Indonesia’s reviewed law on labour migration

On Thursday October 12, ANRSP members KSBSI and SBMI jointly organized a workshop on Indonesia’s reviewed law on labour migration. The current legislation, Bill nr 39/2004, has been in effect for 13 years and its revision is in the last stages. Without obstacles it will be approved in parliament on October 28 this year. Generally speaking, both KSBSI and SBMI think some amendments to the decree are positive, others require a critical look and still other elements are not sufficiently taken up in the reviewed of the bill.

The new amended Bill will focuses on the protection of migrant workers. For example, Indonesia will no  longer send migrant workers to countries oversees who didn’t sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Indonesian Government. Also the sanctions by law for offenders will be strengthened. The possibility to combine jail-time and financial sanctions will make the sanctions more applicable in practice.

The reviewed bill also shifts the migrant workers’ social protection. Instead of a separate social security mechanism (private, for profit), migrant workers now have to join the universal, non-profit, State owned social protection body called BPJS. According to KSBSI and SBMI, as such this is a positive evolution. However, the new social protection body cannot cover all risks the former system covered (for example repatriation, sexual harassment, etc). Furthermore not all possible social protection schemes are being made compulsory for migrant workers.  KSBSI and SBMI state that all social protection schemes should be made compulsory for migrant workers. This means the government should not see migrant workers as informal workers. To cover the other risks, it might be more feasible to solve this problem in the short term by bringing the responsibility for very specific migration related risks (like repatriation) to the ministry of foreign affairs. Widening the possible schemes within the BPJS, might prove to be a much more challenging approach in the short term.

Unfortunately many questions remain on the actual implementation.  The role of government institutions increases, but who is going to monitor what will happen in the bureaucracy?  For example: how will it be guaranteed that migrant workers don’t have to pay for their recruitment themselves? So there should be an independent monitoring body that can not only mediate, but that can also sanction effectively.  KSBSI and SBMI also know that offences are happening right at the recruitment phase, even before migrant workers leave the country. So legal aid should be provided by the government even in the pre-process stage.

Another gap is the important phase of the recruitment and the placing of Migrant workers.  Unfortunately the bill doesn’t tackle this issue well. Another derivative regulations on placing will be needed.