The Situation of Migrant Workers
(1) Background
Throughout 2002 large numbers of people continued to leave Burma to seek work abroad. Approximately ten percent of Burma’s population migrates to other countries, according to a report Migration, Needs, Issues and Responses in the Greater Mekong Subregion 2002, by the Asian Migrant Center. People leave Burma for a number of reasons. Rampant inflation, a deteriorating economy and general lack of employment and educational opportunities are factors that cause many people to emigrate. In addition to these hardships, many people living in rural areas are forced to pay heavy taxes to local officials and the military and to sell a large percentage of their crops to the government at below-market prices. For these reasons, many Burmese view their migration as less of a decision than an economic necessity.
Ethnic minority people living in civil war zones often have no choice about emigrating, as they are forced to flee their homes to avoid brutal campaigns of violence against them by the Burmese Military. Every year thousands of people flee across the border, primarily into Thailand, to escape these human rights violations which include mass forced relocation, arbitrary arrest, torture, rape, and extra-judicial killing. Some of these people are able to seek asylum in refugee camps in Thailand and Bangladesh, however many of those fleeing human rights violations are not recognized as refugees by the Thai and Bangladeshi Governments. These individuals are left with the choice of trying to enter refugee camps illegally or else trying to survive as migrant workers.
Migration from Burma is facilitated by the fact that 7 of Burma’s 14 States and Divisions share borders with neighboring countries. In the west, Burma borders Bangladesh and India, in the north and northeast China, and in the east Laos and Thailand. In a 1999 report by Save the Children UK, Small Dreams Beyond Reach: The Lives of Migrant Children and Youth Along the Borders of China, Myanmar, and Thailand, the authors note that in the past ten years the largest flow of migrants in the Mekong region has been concentrated along the borders of China, Burma and Thailand, with Burmese people making up the largest percentage of the population migrating. The report goes on to note that while China, India, Bangladesh and Thailand have collectively reported hosting over two million Burmese migrants, the actual population of people from Burma living in these countries is likely to be much higher. However it is extremely difficult to obtain accurate estimates as to the number of Burmese working abroad, as many are illegal, and the population as a whole is highly mobile. In addition, some migrant groups are ethnically similar to indigenous populations of neighboring countries, making them difficult to identify as non-natives.
Situation for Women Migrant Workers
Women make up a significant percentage of migrants from Burma. In neighboring countries, most notably Thailand, there is a strong demand for female labor. Women who emigrate are more likely then men to work as undocumented or illegal workers. This is partly due to the fact that many women take jobs that are in the informal sector and not included in government registration. While women are subjected to the same poor conditions and abuses as men who are migrant workers, women also suffer abuses specific to their gender. Of greatest concern is the fact that Burmese women working outside their country are extremely vulnerable to sexual abuse by their employers, human traffickers, local officials, or others. Many women face sexual harassment and/or sexual assault in the workplace, while they are in government detention centers, and/or in their homes and communities. Women migrant workers who are undocumented have little recourse when they are abused, as their abusers often threaten them with arrest and deportation if they complain to the authorities or try to escape their situation. As a result of this situation, a number of young migrant women report feeling pressure to get married in order to have some protection against unwanted sexual advances from others.
As in Burma, most migrant women also suffer from a lack of access to reproductive health care, and information on STDs and contraceptives. In Gathering Strength, a report by Images Asia, the authors note that in Mae Sot, a town on the Thai/Burma border, some health workers have reported that it is more difficult to negotiate with factory managers than brothel owners about provision of reproductive health information to employees. One health worker reports the following situation in Mae Sot:
"Our patients come from the Mae Sot area, factories, refugee camps, some from inside Burma, and some from the border....We see pregnant women who don’t want their babies, and they induce abortions. When they arrive here they already have infections. Especially in the factories in Mae Sot, there are many women who get pregnant but don’t want to have babies. Some induce abortions themselves, some get TBAs [Traditional Birth Assistants] to do it. After an induced abortion, there is increased chance of an ectopic [tubal] pregnancy, which is very dangerous and can be fatal for the woman.
In Burma, women are very shy, and no one gets any sex education. But here, in the factories, men and women are together. Maybe they will sleep together, and afterwards, the woman is pregnant and she may not even know why. Families never talk about sex. In our culture, it is very secret. Mothers will not tell their daughters anything about sex. This year, there are more young women. Some have even graduated from university, but they all must come to work in Thailand. We have seen two rape cases this year, and many cases of STD’s, including HIV/ AIDS. Now we see more patients who already have AIDS; they die after only one or two months. Last year, two or three people died in our clinic of AIDS. This year, we have seen more than 10 people die of AIDS, including a pregnant woman. In the past one to two years, we have seen many STD’s in women….
A woman came in who had an incomplete abortion. I explained that she needed to stay in the clinic, because the tissue hadn’t come out yet. If we treated her for two or three days and she did not get better, we could send her to Mae Sot Hospital. She said, "No, I cannot take a holiday. My manager will not agree. Just give me medicine because I must continue with my job." I explained to her that we could take care of her here and it would not cost any money, but she could not afford to stop working. So finally, I gave her medicine and told her to come back immediately if she had any problems…I sometimes feel very sad about our people. Now with the arrests [of illegal migrants], people have even more problems. The army is shooting at them in Burma, and they cannot stay here safely. I don’t know what the situation will bring. In the [refugee] camps, we can see the same people repeatedly, and problems are dependent on the season. But here [working with migrant workers], it is different. We often see people only once, and we urge them to come back. But they have problems with transport and arrests by police. We cannot always help like this, you see. Ultimately, change will depend on political changes, not on the clinic or our staff. Political changes must happen step by step. Changes must happen inside Burma, on the borderline, and in Thailand. We can do so many things, but it depends on the situation." (Belak, Brenda, Gathering Strength Women from Burma on Their Rights. Images Asia, January 2002)
In January 2002 the situation for migrant women further deteriorated when the Thai Labour Ministry issued a regulation stating that female foreign workers would be given a medical checkup and those found to be pregnant would not have their licences to work in Thailand renewed. While this regulation was later overturned following protests from human rights groups, many women report that they continue to be dismissed by their employers if they become pregnant. As abortion is illegal in both Thailand and Burma, many women resort to traditional methods to induce abortions which can seriously damage their health.
In 2002, Suzanne Belton, a PhD Candidate at Melbourne University’s Key Centre for Women’s Health, conducted research in Thailand focusing on reproductive health issues of migrant women. Her report notes:
"The preliminary findings of recent research of abortions in Tak [province of Thailand] reveal a serious situation, which is getting worse. In the local Thai hospitals in 2001-2002, twelve Burmese women died from lack of antenatal care, post abortion complications or delivery complications and more than 300 Burmese women were seen with post abortion complications. One woman from a refugee camp died during her 16th pregnancy.
In 2001 at the Mae Tao Clinic, established by Dr Cynthia Maung from Burma to treat Burmese migrants, there were 457 post abortion cases, more than double from 2000. The clinic performed 563 birth deliveries, a comparable number to post abortion cases. However, the numbers are likely much higher as most women still give birth and perform abortions at home with community midwives or abortionists. Of the women interviewed, more than half had been living in Thailand for more than 3 years. This demonstrates the need for long-term intervention strategies and care.
Forty percent of the women interviewed induced their own abortion before going to the clinic or hospital with home-type remedies, massage (pounding and compressing the uterus), high dosages of contraceptive pills or went to an abortionist who puts sticks, nails, etc into the womb. Some women get massive infection of their reproductive organs and lose the ability to ever become pregnant again. Abortions are particularly dangerous since they are illegal in both Thailand and Burma and the abortionists do not appear to be well trained. Legal reforms to liberalize access to clean abortion in both Thailand and Burma would decrease the sickness and deaths.
It costs approximately US$53 for a woman who is hospitalized for post abortion complications in a Thai hospital and about US$230 if she dies from pregnancy related causes. Burmese women in Tak earn about US$45 per month, making hospital fees far beyond their reach.
The research sampling showed that 25% of the women having an abortion experienced five or more pregnancies, which is a serious health risk for the woman. It was found that most women do not receive family planning information while they are inpatients being treated for post abortion care in local Thai hospitals. The availability of information and services could reduce abortions as well as being economical for the women, the Thai health system and NGOs providing services. A one-year contraceptive injection costs US$2.10 and female sterilization costs US$11.60. It was noted that the women were ‘very interested’ in talking about family planning. It was also noted that the women interviewed had little to no education and nearly 25% could not read or write, so alternatives to written information needs to be provided.
Poverty, domestic violence, job retention, ill-timing and community pressure were reasons cited for ending the pregnancy. Abortions and maternal health must be dealt with in the framework of these underlying causes in order for assistance and intervention to be effective and sustainable." (Source: Suzanne Belton, PhD Candidate. Melbourne University Key Centre for Women’s Health in Society Faculty of Medicine. Research conducted through the Mae Tao Clinic. Full report will be published during 2003)
(2) Situation for Migrant Children
From April 1999 to March 2001, Save the Children UK conducted research along Burma’s borders with China and Thailand on the situation of Burmese children living in these countries. In the study, researchers found that the majority of migrants from Burma were young people. Beginning at age 13, children from Burma migrate on their own to search for work in neighboring countries. While some children under 13 also migrate on their own, the majority of children this age migrate with their parents or other relatives. The report goes on to note that:
"The interviews in this study revealed extensive debt-bondage, sexual abuse, illegal confinement, confiscation of documents, arrest and extortion, forced overtime, few basic resources and poor living conditions that were overcrowded, insecure and often violent. Sexual abuse was commonly reported among girls and young women, particularly among those involved in sex work and domestic service. The general health problems impacting children and young people were identified as malaria (the most common illness reported), tuberculosis (TB), dengue fever, diarrhea and malnutrition. Reproductive health issues were a major concern among youth and adults at all the project sites….
Along all the borders, most of the children did not attend school and among those who did only a very few had finished primary level education. Those who were displaced or had migrated across the borders cited constant mobility, remoteness, insecurity and lack of documentation as the reasons why their children did not attend school. Economic instability and language barriers were other important factors. There was also an attitude among participants in several of the study sites that formal education would not lead to a good life, even if young people were to finish higher levels of schooling. Cross-border migration was seen as an opportunity to obtain experience and develop practical skills. Consequently, many children reported not going to school or dropping out of school early. These children began working at an early age and were vulnerable to exploitation as a result of their limited knowledge and skills.
Drug production, trafficking and addiction were critical issues identified by the communities at all of the research sites along the borders. Participants noted the problem of drug addiction, particularly among young people, with children as young as nine and ten years old considered vulnerable to experimentation and addiction. Young migrants also reported being introduced to amphetamines by their employer in order to work harder and longer hours. In addition, migrants along all three borders noted the ease of recruiting migrants into the drug trafficking business, and expressed frustration with the inability to deal with drug-related problems in their families and communities.
Child labour was found in all three countries, particularly along the border areas and among migrant populations. This was largely a result of extreme poverty and of children left orphaned or abandoned by their parents. Many young children were observed working largely in the service and entertainment sectors (such as teashops, restaurants and hotels that often included direct and indirect sex work), in agricultural related jobs, or as day labourers or beggars. In addition, child soldiers, both in the army and with armed opposition groups, were found in Myanmar. According to the attitudes and perspectives of those in this study, children were of a ‘workable age’ as early as six or seven years old…
Orphaned children along the border areas were found to be the most vulnerable, often living without assurance of their most basic needs. These children were the most likely to be exploited and trafficked. Abandonment was a common problem, related to drug trafficking and addiction, HIV/AIDS, and loss of contact with family during migration. In addition, migrants’ illegal status often leads to arrest, detention and deportation, with children reporting being treated as adults during this process, often separated from their family and communities." (Source: Caoutte, Therese. Small Dreams Out of Reach, The Lives of Migrant Children and Youth along the Borders of China, Myanmar, and Thailand. (Bangkok: Save the Children UK, 2001)
Another concern with increasing numbers of families migrating from Burma is the situation for children who are born outside of Burma to Burmese parents. In both Thailand and China the respective governments refuse to grant citizenship to children of both legal and illegal immigrants and refugees from Burma. This is highly problematic, as these children are also denied Burmese citizenship under the Burma Citizenship Act, because they were born outside the country and because their parent(s) left Burma illegally.
At present in Thailand there are no clear regulations about how hospitals should deal with the birth of babies born to parents who have illegally entered the country. Usually hospitals simply do not record the births of these children. In Ranong and Samut Sakhon, it has been reported that hospitals remove the birth records of these babies from the last page of the doctor’s appointment books, to prevent the children from claiming Thai nationality in the future. Stateless children suffer discrimination both in the country of their birth as well as in Burma, if and when they return. Without a national ID, people in Burma are unable to access educational opportunities, government employment, or to travel freely within the country. (Source: BLC)
(3) Burmese Migrants in Thailand
Throughout 2002 people from Burma continued to flee to neighboring Thailand to escape a deteriorating economy and widespread human rights violations by the military regime. While the SPDC officially closed border crossings with Thailand from May to October, large numbers of people continued to enter Thailand at unofficial crossing sites along the border. According to some estimates there are currently as many as 2 million migrants from Burma and other neighboring countries working in Thailand. Migrant workers from Burma come from a variety of geographical locations and ethnic groups. There are both push and pull factors at work when people make the decision to migrate to Thailand. The pull factors include the close geographical location of Thailand to Burma as well as the demand in Thailand for cheap labor. The push factors include the poor state of the Burmese economy and ongoing human rights violations that are specifically acute in areas along the Thai border. Many workers also report that they have come to Thailand to escape the SPDC’s demands for forced labor in their home states and divisions.
As most people emigrate from Burma due to factors that are both political and economic, it is difficult to make absolute distinctions between economic migrants, political asylum seekers, and refugees. The Royal Thai Government maintains a strict and sometimes arbitrary policy on classifying Burmese who arrive in Thailand, which means that in many cases victims of direct human rights abuses are refused access to refugee camps and international humanitarian aid. These people are faced with the choice of trying to illegally enter the refugee camps or else becoming migrant workers. The more than 100,000 Shans currently working in Thailand as migrant laborers are visible examples of these policies. While human rights abuses by the Burmese military in Shan State, including forced labor, forced relocations, arbitrary arrest, killings and rape have been widely documented, the Thai government continues to deny any Shans refugee status.
An 18 December 2002 article in Irrawaddy magazine included an interview with a corn farmer from southern Shan State, who had recently fled to Thailand. This man said: "We can’t survive due to the authority’s taxes and extortion." The article also reported that farmers in Mon State have also been leaving for Thailand following floods that wiped out their rice crops. These farmers reportedly fled not only because of a lack of food, but also because they were unable to supply the government with the required rice quotas. Other regional analysts predict that due to worsening economic conditions, rapidly increasing prices for basic commodities, and widespread flooding, thousands more people will flee to Thailand in 2003. (Source: Irrawaddy)
Thai Migration Policy and Legal Registration of Migrant Workers
Thailand’s policy on migration prioritizes economic development and national security, sometimes at the expense of protecting the rights of migrant workers. For the past 7 years, Thai migration policy has been drafted through a series of cabinet resolutions which reflect the attitude of whatever administration is currently in office. Contradictions between these resolutions have inhibited the formation of a coherent policy on migration and thus hindered the development of a consistent strategy for implementation.
Thai law defines an illegal alien as a person without Thai citizenship who has entered the Kingdom in violation of section 12 of the Immigration Act of 1979. According to this Act, migrants found to be in the country illegally, will be repatriated to their countries of origin. In March 1992 the Thai cabinet passed the first of a successive number of resolutions which have allowed migrants to pay a fee and apply for a work permit which allows them to work legally in Thailand. The permit limits work to specific industries in designated parts of the country. Migrants with work permits are protected under the 1997 Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and covered by most of the provisions in the Labour Protection Act of 1998. The work permit also gives migrants access to the 30-baht health scheme, where each visit to a doctor or clinic costs only 30 baht plus the cost of medicine. Unfortunately enforcement of these protections for migrant workers has been lax, and many workers are not aware of what rights the permit entitles them to and how to respond if these rights are violated.
In addition, Burmese migrant workers often find it difficult to obtain a work permit for a number of reasons. The permit costs 4,450 baht for one year, which makes it too expensive for many workers, who make an average salary of 1,500-2,000 baht a month. In addition, a worker has to be guaranteed by a factory owner or other Thai employer in order to register for a permit. In the past, a key complaint with the work permit system was that registered workers were not allowed to change jobs without losing their legal status. During the September 2002 registration period, changes were made in the regulations which allowed legal workers to change jobs and register with a new employer. These new regulations stated that if and when a registered worker is fired or leaves their job for any reason, they are required to find a new job (and employer to guarantee them) within 7 days or they will lose their permit. This process is still problematic, as in order to register with a new employer, the worker has to first obtain a signature of consent from his or her previous employer. In practice, employers rarely give consent for their workers to switch jobs, as they don’t want employees to move to other factories or businesses which may pay higher salaries. As a result, even with the change in regulations, most workers remain unable to change jobs while retaining their legal status. Due to this, employers can prevent workers from striking or complaining about salaries and working conditions by threatening to fire them.
In some areas of Thailand, specifically in areas on the border with Burma, employers of Burmese workers withhold their employees’ work permits. In these cases, workers are only given a photocopy of their work permit, which is often not accepted by police as valid identification. Workers report that when they are stopped by officials, they are either forced to give bribe money, or else wait for their employer to be contacted to come and vouch for them. In these cases, employers often don’t bother coming to the police station or detention center and the arrested workers are deported and their copy of the work permit confiscated.
Migrants in areas where this practice is common are as a result increasingly choosing not to renew their permits. For example, in Tak province during the November 2002 registration period only 30, 260 Burmese workers registered, compared to the 50, 235 who had registered in 2001. (Source: Bangkok Post)
During the registration renewal period for migrant workers that ran from September 15 to October 15 2002, Thailand instituted a new form, the Tor Dor 13, which migrants had to fill out. This form required that applicants provide their addresses in their home countries, leading some workers to fear that their families in Burma might face harassment from the SPDC which actively discourages illegal migration. Migrants were also afraid that if they gave a false address then they would be banned by the SPDC from returning to Burma in the future.
In a report released in July 2002, Amnesty International noted concerns of illegal migrants being forcibly returned to Burma as many have a "well-founded fear of persecution if they were to be returned."
Working and Living Conditions
In July 2002, Amnesty International released a report, "Myanmar: Lack of Security in Counter-Insurgency Areas," which noted that migrants in Thailand face many difficulties and abuses. AI researchers interviewed 100 Burmese migrants in Thailand who reported that they had paid between 4,500 and 10,000 baht (US$104 to 233) to be brought to Thailand by human smugglers.
Once in Thailand, Burmese migrants work in a number of industries and service sectors, often in dirty and sometimes dangerous conditions for pay that is far below the Thai minimum wage. Workers in factories report that there are many injuries that occur and that workers rarely receive any compensation for work related accidents or deaths. A number of agricultural workers suffer from respiratory or other problems as a result of long-term exposure to chemical pesticide spray. These workers typically are not given masks, gloves or other protective gear even when they are in contact with chemicals that are known to be harmful.
All migrant workers face a common fear of arrest and deportation. This fear keeps many migrants from moving freely and impedes their access to health care and other social services that may be available. For this reason migrants suffer in silence from easily treatable diseases. The spread of communicable diseases is facilitated by lack of access to health care facilities and medicine, cramped living conditions and poor sanitation. Lack of knowledge of the local language also prevents migrants from seeking help when they face unhealthy or dangerous situations. This combination of fear of arrest and lack of knowledge about the laws, customs and language of their host country means that migrants are easily exploited and abused by their employers, Thai officials and others.
Repatriation of Migrant Workers
Before February 2002, illegal migrants deported from Thailand were often simply dropped off at some point on the border, after which they often returned to Thailand.
In late 2001, the Thai and Burmese Governments entered into negotiations about the repatriation of illegal workers. The SPDC agreed to set up a number of holding centers or reception camps directly on the border inside Burma. In February 2002, following a three day visit to Burma, Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai said that the SPDC had agreed to accept back thousands of undocumented workers and had "assured [him] they will not be prosecuted." (Source: Bangkok Post)
Following this, a reception center for returning migrants was established in Myawaddy. While the Thai government has actively encouraged international organizations to assist with the repatriation process, at present there are no international organizations regularly monitoring conditions at this center.
The reception center in Myawaddy (In Burmese Ke Say Yee Sa Kan) is run by the Directorate of the Defense Service Intelligence (DSI) of the Ministry of Defense. Between February and May 2002, over 19,000 migrants from Burma were repatriated and 3,681 people were processed through the Myawaddy Reception Center. (Source: Bangkok Post, New Light of Myanmar) At the reception center, deportees are reportedly placed under a combined police, military and DKBA guard. All returned migrants are screened through a series of interviews with immigration and public health officials, and members of military intelligence.
Thai authorities do not conduct any screening before deportation to determine if any among those deported are refugees or asylum seekers. Instead, local Thai officials regularly assume that all people without ID documents outside the refugee camps are illegal immigrants. This arbitrary definition ignores the fact that although many people do migrate to Thailand for economic reasons, many others are also refugees, political exiles and activists. Often an individual falls into more than one, if not all categories. For example, many refugees attempt to supplement their inadequate diet by leaving their assigned refugee camps illegally, and working for short-term contracts. Others come to Thailand as either refugees or illegal immigrants, and then become involved with some of the many Burmese opposition groups based in Mae Sot. Often people became refugees because they were politically active inside Burma.
SPDC officials specifically screen returned migrants for those who may be affiliated with political opposition groups. Thai authorities also submit personal data on deportees to SPDC officials at the time of repatriation. These officials then cross-check this information with their own files to search for dissidents. As most political activity is criminalized in Burma, this process places past and present politically active deportees at severe risk of arrest, interrogation, torture, and arbitrary detention.
In addition to political screening, returned migrants are also tested for a number of communicable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, Malaria, TB, and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. A number of human rights organizations have protested this mandatory HIV/AIDS testing, and the reported separation of at least 20 individuals who tested positive for HIV/AIDS. Such mandatory testing contravenes UN HIV Principles and Guidelines to which Thailand and Burma are signatory.
Deportees have also reported that as part of an ongoing campaign to discourage illegal emigration, SPDC officials at the reception camp are now photographing and maintaining records of personal data on all deportees. Those deported are informed that if the SPDC officials collect three photographs of one returnee, (i.e. if someone is deported through the reception camp three times) then that person will be arrested for illegal emigration. According to SPDC regulation 367/120-(b)(1), these individuals can be sentenced to up to 7 years imprisonment.
At the end of the screening process it appears that people are dealt with in one of two ways; those who are able to find a resident of Myawaddy prepared to vouch for them are simply released after paying between 2,000-3,500 kyat; while the remainder are transported by truck back to their home districts. Individuals transported back to their home districts are required to pay a transportation fee which varies according to distance. It costs for example, only 150 kyat to be transported to nearby Moulmien but 1400 kyat to be deported to Arakan State. People who have no relatives or friends in Myawaddy to vouch for them and who cannot afford to pay this transportation fee sometimes have to stay in the area working as lookouts to guard train tracks, bridges and government buildings until they can save up the cost of the repatriation fee.
Many people attempt to evade the screening process and/or forced transfer to their home districts by paying bribes to officials. Other deportees apparently are able to bribe their way out at the customs checkpoint on arrival, or else manage to run away during transfer back to their home districts. Having escaped or bribed their way out of official custody, it appears to be a relatively simple matter for migrants to secretly cross the border and re-enter Thailand illegally. Many people wade across the Moei River, which separates the two countries, everyday.
The SPDC actively discourages people, and especially women from migrating abroad. One reason for this is that the regime fears that migrants will report on human rights abuses inside the country to opposition groups or other human rights organizations. Major General Kyaw Win has stated that part of the SPDC’s "Anti-Human Trafficking Campaign" includes efforts to "teach people about negative consequences of working abroad." This campaign appears to focus less on education than on threats and punishment of people found to have worked, or planning to work, abroad. In a number of states and Divisions the SPDC is creating "Human Trafficking Prevention Committees" which have been ordered to collect data on everyone between 16 and 25 years of age, and to investigate anyone traveling to border areas. (Source: Altsean)
Women and girls have been specifically targeted in these campaigns. Some women who return to their villages in Burma have reportedly been made to sign documents pledging to the authorities that they will not return to Thailand. The Myanmar Women’s Affair Association chairperson Dr. Daw Khin Win Shwe, wife of Gen. Khin Nyunt issued an order that young women be prohibited from working in Thailand in order to prevent trafficking. Young women are further prohibited from traveling to Thailand except in the company of a guardian. Women who are found to have disobeyed this order can be put in prison for one to three years. Male deportees have reported that if they were returned to their home towns they also would have been required to sign such a pledge. After doing so they then are in jeopardy of a seven-year prison term if arrested attempting to return to Thailand or upon deportation
(1) Background
Throughout 2002 large numbers of people continued to leave Burma to seek work abroad. Approximately ten percent of Burma’s population migrates to other countries, according to a report Migration, Needs, Issues and Responses in the Greater Mekong Subregion 2002, by the Asian Migrant Center. People leave Burma for a number of reasons. Rampant inflation, a deteriorating economy and general lack of employment and educational opportunities are factors that cause many people to emigrate. In addition to these hardships, many people living in rural areas are forced to pay heavy taxes to local officials and the military and to sell a large percentage of their crops to the government at below-market prices. For these reasons, many Burmese view their migration as less of a decision than an economic necessity.
Ethnic minority people living in civil war zones often have no choice about emigrating, as they are forced to flee their homes to avoid brutal campaigns of violence against them by the Burmese Military. Every year thousands of people flee across the border, primarily into Thailand, to escape these human rights violations which include mass forced relocation, arbitrary arrest, torture, rape, and extra-judicial killing. Some of these people are able to seek asylum in refugee camps in Thailand and Bangladesh, however many of those fleeing human rights violations are not recognized as refugees by the Thai and Bangladeshi Governments. These individuals are left with the choice of trying to enter refugee camps illegally or else trying to survive as migrant workers.
Migration from Burma is facilitated by the fact that 7 of Burma’s 14 States and Divisions share borders with neighboring countries. In the west, Burma borders Bangladesh and India, in the north and northeast China, and in the east Laos and Thailand. In a 1999 report by Save the Children UK, Small Dreams Beyond Reach: The Lives of Migrant Children and Youth Along the Borders of China, Myanmar, and Thailand, the authors note that in the past ten years the largest flow of migrants in the Mekong region has been concentrated along the borders of China, Burma and Thailand, with Burmese people making up the largest percentage of the population migrating. The report goes on to note that while China, India, Bangladesh and Thailand have collectively reported hosting over two million Burmese migrants, the actual population of people from Burma living in these countries is likely to be much higher. However it is extremely difficult to obtain accurate estimates as to the number of Burmese working abroad, as many are illegal, and the population as a whole is highly mobile. In addition, some migrant groups are ethnically similar to indigenous populations of neighboring countries, making them difficult to identify as non-natives.
Situation for Women Migrant Workers
Women make up a significant percentage of migrants from Burma. In neighboring countries, most notably Thailand, there is a strong demand for female labor. Women who emigrate are more likely then men to work as undocumented or illegal workers. This is partly due to the fact that many women take jobs that are in the informal sector and not included in government registration. While women are subjected to the same poor conditions and abuses as men who are migrant workers, women also suffer abuses specific to their gender. Of greatest concern is the fact that Burmese women working outside their country are extremely vulnerable to sexual abuse by their employers, human traffickers, local officials, or others. Many women face sexual harassment and/or sexual assault in the workplace, while they are in government detention centers, and/or in their homes and communities. Women migrant workers who are undocumented have little recourse when they are abused, as their abusers often threaten them with arrest and deportation if they complain to the authorities or try to escape their situation. As a result of this situation, a number of young migrant women report feeling pressure to get married in order to have some protection against unwanted sexual advances from others.
As in Burma, most migrant women also suffer from a lack of access to reproductive health care, and information on STDs and contraceptives. In Gathering Strength, a report by Images Asia, the authors note that in Mae Sot, a town on the Thai/Burma border, some health workers have reported that it is more difficult to negotiate with factory managers than brothel owners about provision of reproductive health information to employees. One health worker reports the following situation in Mae Sot:
"Our patients come from the Mae Sot area, factories, refugee camps, some from inside Burma, and some from the border....We see pregnant women who don’t want their babies, and they induce abortions. When they arrive here they already have infections. Especially in the factories in Mae Sot, there are many women who get pregnant but don’t want to have babies. Some induce abortions themselves, some get TBAs [Traditional Birth Assistants] to do it. After an induced abortion, there is increased chance of an ectopic [tubal] pregnancy, which is very dangerous and can be fatal for the woman.
In Burma, women are very shy, and no one gets any sex education. But here, in the factories, men and women are together. Maybe they will sleep together, and afterwards, the woman is pregnant and she may not even know why. Families never talk about sex. In our culture, it is very secret. Mothers will not tell their daughters anything about sex. This year, there are more young women. Some have even graduated from university, but they all must come to work in Thailand. We have seen two rape cases this year, and many cases of STD’s, including HIV/ AIDS. Now we see more patients who already have AIDS; they die after only one or two months. Last year, two or three people died in our clinic of AIDS. This year, we have seen more than 10 people die of AIDS, including a pregnant woman. In the past one to two years, we have seen many STD’s in women….
A woman came in who had an incomplete abortion. I explained that she needed to stay in the clinic, because the tissue hadn’t come out yet. If we treated her for two or three days and she did not get better, we could send her to Mae Sot Hospital. She said, "No, I cannot take a holiday. My manager will not agree. Just give me medicine because I must continue with my job." I explained to her that we could take care of her here and it would not cost any money, but she could not afford to stop working. So finally, I gave her medicine and told her to come back immediately if she had any problems…I sometimes feel very sad about our people. Now with the arrests [of illegal migrants], people have even more problems. The army is shooting at them in Burma, and they cannot stay here safely. I don’t know what the situation will bring. In the [refugee] camps, we can see the same people repeatedly, and problems are dependent on the season. But here [working with migrant workers], it is different. We often see people only once, and we urge them to come back. But they have problems with transport and arrests by police. We cannot always help like this, you see. Ultimately, change will depend on political changes, not on the clinic or our staff. Political changes must happen step by step. Changes must happen inside Burma, on the borderline, and in Thailand. We can do so many things, but it depends on the situation." (Belak, Brenda, Gathering Strength Women from Burma on Their Rights. Images Asia, January 2002)
In January 2002 the situation for migrant women further deteriorated when the Thai Labour Ministry issued a regulation stating that female foreign workers would be given a medical checkup and those found to be pregnant would not have their licences to work in Thailand renewed. While this regulation was later overturned following protests from human rights groups, many women report that they continue to be dismissed by their employers if they become pregnant. As abortion is illegal in both Thailand and Burma, many women resort to traditional methods to induce abortions which can seriously damage their health.
In 2002, Suzanne Belton, a PhD Candidate at Melbourne University’s Key Centre for Women’s Health, conducted research in Thailand focusing on reproductive health issues of migrant women. Her report notes:
"The preliminary findings of recent research of abortions in Tak [province of Thailand] reveal a serious situation, which is getting worse. In the local Thai hospitals in 2001-2002, twelve Burmese women died from lack of antenatal care, post abortion complications or delivery complications and more than 300 Burmese women were seen with post abortion complications. One woman from a refugee camp died during her 16th pregnancy.
In 2001 at the Mae Tao Clinic, established by Dr Cynthia Maung from Burma to treat Burmese migrants, there were 457 post abortion cases, more than double from 2000. The clinic performed 563 birth deliveries, a comparable number to post abortion cases. However, the numbers are likely much higher as most women still give birth and perform abortions at home with community midwives or abortionists. Of the women interviewed, more than half had been living in Thailand for more than 3 years. This demonstrates the need for long-term intervention strategies and care.
Forty percent of the women interviewed induced their own abortion before going to the clinic or hospital with home-type remedies, massage (pounding and compressing the uterus), high dosages of contraceptive pills or went to an abortionist who puts sticks, nails, etc into the womb. Some women get massive infection of their reproductive organs and lose the ability to ever become pregnant again. Abortions are particularly dangerous since they are illegal in both Thailand and Burma and the abortionists do not appear to be well trained. Legal reforms to liberalize access to clean abortion in both Thailand and Burma would decrease the sickness and deaths.
It costs approximately US$53 for a woman who is hospitalized for post abortion complications in a Thai hospital and about US$230 if she dies from pregnancy related causes. Burmese women in Tak earn about US$45 per month, making hospital fees far beyond their reach.
The research sampling showed that 25% of the women having an abortion experienced five or more pregnancies, which is a serious health risk for the woman. It was found that most women do not receive family planning information while they are inpatients being treated for post abortion care in local Thai hospitals. The availability of information and services could reduce abortions as well as being economical for the women, the Thai health system and NGOs providing services. A one-year contraceptive injection costs US$2.10 and female sterilization costs US$11.60. It was noted that the women were ‘very interested’ in talking about family planning. It was also noted that the women interviewed had little to no education and nearly 25% could not read or write, so alternatives to written information needs to be provided.
Poverty, domestic violence, job retention, ill-timing and community pressure were reasons cited for ending the pregnancy. Abortions and maternal health must be dealt with in the framework of these underlying causes in order for assistance and intervention to be effective and sustainable." (Source: Suzanne Belton, PhD Candidate. Melbourne University Key Centre for Women’s Health in Society Faculty of Medicine. Research conducted through the Mae Tao Clinic. Full report will be published during 2003)
(2) Situation for Migrant Children
From April 1999 to March 2001, Save the Children UK conducted research along Burma’s borders with China and Thailand on the situation of Burmese children living in these countries. In the study, researchers found that the majority of migrants from Burma were young people. Beginning at age 13, children from Burma migrate on their own to search for work in neighboring countries. While some children under 13 also migrate on their own, the majority of children this age migrate with their parents or other relatives. The report goes on to note that:
"The interviews in this study revealed extensive debt-bondage, sexual abuse, illegal confinement, confiscation of documents, arrest and extortion, forced overtime, few basic resources and poor living conditions that were overcrowded, insecure and often violent. Sexual abuse was commonly reported among girls and young women, particularly among those involved in sex work and domestic service. The general health problems impacting children and young people were identified as malaria (the most common illness reported), tuberculosis (TB), dengue fever, diarrhea and malnutrition. Reproductive health issues were a major concern among youth and adults at all the project sites….
Along all the borders, most of the children did not attend school and among those who did only a very few had finished primary level education. Those who were displaced or had migrated across the borders cited constant mobility, remoteness, insecurity and lack of documentation as the reasons why their children did not attend school. Economic instability and language barriers were other important factors. There was also an attitude among participants in several of the study sites that formal education would not lead to a good life, even if young people were to finish higher levels of schooling. Cross-border migration was seen as an opportunity to obtain experience and develop practical skills. Consequently, many children reported not going to school or dropping out of school early. These children began working at an early age and were vulnerable to exploitation as a result of their limited knowledge and skills.
Drug production, trafficking and addiction were critical issues identified by the communities at all of the research sites along the borders. Participants noted the problem of drug addiction, particularly among young people, with children as young as nine and ten years old considered vulnerable to experimentation and addiction. Young migrants also reported being introduced to amphetamines by their employer in order to work harder and longer hours. In addition, migrants along all three borders noted the ease of recruiting migrants into the drug trafficking business, and expressed frustration with the inability to deal with drug-related problems in their families and communities.
Child labour was found in all three countries, particularly along the border areas and among migrant populations. This was largely a result of extreme poverty and of children left orphaned or abandoned by their parents. Many young children were observed working largely in the service and entertainment sectors (such as teashops, restaurants and hotels that often included direct and indirect sex work), in agricultural related jobs, or as day labourers or beggars. In addition, child soldiers, both in the army and with armed opposition groups, were found in Myanmar. According to the attitudes and perspectives of those in this study, children were of a ‘workable age’ as early as six or seven years old…
Orphaned children along the border areas were found to be the most vulnerable, often living without assurance of their most basic needs. These children were the most likely to be exploited and trafficked. Abandonment was a common problem, related to drug trafficking and addiction, HIV/AIDS, and loss of contact with family during migration. In addition, migrants’ illegal status often leads to arrest, detention and deportation, with children reporting being treated as adults during this process, often separated from their family and communities." (Source: Caoutte, Therese. Small Dreams Out of Reach, The Lives of Migrant Children and Youth along the Borders of China, Myanmar, and Thailand. (Bangkok: Save the Children UK, 2001)
Another concern with increasing numbers of families migrating from Burma is the situation for children who are born outside of Burma to Burmese parents. In both Thailand and China the respective governments refuse to grant citizenship to children of both legal and illegal immigrants and refugees from Burma. This is highly problematic, as these children are also denied Burmese citizenship under the Burma Citizenship Act, because they were born outside the country and because their parent(s) left Burma illegally.
At present in Thailand there are no clear regulations about how hospitals should deal with the birth of babies born to parents who have illegally entered the country. Usually hospitals simply do not record the births of these children. In Ranong and Samut Sakhon, it has been reported that hospitals remove the birth records of these babies from the last page of the doctor’s appointment books, to prevent the children from claiming Thai nationality in the future. Stateless children suffer discrimination both in the country of their birth as well as in Burma, if and when they return. Without a national ID, people in Burma are unable to access educational opportunities, government employment, or to travel freely within the country. (Source: BLC)
(3) Burmese Migrants in Thailand
Throughout 2002 people from Burma continued to flee to neighboring Thailand to escape a deteriorating economy and widespread human rights violations by the military regime. While the SPDC officially closed border crossings with Thailand from May to October, large numbers of people continued to enter Thailand at unofficial crossing sites along the border. According to some estimates there are currently as many as 2 million migrants from Burma and other neighboring countries working in Thailand. Migrant workers from Burma come from a variety of geographical locations and ethnic groups. There are both push and pull factors at work when people make the decision to migrate to Thailand. The pull factors include the close geographical location of Thailand to Burma as well as the demand in Thailand for cheap labor. The push factors include the poor state of the Burmese economy and ongoing human rights violations that are specifically acute in areas along the Thai border. Many workers also report that they have come to Thailand to escape the SPDC’s demands for forced labor in their home states and divisions.
As most people emigrate from Burma due to factors that are both political and economic, it is difficult to make absolute distinctions between economic migrants, political asylum seekers, and refugees. The Royal Thai Government maintains a strict and sometimes arbitrary policy on classifying Burmese who arrive in Thailand, which means that in many cases victims of direct human rights abuses are refused access to refugee camps and international humanitarian aid. These people are faced with the choice of trying to illegally enter the refugee camps or else becoming migrant workers. The more than 100,000 Shans currently working in Thailand as migrant laborers are visible examples of these policies. While human rights abuses by the Burmese military in Shan State, including forced labor, forced relocations, arbitrary arrest, killings and rape have been widely documented, the Thai government continues to deny any Shans refugee status.
An 18 December 2002 article in Irrawaddy magazine included an interview with a corn farmer from southern Shan State, who had recently fled to Thailand. This man said: "We can’t survive due to the authority’s taxes and extortion." The article also reported that farmers in Mon State have also been leaving for Thailand following floods that wiped out their rice crops. These farmers reportedly fled not only because of a lack of food, but also because they were unable to supply the government with the required rice quotas. Other regional analysts predict that due to worsening economic conditions, rapidly increasing prices for basic commodities, and widespread flooding, thousands more people will flee to Thailand in 2003. (Source: Irrawaddy)
Thai Migration Policy and Legal Registration of Migrant Workers
Thailand’s policy on migration prioritizes economic development and national security, sometimes at the expense of protecting the rights of migrant workers. For the past 7 years, Thai migration policy has been drafted through a series of cabinet resolutions which reflect the attitude of whatever administration is currently in office. Contradictions between these resolutions have inhibited the formation of a coherent policy on migration and thus hindered the development of a consistent strategy for implementation.
Thai law defines an illegal alien as a person without Thai citizenship who has entered the Kingdom in violation of section 12 of the Immigration Act of 1979. According to this Act, migrants found to be in the country illegally, will be repatriated to their countries of origin. In March 1992 the Thai cabinet passed the first of a successive number of resolutions which have allowed migrants to pay a fee and apply for a work permit which allows them to work legally in Thailand. The permit limits work to specific industries in designated parts of the country. Migrants with work permits are protected under the 1997 Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and covered by most of the provisions in the Labour Protection Act of 1998. The work permit also gives migrants access to the 30-baht health scheme, where each visit to a doctor or clinic costs only 30 baht plus the cost of medicine. Unfortunately enforcement of these protections for migrant workers has been lax, and many workers are not aware of what rights the permit entitles them to and how to respond if these rights are violated.
In addition, Burmese migrant workers often find it difficult to obtain a work permit for a number of reasons. The permit costs 4,450 baht for one year, which makes it too expensive for many workers, who make an average salary of 1,500-2,000 baht a month. In addition, a worker has to be guaranteed by a factory owner or other Thai employer in order to register for a permit. In the past, a key complaint with the work permit system was that registered workers were not allowed to change jobs without losing their legal status. During the September 2002 registration period, changes were made in the regulations which allowed legal workers to change jobs and register with a new employer. These new regulations stated that if and when a registered worker is fired or leaves their job for any reason, they are required to find a new job (and employer to guarantee them) within 7 days or they will lose their permit. This process is still problematic, as in order to register with a new employer, the worker has to first obtain a signature of consent from his or her previous employer. In practice, employers rarely give consent for their workers to switch jobs, as they don’t want employees to move to other factories or businesses which may pay higher salaries. As a result, even with the change in regulations, most workers remain unable to change jobs while retaining their legal status. Due to this, employers can prevent workers from striking or complaining about salaries and working conditions by threatening to fire them.
In some areas of Thailand, specifically in areas on the border with Burma, employers of Burmese workers withhold their employees’ work permits. In these cases, workers are only given a photocopy of their work permit, which is often not accepted by police as valid identification. Workers report that when they are stopped by officials, they are either forced to give bribe money, or else wait for their employer to be contacted to come and vouch for them. In these cases, employers often don’t bother coming to the police station or detention center and the arrested workers are deported and their copy of the work permit confiscated.
Migrants in areas where this practice is common are as a result increasingly choosing not to renew their permits. For example, in Tak province during the November 2002 registration period only 30, 260 Burmese workers registered, compared to the 50, 235 who had registered in 2001. (Source: Bangkok Post)
During the registration renewal period for migrant workers that ran from September 15 to October 15 2002, Thailand instituted a new form, the Tor Dor 13, which migrants had to fill out. This form required that applicants provide their addresses in their home countries, leading some workers to fear that their families in Burma might face harassment from the SPDC which actively discourages illegal migration. Migrants were also afraid that if they gave a false address then they would be banned by the SPDC from returning to Burma in the future.
In a report released in July 2002, Amnesty International noted concerns of illegal migrants being forcibly returned to Burma as many have a "well-founded fear of persecution if they were to be returned."
Working and Living Conditions
In July 2002, Amnesty International released a report, "Myanmar: Lack of Security in Counter-Insurgency Areas," which noted that migrants in Thailand face many difficulties and abuses. AI researchers interviewed 100 Burmese migrants in Thailand who reported that they had paid between 4,500 and 10,000 baht (US$104 to 233) to be brought to Thailand by human smugglers.
Once in Thailand, Burmese migrants work in a number of industries and service sectors, often in dirty and sometimes dangerous conditions for pay that is far below the Thai minimum wage. Workers in factories report that there are many injuries that occur and that workers rarely receive any compensation for work related accidents or deaths. A number of agricultural workers suffer from respiratory or other problems as a result of long-term exposure to chemical pesticide spray. These workers typically are not given masks, gloves or other protective gear even when they are in contact with chemicals that are known to be harmful.
All migrant workers face a common fear of arrest and deportation. This fear keeps many migrants from moving freely and impedes their access to health care and other social services that may be available. For this reason migrants suffer in silence from easily treatable diseases. The spread of communicable diseases is facilitated by lack of access to health care facilities and medicine, cramped living conditions and poor sanitation. Lack of knowledge of the local language also prevents migrants from seeking help when they face unhealthy or dangerous situations. This combination of fear of arrest and lack of knowledge about the laws, customs and language of their host country means that migrants are easily exploited and abused by their employers, Thai officials and others.
Repatriation of Migrant Workers
Before February 2002, illegal migrants deported from Thailand were often simply dropped off at some point on the border, after which they often returned to Thailand.
In late 2001, the Thai and Burmese Governments entered into negotiations about the repatriation of illegal workers. The SPDC agreed to set up a number of holding centers or reception camps directly on the border inside Burma. In February 2002, following a three day visit to Burma, Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai said that the SPDC had agreed to accept back thousands of undocumented workers and had "assured [him] they will not be prosecuted." (Source: Bangkok Post)
Following this, a reception center for returning migrants was established in Myawaddy. While the Thai government has actively encouraged international organizations to assist with the repatriation process, at present there are no international organizations regularly monitoring conditions at this center.
The reception center in Myawaddy (In Burmese Ke Say Yee Sa Kan) is run by the Directorate of the Defense Service Intelligence (DSI) of the Ministry of Defense. Between February and May 2002, over 19,000 migrants from Burma were repatriated and 3,681 people were processed through the Myawaddy Reception Center. (Source: Bangkok Post, New Light of Myanmar) At the reception center, deportees are reportedly placed under a combined police, military and DKBA guard. All returned migrants are screened through a series of interviews with immigration and public health officials, and members of military intelligence.
Thai authorities do not conduct any screening before deportation to determine if any among those deported are refugees or asylum seekers. Instead, local Thai officials regularly assume that all people without ID documents outside the refugee camps are illegal immigrants. This arbitrary definition ignores the fact that although many people do migrate to Thailand for economic reasons, many others are also refugees, political exiles and activists. Often an individual falls into more than one, if not all categories. For example, many refugees attempt to supplement their inadequate diet by leaving their assigned refugee camps illegally, and working for short-term contracts. Others come to Thailand as either refugees or illegal immigrants, and then become involved with some of the many Burmese opposition groups based in Mae Sot. Often people became refugees because they were politically active inside Burma.
SPDC officials specifically screen returned migrants for those who may be affiliated with political opposition groups. Thai authorities also submit personal data on deportees to SPDC officials at the time of repatriation. These officials then cross-check this information with their own files to search for dissidents. As most political activity is criminalized in Burma, this process places past and present politically active deportees at severe risk of arrest, interrogation, torture, and arbitrary detention.
In addition to political screening, returned migrants are also tested for a number of communicable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, Malaria, TB, and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. A number of human rights organizations have protested this mandatory HIV/AIDS testing, and the reported separation of at least 20 individuals who tested positive for HIV/AIDS. Such mandatory testing contravenes UN HIV Principles and Guidelines to which Thailand and Burma are signatory.
Deportees have also reported that as part of an ongoing campaign to discourage illegal emigration, SPDC officials at the reception camp are now photographing and maintaining records of personal data on all deportees. Those deported are informed that if the SPDC officials collect three photographs of one returnee, (i.e. if someone is deported through the reception camp three times) then that person will be arrested for illegal emigration. According to SPDC regulation 367/120-(b)(1), these individuals can be sentenced to up to 7 years imprisonment.
At the end of the screening process it appears that people are dealt with in one of two ways; those who are able to find a resident of Myawaddy prepared to vouch for them are simply released after paying between 2,000-3,500 kyat; while the remainder are transported by truck back to their home districts. Individuals transported back to their home districts are required to pay a transportation fee which varies according to distance. It costs for example, only 150 kyat to be transported to nearby Moulmien but 1400 kyat to be deported to Arakan State. People who have no relatives or friends in Myawaddy to vouch for them and who cannot afford to pay this transportation fee sometimes have to stay in the area working as lookouts to guard train tracks, bridges and government buildings until they can save up the cost of the repatriation fee.
Many people attempt to evade the screening process and/or forced transfer to their home districts by paying bribes to officials. Other deportees apparently are able to bribe their way out at the customs checkpoint on arrival, or else manage to run away during transfer back to their home districts. Having escaped or bribed their way out of official custody, it appears to be a relatively simple matter for migrants to secretly cross the border and re-enter Thailand illegally. Many people wade across the Moei River, which separates the two countries, everyday.
The SPDC actively discourages people, and especially women from migrating abroad. One reason for this is that the regime fears that migrants will report on human rights abuses inside the country to opposition groups or other human rights organizations. Major General Kyaw Win has stated that part of the SPDC’s "Anti-Human Trafficking Campaign" includes efforts to "teach people about negative consequences of working abroad." This campaign appears to focus less on education than on threats and punishment of people found to have worked, or planning to work, abroad. In a number of states and Divisions the SPDC is creating "Human Trafficking Prevention Committees" which have been ordered to collect data on everyone between 16 and 25 years of age, and to investigate anyone traveling to border areas. (Source: Altsean)
Women and girls have been specifically targeted in these campaigns. Some women who return to their villages in Burma have reportedly been made to sign documents pledging to the authorities that they will not return to Thailand. The Myanmar Women’s Affair Association chairperson Dr. Daw Khin Win Shwe, wife of Gen. Khin Nyunt issued an order that young women be prohibited from working in Thailand in order to prevent trafficking. Young women are further prohibited from traveling to Thailand except in the company of a guardian. Women who are found to have disobeyed this order can be put in prison for one to three years. Male deportees have reported that if they were returned to their home towns they also would have been required to sign such a pledge. After doing so they then are in jeopardy of a seven-year prison term if arrested attempting to return to Thailand or upon deportation
No comments:
Post a Comment