UAE: Exploited Workers Building 'Island of Happiness'

Guggenheim, Louvre, New York University, Other Projects Should Protect Workers from Abuses by Labor Agencies, Construction Firms

May 19, 2009

(Abu Dhabi) - Thousands of South Asian migrant workers building a US$27 billion island development in the United Arab Emirates face severe exploitation and abuse, in some cases amounting to forced labor, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Labor-supply agencies, construction companies, and repressive laws are responsible for the abuse.

The 80-page report, "‘The Island of Happiness': Exploitation of Migrant Workers on Saadiyat Island, Abu Dhabi," found that while the UAE government has moved to improve housing conditions and ensure the timely payment of wages in recent years, many labor abuses remain commonplace. International institutions planning to open branches on the island - including the Guggenheim, New York University (NYU), and the French Museum Agency (responsible for the Louvre Abu Dhabi) - should urgently obtain enforceable contractual guarantees that construction companies will protect workers' fundamental rights on their projects, Human Rights Watch said.

"These international institutions need to show that they will not tolerate or benefit from the gross exploitation of these migrant workers," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "The vague assurances they've received from their development partners are hollow substitutes for firm contractual agreements that their projects will be different from business as usual in Abu Dhabi."

Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE, hopes to turn Saadiyat Island (the "island of happiness") into an international tourist destination. The low-lying island will have four museums and a performing arts center designed by world-renowned architectural firms - including Ateliers Jean Nouvel, Foster and Partners, and Gehry Partners - as well as a campus of New York University, golf courses, hotels, and expensive residences.

Workers from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other South Asian countries have been building the island's infrastructure since Abu Dhabi formed the Tourism Development and Investment Company (TDIC) to oversee the project in 2005. On May 27, 2009, French President Nicolas Sarkozy is scheduled to lay the foundation stone of the Louvre Abu Dhabi. The museum is expected to open in 2013.

Based on interviews with migrant workers, and meetings with UAE and French government officials, as well as officers of international institutions and corporations with projects on the island, the Human Rights Watch report documents a cycle of abuse that leaves migrant workers deeply indebted, badly paid, and unable to stand up for their rights or even quit their jobs.

The UAE government and the authorities responsible for developing Saadiyat Island have failed to tackle the root causes of worker abuse: unlawful recruiting fees, broken promises of wages, and a sponsorship system that gives an employer virtually complete power over his workers.

To obtain the visas needed to work in the UAE, nearly all workers Human Rights Watch interviewed on Saadiyat Island paid hefty fees to "labor-supply agencies" in their home countries that are contracted to supply workers to construction companies in the UAE. Because the agencies promised good terms of employment in the UAE, many workers sold their homes or land or borrowed money at high rates of interest to pay the agencies' fees. Upon arrival in the UAE, the indebted workers - many of whom are illiterate - are required to sign contracts with the construction companies on much worse terms than they had been promised back home. Workers have virtually no recourse against the agencies that cheated them with false promises of good wages and exploitative recruiting fees.

UAE laws prohibit agencies from charging workers such fees. The agencies are supposed to charge the companies, but the law is not enforced. Further, there are no penalties if companies, pursuing their own financial interests, knowingly work with agencies that make workers pay the fees.

Workers face the choice of quitting their jobs while still owing thousands of dollars for the unlawful recruiting fees, or continuing to work in exploitative conditions. Virtually all complained of low pay and poor-quality healthcare. Nor can workers effectively demand better pay or living conditions, because UAE laws do not protect the basic rights to form unions, bargain collectively, or strike. Instead, the UAE's "sponsorship" system gives employers nearly absolute control over the workers' lawful employment and presence in the country, with visas tied to individual employers. All workers said that when they arrived in the UAE, their employers had confiscated their passports. Employers can move to revoke the visa of a worker who quits, leading to deportation.

Some workers reported conditions that amount to forced labor: their employer threatened to fine them heavily if they tried to quit before they had worked for two years, which effectively confined them to the "island of happiness." Workers are generally not aware of their rights and are afraid of expressing grievances, and independent and effective monitoring is lacking.

"The museums and NYU should insist that their local development partners guarantee workers' basic rights, which at minimum should include reimbursement for unlawful recruiting fees, official contracts in their native language signed prior to their arrival, and the right to strike and bargain collectively," said Whitson. "And they should insist on independent third-party monitoring of their projects, and impose meaningful penalties for violations."

Research on Saadiyat Island did show that authorities have taken some positive steps. Although workers' accommodations were still under construction when Human Rights Watch visited the island, they appeared to be relatively hygienic and not overcrowded. TDIC, the government-owned company overseeing the island's development, has sought contractual guarantees from construction companies that they will not confiscate workers' passports, use forced labor, or commit other abuses.

Human Rights Watch contacted the construction companies, architectural firms, and international institutions working on the island to alert them to the need to take steps to ensure workers on their projects are not abused. Many did not reply to our letters. Among the Guggenheim, New York University, and the French Museum Agency (responsible for the Louvre Abu Dhabi project), only the Agency has taken any steps to seek meaningful contractual guarantees from TDIC to allow independent monitoring of workers' rights, but even the Agency's contract lacks guarantees or provisions allowing it to enforce workers' rights.

Jordan: Replace Law on Associations

Proposed Amendments Not Sufficient to Meet Rights Obligations

May 16, 2009

(Amman) - Jordan should scrap its proposed amendments to a law regulating nongovernmental organizations and instead propose a new law that would guarantee freedom of association, Human Rights Watch and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network said today in a letter to Prime Minister Nader al-Dahabi. The proposed amendments to the 2008 Law of Societies do not rectify major deficiencies that violate the right to free association.

"It makes no sense to keep trying to cobble together amendments to a law that takes the wrong approach to begin with," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "It is time to start over with a new law guided by Jordan's obligations under international law."

In their letter to al-Dahabi, Human Rights Watch and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network called on the government to revisit aspects of the 2008 law limiting the activities and membership of nongovernmental organizations and their ability to function independently from the government.

In 2006, a coalition of Jordanian nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) proposed a draft law, but the government rejected it, instead submitting an alternative draft law to parliament that was even more restrictive than the old Law of Charitable
Societies of 1966. Parliament approved the government's draft with minor changes in 2008, and King Abdullah signed it into law in December 2008.

An outcry by local and international NGOs prompted al-Dahabi's government to offer a new round of consultations with NGOs under the aegis of the social development minister, Hala Latouf. But the resulting amendments proposed by the government fell short of NGO expectations. The parliamentary session expected for June is to vote on these government amendments.

The current law prohibits associations from pursuing any "political objectives" and activities that violate "public order." Both terms are overly broad and invite governmental abuse. The law also discriminates against non-Muslim religious organizations, by restricting the activities they are allowed to engage in, and excludes non-Jordanians and children from establishing associations in
Jordan, in violation of the country's international treaty obligations.

The 2009 proposed amendments would ease the process of establishing an association by describing more clearly the duties of the registrar of associations, but they continue to grant the government ultimate political control to decide whether an association can incorporate. The inclusion of a right to challenge such denials judicially provides inadequate redress, since the law includes no criteria for denying permission and the government could act lawfully by denying permission without reason.

The 2009 proposed amendments do not address the 2008 law's disproportionate government control over the work of NGOs, requiring them to submit annual plans to the government in advance, to admit government officials to meetings, and to
seek prior approval for any foreign funding. The 2008 law also allows the government to remove an NGO's management and replace it with state functionaries and to dissolve the NGO for repeating minor infractions of the law. The new amendments would actually increase governmental control, allowing it access to an NGO's finances at any time without cause or a judicial warrant.
These measures make it difficult for associations to operate independently of government, the defining feature of nongovernmental organizations.

International law guarantees the right to form associations, and any restrictions placed on that right in a democratic society must be necessary for national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, and be the least restrictive possible. The Jordanian government has not made clear how the severe restrictions fulfill any of these conditions.

"The government's attempts to exert excessive control over NGOs deprives Jordanians of the benefits of open discussion about public policies and services," said Whitson.

Yemen: Halt Crackdowns on Newspapers

Military Assault, Printing Bans and Plan for Special Media Court Are Unjustified Censorship

May 15, 2009

(New York) - Yemen's government should immediately cease attacks on independent newspapers and scrap plans for a special court to try media cases, Human Rights Watch said today.

"These actions are a clear effort to silence independent voices in Yemen," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "President Abdullah Ali Saleh needs to end this campaign of intimidation and censorship."

On May 12, 2009, government soldiers in the southern port city of Aden stormed the headquarters of al-Ayyam, the country's most popular daily, as demonstrators outside the building protested a week-old publication ban on the paper and seven other Yemeni publications. At least two security guards were reported killed in an exchange of gunfire, with each side blaming the other.

Yemen's information minister had banned publication of the papers on the grounds that their reporting was "harming national unity." The papers had been reporting on recent, deadly clashes between government troops and protesters demanding more resources for the country's impoverished south.

Al-Ayyam delivery trucks were seized and set on fire May 1 and May 3 by people the paper described as government sympathizers. In the following days, security forces also arrested a blogger and the editor of a web site in the southern province of Hadhramaut.

The new media court was authorized Wednesday by the Supreme Judicial Council, an administrative body affiliated with the Justice Ministry. The ministers of justice and information said it would open on May 16 to hear media cases swiftly and "protect all sides' rights."

However, Yemen has previously prosecuted journalists critical of the government in proceedings that fall short of international fair-trial standards. Last year, one prominent journalist was convicted of terrorism - but subsequently pardoned - for reporting on civilian casualties by military forces during clashes with minority Zaidis in the north. Other journalists have been detained by security agents. On February 12, 2008, unidentified gunmen attacked al-Ayyam's offices in the capital, Sana'a, after the paper covered previous unrest in the south.

"Yemen's history of harassing journalists raises serious questions about the judicial council's motives," Whitson said.

Yemen is a party the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Arab Charter on Human Rights, both of which guarantee the right to freedom of expression.

"We urge Yemeni government authorities to investigate these incidents thoroughly and to allow freedom of expression," Whitson said.

Syria: Flawed Court Resumes Prosecutions

"The resumption of business in this kangaroo court is a distressing signal that Syrian authorities have no interest in addressing their flawed justice system...Instead of revealing the fate of those detained in Sednaya and referring the accused to courts that can actually dispense justice, they decided to resume sentencing defendants in a court that rubber-stamps whatever the security services want."

Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch

Government Ignores Calls to Reform Justice System

The Supreme State Security Court (SSSC), a special court with almost no due process guarantees that violates the right to a fair trial, resumed its activities this month following an eight-month suspension, Human Rights Watch said today.

Since the resumption, the court has sentenced at least five defendants and questioned another six, on charges that include "membership in a banned organization" and "contact with the enemy." Human Rights Watch urged the Syrian authorities to dissolve the court and provide all defendants with a free and fair trial.

The court suspended its operations in July 2008 following a riot at Sednaya prison, where most of the court's pretrial detainees are held. The authorities quelled the riot violently and subsequently imposed a total blackout on information concerning detainees in Sednaya. The Syrian authorities have never issued any explanation for the suspension of the court's hearings, but it was probably linked to the information blackout.

"The resumption of business in this kangaroo court is a distressing signal that Syrian authorities have no interest in addressing their flawed justice system," said Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch. "Instead of revealing the fate of those detained in Sednaya and referring the accused to courts that can actually dispense justice, they decided to resume sentencing defendants in a court that rubber-stamps whatever the security services want."

The court resumed its work in secrecy and without any explanation. According to three Syrian activists, the court resumed operations about three weeks ago without any warning. A Western diplomat who has access to the court confirmed that the court had resumed operations after he attended a trial on March 22, 2009.

In a report issued in February, Human Rights Watch documented how the Syrian authorities use the SSSC to silence dissent by convicting defendants on the basis of vague charges that often criminalize freedom of expression and in trials that lack basic due process guarantees. By decree, this court is exempt from the rules of criminal procedure that apply in Syria's criminal courts, and defendants have no right to appeal their verdicts to a higher tribunal. Defense lawyers play a largely ceremonial role and usually see their clients for the first time on the day of the trial.

Little is known about the cases decided by the court since it has resumed its operations. Access to the court remains restricted to defense lawyers and Western diplomats, many of whom were not aware that the court had resumed its operations. The Syrian authorities granted Western diplomats access to the court in 2004 but never provided any explanation for their decision.

According to information from two activists and a diplomat, this month the court sentenced Dr. Fadi `Issa to 12 years in prison on charges of belonging to the banned Muslim Brotherhood, Muhammad al-Halabi to three years on unknown charges, and Khalil Abu Zeid to five years on charges of "committing an act intended to cause an armed rebellion against the authorities."

In a brief 30-minute session last Sunday, the court sentenced two Syrians whose identities are not known on various charges, including "contact with the enemy." The court also questioned five Syrian Kurdish activists on unknown charges and a Lebanese citizen accused of being in contact with the Syrian opposition figure Abdel Halim Khaddam.

"The international community is opening up to Damascus," said Whitson. "The question is whether the Syrian officials will open up their courts to scrutiny and provide their people with fair and public trials. An essential first step would be to abolish the SSSC."