04 Feb 2007 |
|
Nigerians And The Embassies Of Indonesia And Norway The treatment of Nigerians by foreign embassies in the country is a major source of frustration for Nigerians. Our people have complained endlessly about how they are treated shabbily whenever they have any business to conduct with a foreign embassy either as visa applicants, or employees (local staff they are called) or as contractors providing certain services. There have been reports of outright racism, sheer cruelty, contempt and abuse. To be fair every case has to be treated on its own individual merit, but some of the cases reviewed from a distance invite nothing but anger, and a sudden gush of patriotic fervour. Nigeria has many problems: we know; there are many Nigerians who would rather relocate to another country: yes; embassies have the right to conduct their affairs according to their own rules: nobody has any problems with that, but nothing in the process of international relations allows a foreign embassy to openly malign its hosts, maltreat the people and carry on in a manner that negates the norms of civility and decency. Where such cases exist, the Nigerian government owes the Nigerian people a duty to intervene on their behalf. Nigerians are forever treated so shabbily even on their own soil, however because the Nigerian government does not really care about the people. The embassies know our shortcomings too well; they know that citizenship means close to absolutely nothing in Nigeria and that the gap between the people and their government is wide, and so they do whatever they like convinced that Nigerians would take anything, no matter how insulting, degrading or dehumanising. This was the pragmatic explanation that I offered a staff of the Embassy of Indonesia who not too long ago phoned to draw my attention to the maltreatment of "local staff" by the Embassy. "They are dealing with us here at the Embassy of Indonesia; they are telling us there is nothing the Nigerian government can do to them.", the fellow at the other end of the line hollered. Only God knows how he laid his hands on my phone number. "The job of the media is to come to the rescue of the downtrodden. I want you to take a look at what is going at the Indonesian embassy, those people are very wicked," he added. I am used to it: I receive free, unsolicited lectures every day about the role of the media in society; this is the interesting thing about this job. But the guy sounded persistent. What was his problem: allegations of maltreatment of local staff by the Embassy of Indonesia. The embassy simply woke up one morning and decided to convert all its local staff to contract staff, for two years in the first instance, including the staff who have worked for the embassy for up to 27 years or 10 years in some instances. Problem arose when the embassy came up with a document titled "waiver statement" (pernyataan pengesampingan) under which the staff, no matter the length of service are required to sign off all accrued rights and entitlements, or forfeit their employment with immediate effect if they failed to do so. Clause 2 of the Waiver statement ties the hands of the local staff as follows: "I voluntarily waive my right referred to in the above Point 1 and decide to execute the employment contract for definite period which shall govern my employment relationship with the Mission. By virtue of executing the Employment Contract for Definite Period, I waive my right or any other right in the future arising out of my employment relationship with the Mission prior to 31 December 2005." Some of the staff kicked. They insisted that even if they must sign a new contract with the Embassy, their right to all previous entitlements including gratuity cannot be taken away from them. Besides, they argued that the new contract is a form of slavery which violates the Labour laws of both Nigeria and Indonesia and is frowned upon by the international system. The only response from the Embassy was that they should take it or get lost, or risk being removed from the Embassy premises, with force if need be. The aggrieved staff took their case to members of a proposed Nigeria-Indonesia Chamber of Commerce, and also approached the Nigeria Labour Congress and Gani Fawehinmi Chambers. In a letter of appeal from the latter dated January 10, 2007, the attention of the Embassy of Indonesia was drawn to a number of principles: one that the "Waiver Statement" is "oppressive and unjustifiable"; two, that "contract of employment in every civilized environment must respect the human dignity of the employees and should not reduce employees to mere slaves perpetually at the mercy of the tyrannical overlord who derives pleasure from dehumanizing them"; three, that the Embassy cannot and should not "ignore the prescriptions of the International Labour Organization on minimum standards of decency to be accorded employees," and four, that the Indonesian Law of Contract does not authorize the discrimination of local staff by Indonesian embassies abroad. The overlords at the Embassy of Indonesia could not be bothered. Eventually, they sacked the recalcitrant workers who were not willing to sign themselves into slavery in the 21st Century. Neither the persuasive authority deployed by the Gani Fawehinmi Chambers nor the Nigeria Labour Congress could help their situation. They are now out of job, and as the Indonesians predicted, "nothing will happen". And if this is so, it will be most unfortunate indeed. The conditions that the Indonesian Embassy imposed on its Nigerian staff were not extended to Indonesians working in the same Embassy. It should also be noted that there is gross discrimination in terms of emoluments between the two categories of staff, with a graduate Nigerian staff earning a paltry N14, 000 as basic salary per month! Should we blame the Indonesians? Yes, we should. But before doing so, the point must be made that the Indonesians are not alone in the maltreatment of Nigerian workers. Nigerians working in establishments owned by Asians generally are full of complaints about how they are treated as if they are less than human. There may well be other embassies where the local staff are no better treated than their colleagues in the Indonesian embassy. In virtually very similar situation, the oppressors of Nigerians inside Nigeria simply remind the Nigerians that they are doing them a favour by offering them a job. They point to the Nigerian labour market and its high unemployment index, the poor wages structure, and the cynicism even of Nigerian employers of labour. Labour is badly priced, wickedly treated and most unfortunate in Nigeria. The mindset of the average employer of labour is that he or she is doing you a favour and you have to be grateful to have a place to go in the morning. You are therefore expected to take whatever you are offered without any complaints or else even that which has been given could be taken away from you! The Nigerian worker seeing that there are no jobs out there accepts his misfortune with equanimity. In the Indonesian embassy case, the sacked workers soon had to get some prominent Nigerians to intervene on their behalf! What is crushed underfoot in both the Indonesian case and every other case is: human dignity. The Indonesian Embassy should take a second look at its "waiver statement". It is truly oppressive and unjustifiable. The Nigerian government also has a duty to call foreign embassies to order where the rights of Nigerians are being violated; a foreign Mission should not be an outpost for modern slavery and ultimately, Nigeria must put its own house in order otherwise we will continue to get confronted with moral questions that need not arise. And that takes me to the Embassy of Norway which can also be accused of using Nigeria's social and economic situation to spite the country and denigrate its people in a most unfriendly manner. This is the story of Citizen Okonkwo, Ejike John, a 500-Level student of Mass Communication at the Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago Iwoye, Ogun state. He has been selected to represent Nigeria at the International Student Festival taking place in Trondheim (ISFIT 2007), Norway, from 16 -25 February 2007. ISFIT is the world's largest student thematic festival, this year about 450 students from 144 nations will participate at the event, with Ejike as the only participant from Nigeria. The organisers are providing food and accommodation while Globacom, the telecomm company has graciously accepted to give Ejike a return ticket to enable him participate at the world forum where young people will be examining the subject of globalization at various interactive sessions and symposia. But Ejike may not be able to travel, because the Royal Norwegian Embassy has refused to give him a visa. For him it is his first opportunity to travel abroad; in his letter to Globacom he says his dream is "to contribute my quota to the development of Nigeria by deploying my skills and capabilities to any national task given". A letter from Olabisi Onabanjo University signed by Mrs A. A. Odusanya on behalf of the Registrar confirms that Ejike is a 500 Level student of the University. But the Royal Norwegian Embassy is not impressed. It not only rejected the visa application; the Visa Officer, Oyvind Skutle used the opportunity to pour venom on Nigeria in a most undiplomatic manner. The Norwegian Embassy surely has a right to turn down any visa application, without even offering any reason for doing so, but when it provides reasons, it should submit itself to the test of scrutiny. Shall we take a look at Mr Skutle's letter? "According to the Immigration Regulation section 106 sixth paragraph, second sentence," he writes, "an application for a visa may be rejected if considered necessary from an immigration policy viewpoint" Okay, no problem. Then he adds: "Where our experience with specific groups and nationalities indicates that many fail to leave Norway upon expiration of their visas, it has become our practice to issue a visa only in exceptional cases". Mr Skutle is leading on to something here; he is preparing the grounds for scuttling Ejike's dream, and it is Nigeria that he has in mind. In the very next paragraph, he breaks the rule of diplomacy when he writes as follows: "The Embassy has noted that the applicant comes from a country with a great potential for emigration due to its social and economic situation. In our experience many applicants from Nigeria wish to resettle in other countries." The rest of the rejection letter gripes about the claim that "the applicant lacks the necessary ties to his country of origin". The fact that the application has just a few months to bag a degree in Mass Communication is not considered a strong tie to his country. Ejike has been advised to appeal to the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration within three weeks if he so wishes, but with Mr Skutle's strong emphasis on "exceptional cases" and "our experience", it makes sense to conclude that any Nigerian that goes near the Norwegian Embassy cannot be sure of a fair hearing. The Embassy already has a mind set about Nigerians and Nigeria. Mr Skutle complains about Nigeria's "social and economic situation" in an open correspondence. And on the basis of this he confesses a bias: Okonkwo Ejike John is the victim of structural discrimination: the assumption that every Nigerian is the same and that all Nigerians cannot be trusted - a crude and inaccurate syllogism. Such thinking ought not to represent the substance of the Royal Norwegian Embassy's "immigration policy viewpoint". Between the Norwegians and the Indonesians: we are dealing with a twin case of six and half a dozen. The Nigerian government must take an interest in how foreign embassies treat Nigerians, what they say about us, the kind of signals that they send across. The truest test of foreign diplomacy is at the level of culture and human interaction. A missing link in Nigeria's foreign policy process is the citizen's interest as an ingredient of foreign relations. For many years, the song on the lip of every Nigerian diplomat is that "Africa is the centerpiece of Nigeria's foreign policy." Nigeria spent a lot of money trying to help other African countries, but what did we gain from that experience? Today, the Obasanjo government is talking about trade and investment and the end of protectionism. Norway and Indonesia will like to do business with Nigeria, surely, yet they treat Nigerians with so much contempt. Would someone please advise the embassies of Norway and Indonesia in Nigeria to act with a sense of proportion and diplomacy in all matters?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||







Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.