| |
|
|
|
Bonded labor is a term that has become somewhat known in Pakistan over the past decade. The issue, however, of poor farm laborers being coerced into a situation where they are so burdened with debt that they become slaves of landlords, has been a common problem in interior sindh for a very long time. Other communities, socio-economic classes, ethnic groups and citizen in general have remained apathetic to the plight of these Pakistani slaves. The reason for this social apathy stem partly from the sheer ignorance of our middle class to what happens outside of our cities coupled with the lack of empathy with the bonded laborers, who are mostly Hindu. However, although the government is fully aware of the situation, the stranglehold that the Sindhi and Punjabi landed classes have over our Government makes it perilous for anyone to initiate action or debate that many offend or embarrass them.
Over the last two decades, a few groups have worked hard to gradually attract some attention to this issue. There are two schools of thought among these groups. One considers the landlords who use bonded labour as criminals and argues that that the government should strictly implement the bonded labor law of 1992. The other views the situation as a codependent relationship that will likely continue to exist in some form well into the future, but wants the relationship of land owners and farm laborers to be redefined so as to reduce the extremely inequitable burden on the laborers.
This booklet makes an attempt to bring a new perspective to this debate. Our purpose is to document women’s experience in bondage and particularly, to bring their long struggles for freedom for themselves and their families to light. We believe the issues these women face have never become a part of the larger debate forums of this issue.
We decided not to come between these women and the readers so we have not attempted to analyze their issues. We have simply reported them as they were told and verified. The speak of the years of hardship and deprivation they have gone through and the pain they will carry in their hearts forever. It is important to note that the actual level of violence and abuse is much more then what is contained in the narratives. Informally, the women told of systematic rapes and sexual humiliation that continue for decades. We have only included in this booklet the information they felt comfortable in bringing out publically. We have changed the names of the landlords to avoid any retaliation and possible violence toward these women. The women did not want their own names to be changed. The photographs used in this report are not of the women whose cases are reported here. These are general images of the area and the people of the bari communality.
So far the economic dynamics of the relationship have been at the core of the debate. The discussions revolve around how poor farm families seek their livelihoods, the way they are hired, the skewed input and income distribution between the farmer and the landowner and the way debt records are kept and, at times, changed to favor the landowner. Mostly, it is a debate about what percentage of contribution both parties make and what formula should be applied for income distribution.
However, what we have learnt from listening to these stories is that the entire power dimension of this problem needs to be considered. Regardless of how fair the distribution formulas become, the extreme power and authority imbalance is an important dimension of the debate. Our society has allowed the landowners to continue to operate as feudal lords. Our society also bestows the lowest status and stigma to the “Kammi” (the one who works with his hands), “mazarey” (the tenant laborer who tills someone else’s land) and “women”, who are still considered by many as second grade humans. When redefining the relationship between the landowner and the farm worker, abuse of power, violent crimes and threats against women should be as important as illegal bondage and inequitable income distribution. The high frequency of rape and sexual abuse reported by these bonded women requires this aspect to become a part of the dialogue on establishing a new form of tenancy relationship.
During this study, we confirmed what others have reported, that because of the lack of income generating opportunities, many men do not like to live in the camps created for recently freed laborers. However, it became extremely clear to us that for women, the safety afforded by these camps was reason enough to stay in them. Although the camps are relatively safe havens, women did report abuse form those who operated some of the camps. Perhaps the power dynamics of the feudal mindest is not limited to landowners and their bonded laborers. Any abuse of women or their families by those operating under the pretext of aid should be immediately weeded out. In one person’s words “us waderey se to buch kea a gaiy, yahan ye humarey khair khua humen apny ihsan jta jta k aur us ke badly men hmary gharon men aatey hen” (we have escaped the landlord, now these do-gooders, telling us that we should be indebted to them, come into our homes in exchange for their benevolence).
We hope that the voices in this booklet will help the Pakistani public to realize the importance of the speaking up on various aspects of this shameful issue. We also trust that, after reading these stories, people who are already addressing the bonded labor issue will understand that that women concerns and priorities are different from those of their men. It is important that these social activists modify the current debate format because it neglects a major part of the story. Perhaps these tales will also strengthen the resolve of those in Government who are already trying to help, enable courts to take a stronger stance and cut through the shield of power wielded by the feudal classes. Finally, we pray that some of the more progressive landowners will see that such cruelty is giving all of them a bad name and they will put social pressure on their friends to clean up their business.
|
|
