Editorial 1 : The invisible worker
Introduction: The morning of June 13, 2024 marred by terrible news for all Indians but especially for the families of over 40 Indian migrant workers in Kuwait. As of now, a total of 49 deaths have been reported and at least 50 people have been injured. Among the deceased, 42 were reportedly Indians and 24 of them were from Kerala. Most of those who died were aged between 20 and 50.
Similar incidences, no lesson learnt
- Two years ago, during the football World Cup in Qatar, there were several news reports about rising migrant deaths, harsh working conditions and severe violations of human rights.
- There was similar media coverage during the Dubai Expo, which saw the massive involvement of migrant workers to ensure the rapid development of infrastructure.
- Even during the Covid-19 pandemic, the Ministry of Health in Saudi Arabia reported that migrants constituted 75 per cent of the total people who tested positive for the virus as of May 2020.
- The dingy living spaces and cramped dormitories were noted as a major reason for the virus’s rapid spread among the migrant community.
The Tragic Deaths of Migrants in Kuwait Add to Serious Risks Faced by Migrants in Recent Years
Series of Tragic Incidents
- Migrants have faced serious risks, sometimes leading to death, over the past five years.
- Chronic indifference towards migrant rights, safety, and working conditions in destination countries.
Repetition of Incidents
- Repeated incidents indicate failure to learn necessary lessons.
- Migrant issues gain attention only during crises.
Need for Effective Policies
- Strength of the Indian diaspora worldwide, especially in West Asia, requires well-thought-out policies.
- Essential to ensure the safety and well-being of Indian migrants.
The findings of Kerala Migration Survey 2023
- The Kerala Migration Survey (KMS) 2023 estimates that 2.2 million people from the state have migrated, with 80 per cent of them residing in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.
- The majority of these migrants work in the unorganised sector, such as construction sites and factories, where they often face dangerous working conditions.
- Additionally, since migrants in Gulf countries do not have the option of permanent residency, they are not adequately protected and have few rights, which can lead to exploitative labour conditions similar to those observed in Qatar in the run-up to the World Cup.
Challenges in Addressing Migrant Issues
- Lack of data on migrants in origin and destination countries.
- Inconsistent and inadequate data from agencies on migrant health and deaths.
- Vulnerable migrants in low-skill, low-paying jobs often invisible and unprotected.
Need for Systematic Study and National Database
- KMS provides data on migration patterns, but more comprehensive study needed.
- Urgent need for a national-level migration database to understand conditions and trends.
- Essential for improving migrant safety and well-being.
Migrants' Dreams and Human Costs
- Migrants often seen only as sources of remittances.
- Need to recognize the people behind the remittances and the human cost of migration.
- India has signed MoUs with GCC countries on migration but needs better implementation.
- Aim for India to ensure safe migration and life for its migrants, not just focus on remittances.
Conclusion: These crises are a result of a chronic indifference towards addressing migrant rights, safety and working conditions in destination countries. The repetition of the incidents also suggests that we have not learned the lessons we should have.
Editorial 2 : Ineffective dispute resolution
Introduction: On June 3, the Finance Ministry announced a surprising policy decision. After trying to promote India as a hub for arbitration for decades, the Government of India now feels that arbitrations do not work for them and that the arbitration clause should be dropped from all future government/government-controlled entities’ contracts (except in relation to minor disputes of a value of Rs 10 crore or less).
New Policy Overview
- Government departments should amicably settle disputes in long-term public interest.
- High-level committees (comprising former judges/retired senior officials) will vet or approve settlements.
- If settlements fail, disputes will be adjudicated by courts.
Reasons for Policy Change
- Government perceives arbitrators as lacking integrity and colluding with private parties.
- Belief that arbitral awards are difficult to challenge on merits.
Criticism of the New Policy
- Government's hope in settling disputes without avoiding responsibility is fundamentally flawed.
- Policy could impede infrastructure projects and the goal of a five trillion-dollar economy.
Concerns About Arbitrators
- Arbitrators are intended to be independent and impartial, not government-biased.
- Adverse orders do not imply compromised tribunals; they indicate government shortcomings.
- Abandoning arbitration for lack of trusted arbitrators undermines a valid dispute resolution method.
Trust Issues in Settlements
- Government’s distrust in arbitrators raises questions about trusting officials in negotiations.
- High-level committee approval is still a voluntary, administrative decision.
- Settlements lack transparency and accountability compared to judicial awards.
Overestimation of Government's Settlement Abilities
- Government officials face multiple layers of accountability and legal scrutiny.
- Fear of signing off on significant liabilities deters decision-makers from settling disputes.
- Vivad se Vishwas – II scheme example shows government preference for discounted settlements over honouring arbitral awards.
Court Adjudication Challenges
- Courts are not equipped for heavy commercial disputes.
- Courts are overburdened and slow; challenges to arbitral awards take years.
- Original suits with substantial stakes and complexity are impractical for courts to handle efficiently.
- The 2015 Amendment to the Arbitration Act, prescribes that award challenges shall be disposed off expeditiously “and in any event” within one year.
- The reality is that these challenges linger for around five years or so in the court of first instance alone.
Conclusion: Arbitrations, despite imperfections, are more workable than court litigation. Effective dispute resolution is crucial for economic growth. The policy change is short-sighted and needs a swift reversal to improve arbitration processes and address government concerns more effectively.