not physically coerced into prostitution, but she may nevertheless have felt that she had no real choice but to co-operate with her employer. The burden of a debt that typically takes three to five months for a domestic worker to pay off before she can start sending money home to her family weighs heavily on her mind. She feels under pressure not only to send money as soon as she can, but also to avoid any problems with her employer that might lead to her being sent back home or returned to her agency, which would extend her indebtedness. Many workers in this situation are unwilling to express their true opinions if they go against those of their employers or to reject their proposals. The choices they make are not free. Those include the ones made when they are seeking work and are told that they will not be employed unless they agree to having no days off or doing almost anything else required by an employer.

A second issue that arises from this case is the role of the employment agency that provided the worker to the employer. It is reported that the police acted after it lodged a complaint about what was going on with them. It did the right thing, and that is commendable. Without detracting from that comment, I think that it should also be noted that it kept the agency on the right side of the law.

Section 23(d) of the Employment Agencies Act states that an agency licensed under the act that 'knowingly sends, directs or takes any girl or woman to any place for immoral purposes or to a place where she is likely to be morally corrupted, shall be guilty of an offence'.

Section 24 - (2) stipulates the penalties to which an offending agency can be subject:

'A licensee or any person who is guilty of an offence under section 23 (d) shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both.'

In this instance, the agency could legitimately argue that it did not knowingly send a woman into prostitution, but it must certainly be the case that, once it became aware of her position, it could have jeopardised its own status if it had not taken the responsibility of informing the police.

This underlines a point that TWC2 has been arguing for some time: basic rights and protections for domestic workers need to be ensured under the law. Among these, we have consistently urged, are the right to a day off each week (which can allow a domestic worker who feels wronged to seek help and advice), and limitations on the length of the working day. We have heard arguments that this is best left to 'market forces' and that many protective measures for domestic workers are not practical because abuses take place in the privacy of people's homes: in this case, legal provisions existed to prevent a form of abuse and may well have played a key part in stopping it, although it occurred within the employer's home.

It may be hard to enforce some provisions, but their very existence helps to dispose those who have responsibilities under them to see that they are implemented. 

Yours faithfully,

John Gee
Vice President, TWC2

---

The abuse of Wiwik was documented by her in a diary, where she recorded every incident. This featured prominently in trial reports. Sim Chi Yin reported:

Mr Fachry Sulaiman, the embassy's first secretary (protocol and consular affairs), told The New Paper on Sunday that his team has been telling Indonesian maids here to keep a diary.
 
They've been making that point since late 2003, he said.

He added: 'We instruct them to keep a diary because it's the best way for them to record how they feel each day... And it's useful if something happens to them.'

The message has gone out via the embassy's Sunday activities and twice-monthly radio programme - broadcast from Batam - for maids, he added.

On the hour-long radio show, which runs every second and fourth Wednesday of the month, Mr Fachry and his staff from the embassy's Domestic Worker  Department give out information and advice on all things to do with maids.

He said: 'We hope every one works here happily, but it's also my mission to protect the workers.'

('Indon maids told: Use diaries in case of abuse', 23rd October 2005)

There were varying responses from agents and employers; some said that good employers had nothing to worry about, but others suggested that workers might write lies in their diaries or that the suspicion that their worker might be writing about them might send some employers rummaging through her belongings. Two points that could be made about this are that employers should not consider that they have any right to root through their workers' private papers and that no-one accused in the pages of a diary would face conviction solely on that basis: a court would require corroborating evidence.

---

A member of TWC2's Executive Committee spoke to Sim Chi Yin about the keeping of diaries by domestic workers:

That outlet can be 'cathartic', said Dr Noorashikin Abdul Rahman, a migration scholar and visiting fellow at the National University of Singapore's Geography department.

'The embassy's advice is good. Indonesian domestic workers are more vulnerable because of the widespread practice of not granting this group a day off, especially in the first two years of their contract.'

This means they are often isolated from their peers and have little access to support networks.

Dr Noorashikin, who is also a member of civil society group Transient Workers Count Too, said: 'In their journals, they can also keep a record of wage payments, salary deductions and, for some, unfortunately, abuse.'

In those cases, she added: 'Diary entries can provide clues for the police on the extent and types of abuse the worker claims she had been subjected to. This can then be assessed against physical and medical evidence.'

---

'Maids Dumped' on TV: a response

Portrayals of domestic workers on television sometimes show them in a very negative light or in a stereotypical way. It is important that this should be challenged, not least because it feeds prejudices and misperceptions that encourage the insensitive treatment of domestic workers. Doing this largely depends on the initiative of individuals who see programmes and feel that a response is called for.

Stephanie Chok saw a programme on 23rd November and wrote the critical response that follows. It is very thorough and concrete in its criticisms, and it is to be hoped that the programme's producers will consider it carefully.

Date: 25 November 2005
Sent to: Straits Times Forum
Cc: TWC2, Mediacorp 5 
Subject: TAB TV’s ‘Maids Dumped’ Episode

I watched TAB TV’s latest episode titled ‘Maids Dumped’ (Wed, 23 Nov 05, Mediacorp 5, 10pm). The episode was a highly irresponsible and insensitive portrayal of a really serious issue. TAB TV portrays itself as a cutting-edge ‘part docu-drama, part talk-show’ tackling ‘gritty’ issues with verve. What it has demonstrated so far is a shockingly regressive mentality with regards to key social issues. The three main segments of last night’s show include (in its own words):

• The maid who got pregnant
• The maid who wanted to be a prostitute
• Maids on their day off

These segments consisted of reenactments which perpetuate harmful myths and stereotypes. In the first segment, the employer who raped his maid was portrayed as a sexually-deprived man who was filled with lust because his obnoxious, career-driven wife refused to sleep with him. The fact that this man actually committed rape, a crime punishable by law, was not emphasized. Moreover, the title, “The maid who got pregnant”, appears to put the onus on the maid as an active participant. In fact, a more accurate title would have been “The employer who raped his maid” (against her wishes) – for some people do not appear to understand that ‘rape’ is NOT consensual.

The second segment, “The maid who wanted to be a prostitute” was equally offensive. The title, once more, insinuates that the maid “wanted” to be a  prostitute. Little was made of the acknowledgement that the maid was NOT paid her wages by her employer and thus was driven to run away and seek alternative employment to support herself and her family. It is extremely irresponsible and a gross misrepresentation to conclude that a woman who is driven to desperate economic conditions “wants” to be a prostitute. The reenacted segment ended with the so-called maid dressed in a tight dress seducing a man on the street with savvy and ease. Lest we forget, this was a scene played out by paid actors. Who directed them and wrote the script?

In the next segment, “Maids on their day off”, we were treated to a scene where five maids sit on a straw mat outside Orchard MRT station and make eyes at a group of Indian workers passing by. The show then degenerates into a ridiculous song-and-dance routine. There are maids who have picnics with their friends without mischief, others who spend their days doing community work or attending religious services. Did the producers think of maybe featuring some of these other activities to diversity their portrayals? Clearly, the only objective of the show was to titillate and perpetuate unhelpful negative stereotypes without the least bit of investigation or thought.

In the final section, TAB STING, the show engaged a Bangladeshi worker and ‘secretly’ filmed him while he tried to pick up domestic workers. Firstly, what does this set-up show about the preconceived notions the producers held of both Bangladeshi workers and domestic workers? Ultimately, the Bangladeshi worker was unsuccessful in his attempt and this was viewed as quite comic  al. What  if he had managed to get a telephone number from a domestic worker? Let us not forget that TAB STING is basically trailing fully-grown adults as they spend their days off meeting friends. Should they be subject to such scrutiny over their activities – and moral outcry if they do mingle with the opposite sex?

If the show was serious about highlighting the problem of maid abuse, why did it not target the abusers or engage them in dialogue? If it wished to do ‘investigative’ work, why not STING bullying employers or unscrupulous agents instead of Bangladeshi workers and maids on their day off? Were the producers aware of the consequences on the livelihood of a domestic worker should she be caught on TV doing anything narrow-minded employers believe are ‘unsavory’? Already, advocacy groups in  Singapore are facing many challenges in campaigning for maids to have adequate off days.

From beginning to end, from its illustrations to the scripting, the reenactments to targetted questions, the show was a major disservice for domestic workers in Singapore. They are already suffering from a poor public image in general, thanks to the popular media featuring tasteless, questionable and wholly one-sided feature articles like ‘Is Your Maid a Domestic Goddess’ (FEMALE Nov 2005) and ‘I slept with 10 maids’ (HER WORLD Nov 2005).

The TAB TV production team – from the host to the scriptwriters and producers – truly need to re-examine their production values and personal ethics. Media responsibility is not something that is often discussed here but this program shows that there is a critical need for a deep review into how far we have gone backwards in the 21st century. I would like to believe that this has been a case of ‘lack of awareness’. At the same time, there is little excuse for this sort of thoughtless and harmful media coverage to continue. Perhaps the producers, scriptwriters or host of the program would like to engage in a constructive debate on this issue?
 
Ms Stephanie Chok Juin Mei

---