More countries may face a deployment ban due to their inability to provide protection for overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) said yesterday.
POEA chief Carlos Cao said they are coming out with an additional list of “noncompliant” and “compliant” countries early next year.
“The POEA resolution for 31 other receiving countries, based on the certification issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs, is due by April 2012,” Cao said.
Cao said Congress has given the POEA six more months to review the certification issued by the DFA on 31 other countries, including those in the Middle East.
The six-month period, Cao said, would give the Philippine government and receiving countries longer time to forge bilateral agreements required for the protection of OFWs.
Under the amended Migrant Workers Act, the Philippine government is only allowed to deploy to countries with existing bilateral agreement or existing policies ensuring welfare and protection of Filipino workers.
Government sources disclosed that the DFA has certified Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries as “partially compliant” or can provide protection to only certain skills of Filipino workers.
“Partial compliance means that the DFA recommended the ban on deployment of domestic helpers to Saudi Arabia and several other Gulf countries,” government officials said.
Although Gulf countries were not officially informed of the DFA recommendation, it was said that Saudi Arabia and other receiving countries were already aware of the recommendation.
Earlier, the POEA banned the deployment of OFWs to 41 receiving countries based on the recommendation of the DFA, citing noncompliance with the guarantees provided under the Migrant Workers Act or Republic Act 10022.
The DFA, however, has sought for the deferment of the deployment ban, saying it needs more time to talk with the concerned countries.
The POEA held an emergency meeting Friday to discuss the possibility of delaying the implementation of the ban, but has yet to come out with a final decision.
The law mandates the implementation of the deployment ban 15 days after the publication of the list in a national newspaper or on Nov. 17.
Government officials said the only way to defer the implementation of the deployment ban is for the DFA to withdraw its certification.
Former ambassador Roy Señeres, on the other hand, said the law must be repealed since it cannot be fully implemented in the long run.
Recruiters’ appeal
Also yesterday, the recruitment industry called on the DFA to study the impact of the deployment ban and pursue dialogues with receiving countries to ensure the protection of OFWs.
However, recruitment leader Lito Soriano said the DFA must first withdraw the certification it submitted to the POEA to defer the implementation of the ban.
“This is to give the POEA the legal reason to temporarily withhold the implementation of the deployment ban which has triggered so much flak from the private agencies and OFWs,” Soriano said.
Soriano said he was told that a group of OFWs who previously worked in Libya is planning to seek legal action to stop the government from implementing the ban.
This developed as Sen. Loren Legarda called on government agencies to get their act together in pursuing their mandate to protect OFWs.
Legarda urged the DFA and the POEA to coordinate on their positions regarding the deployment ban covering 41 countries.
“How can we genuinely protect the interests and well-being of 10 million Filipinos overseas if our government agencies cannot even get their act together?” said Legarda, chairperson of the Senate committee on foreign relations.
In a statement, Legarda questioned the POEA Board resolution which cited that the ban was on the basis of the certification of Philippine embassies and consulates.
She likewise asked why the secretary of foreign affairs is now calling for a deferment of the ban.
“These developments suggest lack of coherence in the actions being taken by DFA and POEA,” she said.
“I understand that it was the intent of the POEA to implement the provisions of the law. The question, however, rests on how the decision to impose a deployment ban on 41 countries was reached. Obviously, someone was left out in the cold,” Legarda said.
Section 5 of RA 10022 provides that “the POEA Governing Board, after consultation with the DFA, may, at any time, terminate or impose a ban on the deployment of migrant workers.”
Legarda also lamented the fact that POEA’s decision obviously overlooked the fact that the DFA serves as the first line of defense in the implementation of the country’s foreign policy.
“The protection of overseas Filipinos is one of the pillars of our foreign policy. It is incumbent upon other agencies of the government to consult the DFA on matters that will affect our relations with other countries, and consequently, the interests of overseas Filipinos,” Legarda added.
Welcome move
On the other hand, Compostela Valley Rep. Maria Carmen Zamora-Apsay welcomed the ban on the deployment of OFWs to 41 countries where no labor and social laws can protect them.
“It is consistent with our firm stand to curb the abuses and exploitation being suffered by our OFWs,” Apsay said.
“As vice chairperson of the House committee on overseas workers affairs, we have been lobbying for this listing for the past six months or so,” she said.
The POEA Governing Board issued GB Resolution No. 7-2011 stopping the deployment of OFWs to the following countries: Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Cambodia, Cayman Islands, Chad, Croatia, Cuba, North Korea, Dominica, East
Timor/Timor Leste, Eritrea, Haiti, India, Iraq, Kyrgzstan/Kyrgyz Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho,
Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nauru, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Palestine, Serbia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St.
Vincent and the Grenadines, Sudan, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turks and Caicos, Tuvalu, US Virgin Islands, Vanuatu and Zimbabwe. - With Christina Mendez, Edith Regalado
