|
OWED JUSTICE Human Rights Watch |
VI.
RECRUITED IN THAILAND--SOLD ON JAPAN
The trafficking of women from Thailand to
Japan involves a wide range of actors: the initial recruiter who contacts the
women; the agent in Thailand who pays the recruiter, arranges travel documents,
and holds the women until they are ready to leave; the escorts who accompany
the women to Japan, often via other countries such as Singapore, Malaysia or
South Korea; the brokers who meet the women upon their arrival and pay the
agent for delivering them; and the procurers who run the sex establishments and
pay large sums of money to the brokers for the acquisition of the women.(1) In some
cases, these networks also rely on the cooperation of government officials who
prepare false documents and/or turn a blind eye to violations, apparently in
return for bribes.
The strong demand for Thai women's labor in
Japan, coupled with restrictive immigration policies, has provided an ideal
environment for these networks to flourish. Women who wish to migrate from
Thailand to Japan for work are rarely able to make the arrangements themselves
and instead rely on intermediaries to obtain the necessary travel papers,
negotiate border controls, and arrange their job placement. Research by Human
Rights Watch and others indicates that, in most cases, these intermediaries
engage in serious human rights abuses, and women who agree to migrate for
lucrative employment opportunities find themselves trafficked into compulsory
labor.
Trafficking networks use deception, the
threat and use of physical force, and other forms of coercion to place women
from Thailand into debt bondage employment in Japan. The agents and brokers
derive enormous profits by "selling" the women for amounts exponentially
greater than the costs they have incurred, and this "price" becomes
the basis of a woman's debt, which she must repay through months of grueling
unpaid labor. Agents regularly misrepresented the conditions under which women
would work upon their arrival in Japan, giving false or misleading information
about crucial issues, such as the type of work they would do, the range of
choice they would have, the amount of money they would owe, and the amount of
money they would earn. Agents failed to explain the legal implications of the
women's travel and employment as well as the highly controlled circumstances
under which they would be forced to repay their "debt." Furthermore,
once a woman agreed to go to Japan, and the agent began to make arrangements,
women lost the ability to safely change their decision or negotiate the terms
of their agreement.
Human
Rights Watch traveled to Japan and Thailand several times over the six year
period from 1994 to 1999. In Japan, we conducted interviews in Tokyo and Kyoto,
and in Chiba, Kanagawa, Ibaraki, Nagano, Nagoya, and Osaka prefectures; in
Thailand, we traveled to Bangkok and to the provinces of Chiang Mai, Chiang
Rai, and Phayao. We interviewed women who had recently escaped from debt
bondage, as well as women who had paid off their debts and either returned to
Thailand or continued working in Japan; we could not interview women while they
were in debt bondage, due to the heavily controlled conditions of their
employment. Our interviewees included twenty-three women(2) from
Thailand who described the circumstances under which they came to Japan. Most
of these interviews were conducted together with Friends of Women in Asia
(FOWIA), a Thai NGO based in Bangkok. We also received detailed testimonies
from thirty-five other women, twenty-eight of whom were interviewed by local
researchers(3)
and seven by staff members at a women's shelter in Japan. In addition, we have
drawn on the results of interviews with 170 Thai women that were conducted by
staff at the House for Women "Saalaa"(4) between
September 1992 and May 1995, as well as the work of Dr. Suriya Samutkupt, a
professor of anthropology at Suranaree University of Technology in Thailand.
Dr. Samutkupt met with almost one hundred Thai women working in the sex
industry in Ibaraki prefecture while conducting research in Japan in 1995,
1996, and 1997. He explained to Human Rights Watch that he was not able to
speak to any of the women who were then working in debt bondage, but the women
he talked to had arrived in Japan in "debt" and "described the
hell that they went through."(5)
In
the great majority of the cases we documented, abuses qualifying as trafficking
occurred during women's recruitment, travel, and job placement (see table
below). All but one of the women Human Rights Watch interviewed or obtained a
detailed interview transcript for explained that agents in Thailand arranged
their travel and job placement in coordination with contacts in Japan.(6) The great
majority of these women described elements of deception and coercion that
amounted to trafficking for debt bondage or forced labor. In many more cases,
there were strong indications of coercion--for example, the women had
extraordinarily high "debts" to pay off when they began working--but
the women did not provide enough information about the terms and conditions of
their employment to reach definitive conclusions about whether the situation
constituted debt bondage. The women's initial employment was nearly always in
the entertainment industry, typically in a "dating" snack bar, where
their work included providing sexual services to male clients.(7) The
abuses that the women suffered during the course of their migration and initial
employment in Japan are described below and illustrated with examples from the
women's testimonies.(8)
Due to circumstances, and to their personal decisions, some of the women did
not discuss all of the issues dealt with in this report. Human Rights Watch's
findings were confirmed by the groups and individuals we spoke to in Thailand
and Japan.
Table:
Cases documented by Human Rights Watch
(twenty-three
women were interviewed by Human Rights Watch; thirty-five testimonies were
provided to Human Rights Watch by local researchers and advocates)
|
Trafficked? |
total |
snack bar hostess |
other position |
|
Yes |
41 |
37 (all in debt) |
1 (lover and domestic servant of a snack bar owner; no
debt) 1 (mama and lover of a snack bar owner; no
debt) 2 (brothel; in debt) |
|
Not clear |
14 |
11 (all in debt) |
1 (factory; in
debt) 1 (exotic dancing; in debt) 1 (massage parlor; in debt) |
|
No |
3 |
|
1 (came with
husband-- managed a Thai restaurant) 1 (factory; no debt--she paid 200,000 baht
(US$8,000) in advance) 1 (dish washing) |
|
TOTAL |
58 |
48 (all in debt) |
10 (2 in snack
bars) |
As
seen in the case histories described in the "Profiles" chapter, the
women we interviewed had different backgrounds and expectations when they left
for Japan. But they had similar motivations in going. Most of the women said
that they were attracted by the high salaries promised; they wanted to provide
a better standard of living for themselves and their families and were often
coping with difficult relationships or other family problems. Saalaa, a shelter
for foreign women in Kanagawa prefecture in Japan, similarly reported that most
of the women there had been persuaded to go to Japan by promises of large
wages, though some also wished to separate from husbands or boyfriends.(9) The women
trafficked from Thailand were generally recruited while they were in their
twenties, but some went to Japan when they were under eighteen or over thirty.(10) Most of
the women Human Rights Watch interviewed were Thai nationals, but there is also
a problem of women and girls without Thai citizenship being trafficked out of
Thailand and into Japan. These include migrants from neighboring countries such
as Burma, China, Laos and Cambodia; "hilltribe" people, who may have
been born in Thailand but have no records to prove their nationality; and
"refugees," who were permitted to live in Thailand only as long as
they remained within designated refugee camps. These women find themselves even
more vulnerable to exploitation because of the discrimination and economic
disadvantages that they face in Thailand, and once they leave the country they
are often unable to return.(11)
The
following are excerpts from the testimonies provided by several of the women
Human Rights Watch interviewed about their decisions to work in Japan. Though
all of them made consensual decisions to migrate to Japan for work, and many
knew they would be employed as sex workers, each of these women were
subsequently trafficked into coercive labor conditions:
· Rei grew up in southern Thailand.
She completed the twelfth grade in school and then got a job as a receptionist
for five months. For the next four years, she took many different jobs, but
didn't keep any of them for more than five months. During much of that time,
Rei had no job at all. So, she said, "I heard about many women going to
work in Japan, and I knew many agents in my neighborhood who could arrange for
me to go. I knew I would have to be a prostitute, but the promise of a good
salary was very appealing."(12)
· Phan was born in Burma. She is the
second of seven children. In 1985, when Phan was fourteen years old, she and
her sister moved to Thailand to join their parents and siblings, who had moved
there a year earlier. The next year, when Phan was fifteen and her parents were
having difficulty finding enough money to support the family, Phan began
working at a brothel in Chiang Rai province. After about four years of working
as a sex worker in Thailand and Malaysia, Phan was approached by a Thai man who
asked her if she wanted to go work in Japan.(13)
· Soi was born in Chiang Rai
province and was a seamstress in Bangkok. She was making 3000 baht (US$120(14)) a
month. Soi was twenty-four years old when she was recruited in 1990. A Thai
friend whom she had known for two years asked her if she would be interested in
going to Japan. As Soi recalled, "[My friend] didn't tell me what kind of
work there was, but said I could make a lot of money. I was interested."(15)
· Bua was an only child, and her
father died when she was young. She lived with her mother, grandmother, and
grandfather. After she finished sixth grade, she stopped going to school. She
wanted to continue her studies, but the school was far from her house and her
family could not afford to send her. When she was fifteen years old, her
friends went to work as sex workers, and she went with them. Over the next four
years, she worked variously in Bangkok, southern Thailand, and her village,
sending money home to support her family. In 1991, she met someone who asked
her to go to Japan.(16)
Expectations
and understanding of the process of recruitment and job placement, and of the
work they would be doing in Japan, differed greatly among the women we
interviewed:
· At age twenty-three, when Bun was
asked to go to Japan, she was heavily in debt and agreed to go in order to pay
back her debt and make some additional money. But when she arrived in Japan,
she found that she had been misled about the conditions and financial
arrangements of her employment. "I left for Japan in August 1994 with the
agreement that I could either work in a restaurant or as a prostitute as I
wished. . . . [The day after I arrived,] I was ordered to strip dance on a
table at a snack bar and play stripping games with the customers." In
addition, Bun found herself saddled with an outrageous and unexpected
"debt." "I didn't know I was going to be in debt 400 bai (4
million yen; US$39,000). I only knew that I would have to work for free for two
or three months."(17)
· Faa, who worked at a sewing shop
in Udon Thani province before going to Japan, explained to Human Rights Watch
that she knew she was going to work as a sex worker, but not that she would
have to work off a debt. At nineteen, she arrived in Japan to find that she had
to work every day for the next five months without compensation as she
struggled to pay the money she "owed."(18)
· The Thai man who recruited Phan to
work in Japan told her that she would have to pay off a debt of 100,000 baht
(US$4,000) and that it would take her about two or three months to do so.
"I said I wanted to go, but I didn't have any documents. They said, 'no
problem,' they could arrange all the documents. I saw so many other girls going
to Japan, so I agreed." Later, when Phan arrived in Japan, she found that
her debt was more than seven times the amount to which she had agreed.(19)
In
the interviews Human Rights Watch conducted, the majority of the women
indicated that they knew they would be working as sex workers in Japan, and
some had already worked in this industry in Thailand. Others were promised jobs
as waitresses or factory workers, though in almost all cases they were placed
into the sex industry when they arrived. Saalaa found that of the 170 Thai
women who stayed at the shelter from 1992 to 1995, 158 had worked as indebted
sex workers in Japanese snack bars. And while a majority of these women knew
that they would be working in restaurants or bars with at least the option to
perform sex work, only a quarter of the women understood that they would have
to sell sexual services, and a third expected work outside of the entertainment
industry altogether.(20)
Siriporn Skrobanek, Executive Secretary of the Foundation for Women (FFW) in
Thailand,(21)
told Human Rights Watch that according to FFW's research, when women from
Thailand first began migrating to Japan in the late 1980s, only about ten
percent of the women knew they were going into sex work. A decade later, it has
become more difficult to deceive women about the type of the work they will do
in Japan, but Siriporn Skrobanek explained that recruiters are increasingly
targeting women in northern villages who do not have previous experience of
working in the Thai sex industry, because they consider such women easier to
deceive about the financial arrangements and other aspects of the work.(22)
None
of the women whom Human Rights Watch interviewed had fully understood the
economics of the situation they were entering, nor had any clear idea of the
kind of conditions they would face. While some women were told that they would
be in debt, the amount of the debt and/or the amount of time it would take to
repay the debt was misrepresented. Furthermore, women were not told how debt
repayment calculations would be determined. This was left to the discretion of
their employers in Japan, who routinely used the woman's "debt" to
extract labor under abusive and coercive conditions. And the methods of
coercion that employers regularly applied to ensure that women fully repaid
their "debts" were, of course, not described by recruiters or agents.(23)
Finally,
women did not have a clear understanding of the legal implications of their
migration. Agents handled women's travel and job placement arrangements, often
obtaining falsified documentation for them and always providing escorts to
accompany them on their trip. Women were given only as much information as they
needed to get through immigration procedures. In many cases, women traveled to
Japan legally, on their own passports with Japanese tourist or transit visas,
and they did not understand that their visa status prohibited them from
working. Other women traveled to Japan on falsified passports, in which their
name and/or travel history had been changed, but they did not necessarily know
that false documentation had been prepared for them until after they arrived at
the airport in Thailand, or even later. In other cases, women were told to
memorize fake names and stories before they left Thailand, so they realized
that they would be deceiving the airport authorities. But in these cases too,
the arrangements were made by the agents, and women were required to follow the
agents' instructions. Once a woman had agreed to go to Japan and an agent had
begun to make preparations on her behalf, the woman was in the agent's debt;
she was not allowed to change her mind. Moreover, the women traveled under
conditions of deception; the promises of their recruiters and agents had not
yet been proven false.
Many
women Human Rights Watch interviewed spoke of their surprise and confusion
regarding their legal status and Japanese laws in general:
· Jaem, who entered Japan at age
sixteen, stated, "I didn't know the law and I didn't know that coming to
Japan and doing this kind of work was illegal. Before I went to Japan, nobody
told me that it was illegal. I don't know Japanese law at all. Now I understand
that whatever Thai people do in Japan is illegal."(24)
· "I didn't know anything
before I went to Japan. The agents never told me that I would be legal or that
I would be illegal. They just took me to make a passport and told me that I
would work at a restaurant as a waitress with a good income. . . . I didn't
know Japanese law. But after I arrived in Japan I knew that I was illegal, so I
just hid and escaped when police came," explained Aye, who went to Japan
in 1992 at age twenty-seven, after having been a sex worker since the age of
fourteen or fifteen in Thailand.(25)
· Jo, who traveled to Japan in 1990
at age twenty-three after seven years of sex work in Thailand, confided,
"I never knew the law in Japan or even in Thailand. When I arrived in
Japan I knew that I had come illegally, so I was afraid of being arrested. They
[her bosses at the snack bar] said that if you meet police or immigration
officers you have to run away from them. Everybody said that we stayed
illegally, but nobody explained what was legal or illegal."(26)
Our
interviews with women who have worked in Japan, as well as with nongovernmental
organization (NGO) representatives in Japan and Thailand, suggest that many of
them understood that they were taking a risk in migrating to Japan for work.
Some women had heard firsthand stories about abusive conditions in Japan, or
knew women who had returned to their villages in Thailand sick and
empty-handed. Awareness of the dangers of migration has increased as a result
of information campaigns launched by the Thai government and local NGOs as
well.(27)
But women also knew there was the possibility of making large amounts of money
in Japan and thereby improving the standard of living of their parents,
children, and other family members. In some cases, they lived near large houses
built with remittances sent by women working in Japan, and they saw women who
had returned to their villages after achieving financial success in Japan. As
Yui explained to Human Rights Watch, "when I was nineteen years old, a
villager invited me to go work in Japan. I knew three or four women from the
village had already died in Japan, but other women got a lot of money, so I
decided to go."(28)
Naiyana
Supapong, who served as the Director of Friends of Women in Asia (FOWIA) from
1992 to 1998, helping women who had decided work overseas in Japan, Hong Kong,
and other countries, explained:
Women
only get positive information from agents and returning women, but they don't
know about the negative things. So I gave them both--the positive and the
negative information. I said to them, "some women are successful, but do
you know about the suffering behind their success?" . . . Most of the
women said: we've heard about the bad situations, but some women have good
luck, and we hope we'll be one of them. So most went anyway--they had already
made the decision to go when I met them--but this way they were better
prepared.(29)
And,
according to another Thai NGO worker,
In
the case of Japan, lots of women know what they'll do and know they'll have
hardships, but they still want to go because they are so poor. The Social
Welfare Department tries to prevent them from going with information campaigns
in the villages saying how hard it will be in Japan, that they'll be beaten,
etc. A police officer who is also a song writer (Police Colonel Surasak
Sutharom) even wrote a song about exporting women, saying that it is not a heaven
but a hell. There were also ex-sex workers on talk shows on television saying
don't go to Japan. But still women want to go.(30)
Most
of the women explained that they were first approached by a relative, neighbor,
or other acquaintance, who told them about opportunities to work in Japan:
· Rei's recruiter was a Thai man who
lived in her neighborhood. He was known as the "boss lek" and was
known to have arranged jobs for many women in Japan.(31)
· Khai was recruited in 1991, at age
sixteen, by a client while she was working as a masseuse and sex worker in a
massage parlor in southern Thailand. As she explained to Human Rights Watch,
"a client invited me to work in Tokyo. I explained that I had no
identification, but he said he could get me a passport because he was a member
of parliament. So I agreed, and the client took me to a place to have my body
checked. There I saw many other Thai girls trying to go to Japan. I was told I
would work as a server."(32)
· Faa had left her village in
Thailand to work in a sewing shop in Bangkok. When she was nineteen years old,
her relatives in Bangkok convinced her to go to work in Japan.(33)
· Nam had been working at a
restaurant in Chiang Rai Province when she was invited to go to Japan by a friend
in 1991. As she recalled, "I could not find a job in Thailand and I saw
that many women in the village had gone to Japan, so I decided to go." She
was twenty-eight years old at the time.(34)
If a
woman expressed interest in going to Japan, the recruiter typically offered to
introduce her to an agent who could make all the arrangements. Once a woman
agreed to see an agent, the recruiter hurried to make the introduction. After
that, the woman generally did not see her recruiter again. Chan was recruited
to go to Japan in 1993, by friends of her aunt's whom she had known for a long
time. She told Human Rights Watch that one of these friends "introduced me
to an agent, and the agent gave her [the recruiter] 30,000 baht [US$1200(35)]."(36)
The
women interviewed by Human Rights Watch and Saalaa typically identified their
agent as a Thai man, whom they referred to as "boss." When there was
more than one agent, the women called them boss yai (big boss) and boss
lek (little boss). Of the Thai women in contact with Saalaa shelter from
1992-1995, almost eighty percent of the 158 women who had worked as indebted
snack bar hostesses when they arrived in Japan reported that their agents were
Thai, while an additional thirteen percent dealt with agents from Japan.(37) This
corroborates the experiences of our interviewees, most of whom were first
introduced to Thai agents, though others said their agents were from Japan,
Singapore, or Malaysia. The agent paid the recruiter for the introduction, and
then made arrangements with a broker in Japan to receive the woman. Some agents
have contacts with brokers in many different countries so they are able to move
women according to the demand. For example, according to a report in a major
Thai newspaper in 1994, the arrest of three agents in Bangkok revealed a book
noting the expenses for sending women to Japan, the United States, Australia,
Sweden, South Africa and Italy. These agents were arrested following leads
given to the Acting Thai Police Chief by seven Thai women who had been arrested
in South Africa and claimed to have been trafficked by them.(38)
In
some cases, agents inspected women's bodies first to ensure that they were
suitable for the work overseas:
· Khai explained that the first
thing her recruiter did when she agreed to go to Japan in 1991 was take her to
"a place where I had my body checked."(39)
· As mentioned in the
"Profiles" chapter, Kaew recounted that when she was introduced to an
agent, "the agent in Bangkok decided that I was beautiful enough to go to
Japan, though I had to get a nose job first, and they kept messing it up--they
had to do it four times to get it right. The agent wanted me to get my eyes
done too, but I refused. Other women got plastic surgery for their breasts,
eyes, or other body parts. Women who were not beautiful enough were given a bus
ticket home to their village."(40)
Agents
also handled women's travel arrangements, including booking their flights and
assisting them in obtaining the necessary travel documentation. Thai and
Japanese government policies have made it difficult for women to obtain
passports and Japanese visas legally, but agents are able to overcome these
legal barriers through a variety of tactics, including obtaining authentic
passports and then switching the photographs; arranging "marriages"
to facilitate passport and visa applications; booking flights to the United
States or other destinations with a layover in Japan, as transit visas are
easier to obtain than tourist visas; and using passports from third countries
such as Singapore where visas are not needed to enter Japan. While most of the
women we interviewed traveled on Thai passports, others used passports from
Malaysia, Singapore, and even Japan. Over half of the women we interviewed said
agents used false passports to secure their Japanese visas and entrance into
Japan:(41)
· As described above, Khai had no
identification or citizenship papers when she was recruited to work in Japan,
but the recruiter promised to take care of that for her. "I was told to
say I was another person and given all the woman's documents--her house
registration and identification card--and sent to make a passport under this
person's name. Getting the passport was no problem, even though I couldn't sign
my own name, let alone the name they gave me. I went to apply for the passport
with the agent, and then the agent went to collect it on another day. When I
went to apply for a Japanese visa, I was never asked any questions and got the
visa without difficulty."(42)
· The agent who made arrangements
for Korn was equally adept at fixing documents. When she first decided to go to
Japan in 1993, she applied and received her own passport with the help of the
agent. However, when she was unable to pass the interviews with the Japanese
embassy for a visa, the agent produced a new passport for her, complete with
visa, within a week. She did not know whether the new passport was in her name,
because she was never allowed to hold it.(43)
· In Rei's case, her agent, whom she
referred to as "boss lek," helped her obtain her passport and a
Japanese tourist visa. "The boss lek gave me 1,000 baht (US$40) to apply
for my passport. Then he gave me another 500 baht (US$20) to collect it and 50
baht (US$2) to deliver it to him. The boss lek accompanied me to the passport
office the first time, but I went to collect my passport by myself. Then, boss
lek took me to the Japanese Embassy and told me what to do. However, I actually
went into the Embassy alone and did it myself. The boss lek told me to tell the
Embassy that I was going to Japan to look at a plastic factory, since I am the
boss of a plastic factory in Thailand. Boss lek gave me a letter which stated
that I was the boss of a factory. I also gave the Embassy a phone number for
the factory. When the Embassy called the 'factory'--it was actually the boss
lek's number--the boss lek answered and said I was gone to a meeting for the
day. The embassy never called again. I got my Japanese visa a couple days
later."(44)
· Miew explained that she agreed to
go to Japan because, "I was told I could work in Japan as a waitress at a
restaurant or snack bar and serve alcohol or food and sit down and talk with
customers. I was also told I would get a monthly salary and extra tips, and I
wanted to go because my family's business in Thailand had collapsed and I
wanted to help support them. The 'boss' in Thailand arranged everything for the
trip. In late January 1999, I left Thailand from the southern border and went
to Singapore. Then I left Singapore on a ticket for Los Angeles via Japan. I
traveled with a passport that the boss gave me. The first page of the passport
had been changed with my name, photo, age, and sex, but the other pages were
from someone else who had lived in the United States for ten years and had even
been to Japan before."(45)
· Kay was twenty-seven years old
when she went to Japan from Thailand's Lop Buri province. Kay entered Japan in
1988 on her own passport, but her agent had arranged a marriage for her to
facilitate the visa application process. According to Kay the agent told her
that, "a 'Mrs.' on my passport would make it easier for me to get a
Japanese visa. I met the man who was to be my husband at the district
government office when we registered our marriage, and I have never seen or
heard of him since."(46)
The
women's testimonies suggest that in some cases agents relied on the cooperation
of government officials to procure travel documents. Several women, for
example, reported that they had obtained Japanese visas without having to
answer a single question, despite an official Japanese policy heightening
scrutiny of Thai visa applicants. A Thai government official stationed in Tokyo
in 1995 affirmed these suspicions, explaining to Human Rights Watch that agents
in Thailand could then procure Japanese visas from Embassy staff for
approximately 40,000 baht (US$1600) each.(47) The
Thai press has also published reports of Thai officials preparing false
documentation to facilitate applications for Japanese visas in return for
bribes.(48)
Once
an agent began to make the travel arrangements and obtain the necessary
documentation, the women were obliged to follow the agent's instructions.
Agents used a combination of persuasion, deception, and coercion to ensure that
the women stood by their decisions to go to Japan. Invariably, they misled
women regarding the financial arrangements and other conditions under which
they would work. In some cases agents spoke to the recruits about their costs
and the debt the women would incur, and women often understood that they would
have to repay agents for their travel costs. But agents frequently lied about
the amount of debt, or the amount of time it would take women to repay it. And
those who did not lie outright used vague and misleading jargon that made it
virtually impossible for the women to understand the nature of their financial
arrangements prior to arriving in Japan. For example, traffickers referred to
10,000 yen (about US$84(49))
as one bai (a Thai word for paper note) and then discussed prices,
expenses, and debts in terms of bai:
· When Khai agreed to go to Japan in
1991, she was told that she would owe 120 bai [1.2 million yen; US$9,000] when
she arrived. As she explained, "I didn't know how much that was, but I
thought it was about 30,000 baht [US$1,200] because I asked what the price was
of the round-trip ticket from Bangkok to Tokyo. When I arrived in Japan I was
taken to Shinjuku [an area in Tokyo] and sold to a mama for 120 bai. Later she
told me that I owed 280 bai, and then she added 70 bai more to cover additional
expenses. In total I had to pay off a debt of 350 bai [3.5 million yen;
US$26,000]."(50)
· Wanna said that the agent in
Thailand told her that she would be doing sex work and that she would have a
debt to repay, but she told us that after she arrived in Japan, "I was
surprised when I heard my debt was 700,000 baht [3.3 million yen (330 bai);
US$28,000]."(51)
· Keak went to Japan in 1988 at the
age of twenty-three after eight years as a sex worker in Thailand. She went
through a Malaysian escort in Bangkok, and was told that her debt would be
300,000 baht (1.5 million yen; US$12,000). But after arriving in Japan, "I
was shocked to hear that my debt was 2.8 million yen [550,000 baht; US$22,000].
I cried without eating for two days."(52)
· Aye explained, "I didn't know
anything before I went to Japan. [The agents] said I could earn 20,000 to
30,000 baht [US$800 - 1200] per month. But when I went to Japan [in 1992], they
told me that I owed a debt of 300 bai [3 million yen; 600,000 baht;
US$24,000]."(53)
While
explicit threats were generally unnecessary to elicit women's compliance while
their travel arrangements were being made, several of the women Human Rights
Watch interviewed spoke of being confined to a hotel room during that time. And
a few women were expressly forbidden from going out unescorted or from making
any contact with friends or family during this period, which usually lasted
about a week though sometimes was as short as two or three days. Thus, women
who had voluntarily agreed to go to Japan found themselves confined against
their will, deprived of their basic right to freedom of movement, and unable to
change safely their decision to go to Japan.
· As Bun recalled, "Once I
agreed to go, I was put in a room by the agent and not allowed to go around.
The agent gave me a passport, and I went to Japan a week after Du did with a farang
[Westerner] escort. We told immigration that we were on our honeymoon."(54)
· Pong decided to go to Japan in
1986. She was eighteen years old and had been working at a bar in southern
Thailand for two years. "On the day I agreed to go, my friend introduced
me to an agent. I let him take a photo of myself and went home. Two or three
days later I was called to go to a hotel. I stayed there for twenty-four
hours--I wouldn't have dared to go out--and left the next day. At the airport,
I was given a passport with a false name."(55)
· Phan was working in a brothel in
Hat Yai near the Malaysian border in January 1991 when she was invited to go to
work in Japan. She agreed because it sounded as though she could make more
money, but she had no documents. The agents assured her they could take care of
everything. Two days later, they helped her escape from the brothel and then held
her in a hotel for five days until she left for Japan. During that period, she
was guarded and not allowed out of the room.(56)
· Sri is from a village in the
province of Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya. In 1985, Sri was a twenty-one-year-old
sex worker in a massage parlor in Bangkok, when a client invited her to go to
work at a massage parlor in Macau. Sri agreed, and the client introduced her to
an agent. The agent said he liked Sri and would send her to Japan where she
could make more money. After Sri agreed, the agent brought her to an apartment
in Bangkok. "The agent wouldn't let me out of the apartment at all. I was
kept there with five other girls." The women were held for three days
before beginning their trip to Japan.(57)
Women
were accompanied on their flights to Japan by escorts who were responsible for
delivering the women to brokers, or the brokers' associates, in Japan. Most of
the interviewees reported that their escorts were Thai men, though others were
escorted by women and/or non-Thais, and in some cases the escorts changed as
the women traveled through other countries on their way to Japan. Most of the
women we talked to met the escort for the first time in the airport or as they
were boarding the airplane; none of the women we interviewed saw their escorts
again after they were delivered to brokers in Japan. The escorts facilitated
the women's departures from Thailand and entry into Japan, often via third
countries, such as Malaysia, Singapore, or South Korea. In some instances,
escorts contacted agents in transiting countries to change passports or to
collect or deliver other women. The escorts held the women's travel documents,
tickets, and money during the trip. None of the women interviewed by Human
Rights Watch were allowed to carry their own passports except briefly when
passing through immigration, after which they were immediately taken from them
again by the escort. And those women who stopped in other countries along the
way reported that they were strictly guarded at all times.
· Janya was twenty years old in
August 1991 when she was sent by an agent in Bangkok to Kuala Lumpur to meet a
Malaysian woman who escorted her to Japan. "I entered Japan through Narita
airport. I was carrying a Singaporean passport with a Malaysian-Chinese name on
it and my photograph. I came with the Malaysian woman and her five year old
daughter. I was a little worried because the passport was fake, but the
Malaysian woman told me I didn't have to say anything. She told me to just
practice writing my new name and said that she would take care of everything at
customs. Nothing happened at customs; I got through easily."(58)
· Nat did not even realize she would
end up in Japan when she left Thailand at age twenty and traveled with a friend
and two escorts to Malaysia. When she and her friend arrived in Malaysia, they
were taken to Kuala Lumpur and placed in a large apartment with about one or
two hundred other Thai women. Nat was confined to that apartment for a month
while agents prepared a Malaysian passport for her. As she recalled, "They
gave us meals, but the only things to do were watch television and sleep. We
were not allowed to go out." When the passport was ready, she flew to
Narita airport in Japan.(59)
· Thip flew to Japan via Singapore in
1999. "I began the trip to Japan on my own passport. I didn't have a visa
for Japan--I didn't know that I needed one. I flew from Bangkok to Singapore on
my passport, but on the flight from Singapore to Japan, about thirty minutes
before arrival, the Japanese man who was escorting me gave me a Japanese
passport and told me to use it with the immigration officers in Japan. I was
very surprised, and I asked why. He answered, 'a Japanese passport will make it
easier for you to enter Japan,' and I didn't know what else to do, so I did as
he said."(60)
Several
women explained that they were able to pass through customs despite patently
false stories and/or documentation, and, based on the suspicious behavior they
observed, at least two of the women concluded that airport immigration
officials had collaborated with their traffickers:
· Khai entered Japan in December 1991
with five other people who were posing as her "family": three other
girls who were to be her "sisters," another woman who was the
"mother," and a man who was the "father." But, she
explained, "none of us were related, or looked like it for that matter.
All the women were actually going to work, and the man was the agent."
Khai was also traveling on a false passport with a description that did not
match her physical characteristics. "I knew in my fake passport the woman
was 162 centimeters and I was not even 150 centimeters. But I memorized all the
details and passed [through airport immigration] with no problems."(61)
· Sri traveled to Japan from Hat Yai
airport in 1985 with five other Thai women. "At the Thai immigration in
Hat Yai, they asked me what I was going to do in Japan. The officer was
laughing and I believe he knew exactly what we were going to do. Then the
[escort] arranged all of our passports with the immigration officer and we
passed through without any other questions asked."(62)
· Pot flew to Japan via South Korea
in 1992. She was put on a flight to South Korea with four other Thai women and
one Thai man nicknamed Dee. "Dee told me and the other four women the
specific Thai immigration officer to go to . . . In hindsight I believe that
the immigration officer at Don Muang airport in Bangkok knew what I was going
to do in Japan better than I did at the time of my departure. Because the
officer was buddy-buddy with Dee and just kept smiling at us [the Thai women]
as he stamped our passports."(63)
· Nuch said that when she arrived in
Japan in 1993, her escort "told me to go in a specific line and she went
in another line at Narita immigration. She went through first and then came to
help me. She spoke Japanese and got me through."(64)
We
found that those traveling on false passports often traveled through Hat Yai, a
Thai city in Songkhla province near the Malaysian border.(65) Nid ,
who went to Japan in 1991, explained to Human Rights Watch that "most
women who use false passports go through Hat Yai [airport] because it is easier
to pass immigration."(66)
Sean confirmed that, when she went to Japan in 1992, she had to fly through Hat
Yai because "I had a fake passport and Hat Yai could arrange my departure
without any problems."(67) There
are also agents in Hat Yai who can arrange for women to travel to Malaysia by
boat. Nat, whose experiences in Malaysia are described above, traveled from Hat
Yai to the Thai coast, where, she explained, "Two men were waiting and
they took me and my friend on a small boat. Both were policemen. On the boat,
my friend and I were told not to tell anyone that the two men were police. . .
. After about two hours, the boat arrived at a pier with fishing nets
everywhere. The border police seemed to have been informed about our arrival
and immediately opened the lock for the wire fence." Nat and her friend
had arrived in Malaysia; a month later, Nat flew to Japan on a Malaysian
passport.(68)
Allegations
that corrupt officials are involved in facilitating trafficking operations have
been supported by a number of sources, including Thai officials. A Thai Labor
Affairs Officer stationed in Tokyo told Human Rights Watch about a case in
which a twenty-year-old Thai woman entered Japan with the passport of a
fifty-year-old woman; only the photo had been replaced. The Thai woman had
explained to the officer that she used a password, as she had been instructed,
and passed through immigration at Narita airport without any questions asked.(69) There
have also been reports in the Thai press of collaboration by both Thai and
Japanese officials in such scams. During the investigation of the murder of two
Thai agents in March 1995, the Northern Bangkok Metropolitan Division Deputy
Commander, Kongdej Chusri, told reporters that he believed that for there to be
trafficking in women, both Thai and Japanese officials had to be involved in
the trafficking of women. He explained, "It is difficult to leave Thailand
and enter Japan with a fake passport. Without assistance from the immigration
authorities, it would be almost impossible for them to slip through the tight
control [of immigration]."(70) And a
study published by Chulalongkorn University of Thailand in 1998 noted that
agents who exploit Thai labor migrants, facilitating their travel arrangements
and then subjecting them to indentured labor, are "aided by corrupt police
and other government officials in the immigration office, the airport
authority, and other offices."(71)
After
the women passed through immigration and customs in Japan, they were typically
handed over to a broker, who either went to the airport to meet the women, or
sent someone to pick them up. According to our interviews, most of the brokers
were either Japanese men or Thai women, but some women also reported that
certain Thai and Taiwanese men had acted as brokers. The brokers provided the
connection between the agents in Thailand and the employers in Japan, and they
held the women while making arrangements for their "procurement." In
a few cases, the escorts served as brokers, delivering the women directly to
procurers. While a woman's placement was being arranged, she was confined and
denied access to the outside world. Women were also deprived of their
passports, which were held by the brokers and then given directly to the
procurers.
Descriptions
of the brokers' "job placement" activities indicated that the women
were treated as property, rather than as job applicants. The women consistently
referred to being "sold," and they had no opportunity to negotiate
their "contract" nor any ability to select or refuse their placement.
In the majority of the cases documented by Human Rights Watch, women were
placed into work in the sex industry, usually as "hostesses" in
"dating" snack bars.(72) This
was true regardless of the type of job promised by recruiters and agents in
Thailand. Interviews with NGO staff, Thai Embassy officials, and others in
Japan who work with women from Thailand, as well as with women returning from
Japan to Thailand, confirmed this. The women's shelter Saalaa reported that out
of the 170 Thai women who stayed in the shelter from 1992 to 1995, 158
(eighty-five percent) were "sold to small bars called snacks."(73)
The
following cases provide examples of recruits' first few days in Japan. Here and
below we focus on women who were placed into employment in snack bars:
· Phan arrived at Narita airport in
Japan in early 1991. She and three other Thai women were then taken by their
escort to an apartment where they were handed over to a Taiwanese broker. All
of the women were told to shower, after which they drove through the night to
Kofu city in Yamanashi prefecture. There they were given some winter clothes and
told to shower again and change. According to Phan, the women "were sold
by the Taiwanese broker for 150 bai [1.5 million yen; US$11,000] each. The
broker explained that our debt would actually be 380 bai [3.8 million yen;
US$28,000] to cover all our travel and other expenses. Then we were taken to
different snacks. I was taken to a snack bar run by a Taiwanese mama. I was
given another 20 bai [200,000 yen; US$1,500] to pay for clothes and told my
total debt was 400 bai [4 million yen; US$30,000]."(74)
· Pong told us that when she and her
sister arrived in Japan, "we were handed over to a Thai man who lived in
Japan. He took us to a Thai woman, the broker, where I stayed for two nights. Then
this woman sold me and my sister. I saw the money changing hands and didn't
know at first what it was about, but then realized I was being sold. . . . We
were told at the time of purchase that we were six months in debt. This was the
first I had heard about the debt."(75)
· Rei was escorted to Japan by a
wealthy woman whom she knew from her village in Thailand. When they arrived at
Narita airport, the escort handed Rei a passport and money to show to the
immigration officials. After Rei passed smoothly through immigration control,
the escort took back the passport and money and brought Rei to a hotel in Tokyo
by train. Rei recalled, "I stayed at the hotel with my escort for two nights.
On the third day, I was bought by a Taiwanese mama and taken to Ibaraki
prefecture by car. I didn't find out where I was until about a week later when
I asked a woman I was working with."(76)
· When Pot arrived at Narita airport
in 1990, she was handed over to a Thai woman named Chan and put into a van with
several other women. Chan spent the next five days taking the women around to
different locations in Tokyo. "She was trying to sell us like cattle. Then
on the fifth day a Thai woman bought me and took me to another woman named
'Chan' in Ibaraki prefecture, who paid 380 bai [3.8 million yen; US$26,000] for
me. When I got to the snack I learned that the 380 bai that I was bought for
was to be my debt."(77)
Once
the women were "sold" to snack bar owners or managers, their
procurers demanded that they work to repay their purchase price--plus other
fees and expenses. As one women recalled, "When I refused [to work as a
snack bar hostess], I was told, 'we bought you so we want you to give us back
that amount of money.'"(78)
According to interviewees, the bar owners were typically Japanese men with
close ties to the Yakuza, often referred to as "boss," while
managers, referred to as "mama" or "mama-san," were almost
always foreign women, typically the wife or girlfriend of the owner. Most of
the women interviewed by Human Rights Watch worked under Thai or Taiwanese
mamas, and a few interviewees pointed out that the mama herself was often
living and working in Japan in violation of immigration law, like the women who
work for her. For example, one woman we interviewed explained that she became a
"mama" when a client paid off her debt in one snack bar and then
forced her to repay another debt by working as the mama in a snack bar he
owned.(79)
The mama operated the bar for the owner and managed both the working and living
arrangements of the women who worked there. She was also the one who kept track
of women's "debts," and she exercised strict control over those whose
debt had not yet been paid off, as is discussed further below. In some cases,
women were procured by mamas who were not directly employed by one snack, but
instead had connections to several different snacks, where they brought the
women to work each day. This arrangement was particularly common in the
Kabuki-cho district of the Shinjuku ward in Tokyo, an entertainment district
with numerous small snack bars and other sex venues.
While
I was in Japan, I worked like a slave to pay off my debt. It took almost one
year.(80)
Women
recruited and transported into Japan for sex work typically were subjected to a
period of servitude in the sex industry when they arrived, and forced to work
without pay until they repaid exorbitant "debts," equivalent to
around US$25,000 to US$40,000.(81) In most
cases, the conditions under which such "debts" were imposed, calculated,
and repaid clearly constituted debt bondage, a slavery-like practice outlawed
by international law.(82)
The women involved also reported a range of other coercive tactics which were
used to ensure their obedience while they were "in debt," such as the
imposition of "fines" for misbehavior, the confiscation of their
passports and other identification documentation, threats of "resale"
into renewed debts and/or worse conditions, strict controls on the women's
freedom of movement and communication, and threats and use of physical force.
In some cases, the conditions women described amounted to forced labor.
Furthermore, "indebted" women were compelled to work under highly
abusive labor conditions, subjected to excessive work hours, abuse by clients,
and significant risks to their physical and mental health.
This
chapter describes women's experiences after they were trafficked from Thailand
and "sold" in Japan. It begins with a brief description of the
type of snack bar in which most of the women who were interviewed by Human
Rights Watch had worked, and then describes the methods which were used to
coerce women to work in these establishments for months--or longer--effectively
without pay or recompense, and often at serious risk to their physical and
mental health. Escape from these conditions was difficult and dangerous, and
most of the women we interviewed stayed in debt bondage until their employers
determined that their debts were "finished." Other women, however,
did manage to escape, and their compelling stories are also recounted below.
Though
debt bondage and other slavery-like practices occur in a variety of work
places, the discussion below focuses on the conditions in Japanese snack bars
where the vast majority of our interviewees worked. Snack bars, often referred
to simply as "snacks," are a common venue where many Japanese go for
relaxation and conversation. The many different types of snack bars are not
necessarily distinguishable to outsiders but are well known to the locals in
the area. A baishun--or prostitution--snack bar is one which involves
sexual exchanges and is almost exclusively patronized by men. The women
interviewed by Human Rights Watch distinguished between different types of
baishun snacks by the arrangements of sexual exchanges. As noted in the
previous chapter, most of the women we interviewed were placed in
"dating" snack bars, in which clients may take women out of the bar
for sexual services. Of the forty-eight interviewees who were placed in snack
bars when they arrived in Japan, all but one of the women described going out
with customers to provide sexual services as their primary responsibility.(83) All
discussion of snack bars below refers to "dating" snacks.
"Dating"
snack bars typically employ anywhere from five to twenty women as
"hostesses"(84) and a female manager,
who is called "mama" or "mama-san." Both the hostesses and
the mamas are most commonly from Thailand, the Philippines, or Korea, although
there are also women from other countries, including Japan. When a man enters
the bar, he is immediately greeted by the mama, who comes to his table and asks
what he wants to drink and what kind of woman he would like. If the customer is
a regular, the mama will know without having to ask. Clients can choose a
hostess for either two hours or a whole night, and they may take her out of the
snack if they wish. Typically, a hostess is taken by her client to a nearby
hotel, and the client is then responsible for paying for the hotel room and for
returning the woman to the snack or the apartment where she lives, depending on
the time. According to the women we interviewed, average fees were 20,000 to
30,000 yen (US$170-250(85))
for two hours and 30,000 to 40,000 yen (US$250-340) for the night, and the
money was given directly to the mama. The women explained that once paid for, a
woman was expected to satisfy all of the client's demands.
The operation of baishun snack bars is closely
tied to the Yakuza.(86)
The owners are often Yakuza members (or former members) themselves, or else are
linked to Yakuza gangs to which they pay regular protection money. The Yakuza
are powerful and dangerous groups with connections to police and other
government officials. According to our interviews with women who worked as
hostesses, as well as with advocates and researchers in this field, the
Yakuza's involvement in snack bar operations has important implications for
women's ability to challenge the terms or conditions of their employment and to
seek redress for violations. Women spoke of their fear of Yakuza retaliation
for disobedience or escape attempts, and several advocates pointed to Yakuza
involvement in the snack bar industry as a key reason behind the lack of
adequate police response to abuses.(87) Sri,
who worked as a mama in Kofu from 1985 to 1992, told Human Rights Watch that
she paid the Yakuza 8 bai (80,000 yen; US$630(88)) per
month to protect her snack bar, follow clients who did not pay, and follow
girls who tried to run away.(89)
Many women also alleged that corrupt police
officers--together with Yakuza--helped to protect snack bar operations. Several women explained to Human Rights Watch that
police or immigration officials either exempted their snack bars from raids, or
else gave their owners advance warning, in return for bribes:
· Pot explained that the owners of
her snack bar and others paid a "tax" to the police so that their
hostesses would not be arrested in raids. "When there are raids on snack
bars everyone agrees it is because the owner didn't pay the necessary
tax."(90)
· According to Chan,
"immigration came once, but there was a telephone call which notified the
snack just before and so almost all of the women ran out. Those who didn't get
out were arrested."(91)
· Janya said that "the bar
owners were not afraid of the police because the police warn them in advance of
inspections by immigration officials. I never saw this, but I heard about it
often."(92)
· Nung recalled that while she was
afraid of immigration and police officers, the "boss" at the snack
bar was not. "Boss easily got information about immigration crackdowns. So
during immigration crackdowns, the Thai people stayed at the apartment and the
snack was closed."(93)
All
of the women whose cases Human Rights Watch documented--either through directly
conducting in-depth interviews or drawing upon detailed interview transcripts
from other researchers--and who were placed into employment as snack bar
hostesses upon their arrival in Japan, reported having to repay a substantial
debt to their employers.(94)
The amount of the women's debts varied, but most of the women were told they
owed between 3 million and 5 million yen (US$25,000 - 42,000(95)) when
their work began. Our findings have been corroborated by researchers,
advocates, and government officials in Japan and Thailand.(96) The
women's shelter Saalaa, for example, found that of the Thai women who worked in
Japanese snack bars, more than ninety-five percent arrived in debt. Moreover,
in ninety-five percent of those cases, the women "owed" more than 3
million yen (US$24,000(97)),
which they were forced to reimburse through sex work under highly coercive
conditions. Saalaa published a report on these findings which points out that
although this amount is called a "debt," this is a misnomer, as the
women have not actually borrowed the money.(98)
Human
Rights Watch found that while the crime of debt bondage was closely linked to
the crime of trafficking--as women were placed into debt bondage by the same
networks that arranged their travel to Japan--women also could be
"sold" into debt bondage in snack bars by persons unconnected to
their travel into the country. Human Rights Watch interviewed two women who
accepted job offers while they were already in Japan in 1995 and then found
themselves in debt bondage, with debts of 300 bai (3 million yen; US$32,000):
· Korn came to Japan in 1993. Her
first debt was 380 bai (3.8 million yen; US$34,000), which she paid off in
three months, working as a sex worker at a snack bar. Then Korn and her friend
Gaew, another sex worker from Thailand, met a Thai woman who told them they
could earn a lot of money at another snack bar in Chiba prefecture. So, as Korn
explained, "we both came to work the snack on March 23, 1995. But, upon
arrival at the snack, we realized we had been sold for 300 bai [3 million yen;
US$32,000] each and were in debt again for this amount. As soon as we realized
we had been tricked we tried to escape."(99)
The
actual time it took women to repay their debt, and the work they had to perform
while in debt, often differed greatly from the promises made at the time of
recruitment. Mamas used arbitrary and non-transparent methods of
account-keeping, and women had no control over the initial level or on-going
calculation of their debt. Not surprisingly, abuses were rampant. In virtually
every case Human Rights Watch documented, debts were increased at employers'
discretion as fees were levied for housing, food, clothing, medication, fines,
and other expenses. Some women were never told how much their debt was to begin
with, and in any case, the details of the debt repayment calculations were
never fully explained:
· Unable to find a job that paid a
good salary, Chan left Thailand for Japan in 1993, when she was twenty-three
years old. Chan told Human Rights Watch, "I was charged 100,000 yen
[US$900] a month for all my expenses, and this amount was added to my debt. All
I knew was that this included 30,000 yen [US$270] per month for housing. I
didn't know how the rest of the money was divided."(100)
· Before going to Japan, Sean worked
in a market. Sean was twenty-eight years old when she arrived at Narita airport
in December 1992, and was sent to work at a snack bar in Kofu. "I worked
in a 'dating snack' and had to 'date clients' in order to pay off my debt of
120 bai [1.2 million yen; US$11,000(101)].
Each month, another 3 bai [30,000 yen; US$270] was added to the debt for the
apartment and all other expenses, such as food and clothing. The Japanese owner
also added 3 bai per month to my debt for having given me the job. My agent had
told me I could pay off my debt in three to four months, but it took me nine
months to pay off my debt."(102)
· Phan's mama paid for her apartment
and food, but Phan said she had to cover all of her other expenses, including
birth control pills: "I tried to buy all the extra things I needed with my
tip money so it wouldn't be added to my debt."(103)
· When Miew arrived in Japan in early
1999, she was told that each month she had to pay 50,000 yen (US$430(104))
protection money, 50,000 yen (US$430) for housing, and 30,000 yen (US$260) for
food. These expenses, totaling 130,000 yen (US$1,100) a month, were added to
her debt.(105)
· Sri, a Thai woman working as a mama
at a snack bar in Kofu, told Human Rights Watch in 1995 that, though an
abortion at a private hospital costs about 6-7 bai (60,000-70,000 yen;
US$640-740), if a hostess becomes pregnant while in debt, snack bar employers
may charge her up to 30 bai (300,000 yen; US$3,200) for an abortion and then
add this amount to her debt.(106)
With
fees and other expenses imposed at their mama's discretion, women often found
it impossible to keep track of their debt repayment calculations. And, even
when they tried, they found that their efforts were fruitless, as they were
forced to defer to their mamas when calculations differed:
· Faa was told she owed 120 bai (1.2
million yen; US$9,000(107)).
"I paid off this debt in five months. I served at least one client a night
and at most three. The snack paid for room and board, but I had to pay for my
birth control and my own health care and personal needs. But I didn't
really know exactly how the debt worked or what I owed for what. I just waited
to be told my debt was paid."(108)
· Pot recalled, "In all, I
worked for eight months to pay back my debt and I had calculated that I must
have paid it back long ago, but the mama kept lying to me and said she didn't
have the same records as I did. . . . I tried to keep track of my own
records quietly, but I didn't know all the additional expenses that the mama
was adding to my debt. And I did not want the mama to know I was keeping track
for fear that she would get angry."(109)
Even
in cases where women were released from debt within the promised time frame,
the discretion that their employers exercised over the conditions of their
employment, as well as over the debt repayment calculations, often qualified
the arrangement as debt bondage. While in "debt," women had no power
to negotiate the nature or conditions of their work and could not take sick
days or rest days without permission. They could not refuse clients or clients'
demands, making them highly vulnerable to violence and other abusive treatment.
They furthermore received no compensation for their labor, and while the women
we interviewed were typically allowed to keep tips from clients, in some cases
even that was not allowed. An advocate who worked on a hotline for foreign
women told Human Rights Watch about a Thai woman whose mama demanded that
hostesses hand over their tips: "So she rolled the tips in saran wrap and
put them in her vagina to escape detection by her mama. Then she mailed the
money home, but it was stolen along the way and never got there, so it was all
for nothing."(110)
And a Thai woman who had been arrested for murdering her mama wrote the
following in a letter composed from prison in 1993:
The
mama took all the money I got by engaging in sex with dirty-minded men, but she
did not pay anything to me. . . . Moreover, she charged us food, rent, and
other things as well, and our debt to her went up--although we never really
borrowed from her. . . . When [the other hostesses] saw me get tipped, they
threatened that they were going to tell the mama that I got a tip unless I gave
them some. So I gave them some. I thought that giving some to them was better
than having it all taken away by the mama.(111)
Interviewees explained that their indebtedness
was consistently used as a justification for the strict control that mamas
exercised over all aspects of their lives, which included the confiscation of
their passports, strict isolation, constant surveillance, and the threat and
use of violent punishments for disobedience. The debt itself also provided a
strong incentive for hard work and obedience. Women came to Japan with the
primary objective of sending money back to Thailand, so when they learned that
they had to repay a debt before they could keep their earnings, their top priority
became repaying their debt (or having it repaid) as quickly as possible. This
meant staying on good terms with the mama, who had ultimate control over
calculating debt repayment and even reserved the right to "resell"
women into higher levels of debt and/or worse working conditions. Finally, the
lack of wages obstructed women's access to outside assistance and increased
their dependency on their employers for food, medical care, housing, and other
necessities.
Dr. Suriya Samutkupt, a Professor of Anthropology
at the Suranaree University of Technology, in Thailand, spent several months in
Japan in the mid to late 1990s, interviewing Thai women who were working as sex
workers in Ibaraki prefecture. These women had arrived in Japan in debt
bondage, but had successfully paid off their debts and were now sending money
home to Thailand each month. Samutkupt recalled their descriptions of the
period of debt bondage, emphasizing that "these were women who had 'made
it' in Japan, so their experiences were not as bad as many others":
They didn't really understand the finances or
the accounting, but they knew that cooperation and obedience would get them
through. If they cooperated with the boss and the clients, their chances of
getting tips and getting free were much, much better. They prayed to be bought
out of their contracts [by clients] and they tried to stay away from drugs and
drink. They said that the younger women would get into trouble by getting
involved in drugs and alcohol and by disobeying. Then they would be beaten or
resold. But they explained that "as long as you do your job, the gangsters
aren't too bad and will take care of you when you're sick." They also
explained that if you're young and pretty you have a better chance.(112)
The system of debt bondage provided snack bar
managers with punishments that could be used to exact strict obedience from
women without resorting to the explicit threat or use of physical force. Strict
rules were imposed regarding matters such as punctuality, weight gain, and
failure to fully satisfy clients, and mamas fined women for minor infractions,
thus prolonging their period of indebtedness. Women also reported facing fines
if any of their customers complained, thus encouraging them to yield to all
customer demands.
· At
Kaew's snack bar, "women were fined
for coming back late, fighting with each other, or not agreeing to sit with a
client, so," Kaew explained, "I did what I was told."(113)
· Chan explained, "I could eat
anything I wanted, but I was penalized if I ever weighed more than 54 kilograms
[119 pounds]."(114)
· Lee, who had left her two-year-old
twins with her family in Samut Sakhon Province to come to Japan in 1991, when
she was twenty-three years old, explained that her mama added a 10,000 yen
(US$75) fine to the debt of a woman who gained even one kilogram.(115)
· Noi was twenty-one when she arrived
in Japan. She described her mama as nervous, and sometimes cruel, and said
women were "fined if they were fat or gave bad service to clients."(116)
· Miew was fined 500,000 yen
(US$4,300(117))
for giving the snack bar's telephone number to her parents. She explained that
"Women also got fines for asking customers to help them escape [if the
customer told on them] or for not satisfying the customer."(118)
Many
women reported being faced with the threat or actuality of having their debt
renewed by being "resold" to another snack bar. In a clear
demonstration of the slave-like status of indebted women, procurers considered it
their right to "sell" a woman, this time acting as her broker, or to
return her to her original broker. Many women were resold, or threatened with
resale, into higher levels of debt and worse working conditions as a punishment
for disobedience or "causing trouble." Women also explained that
being found HIV positive was considered grounds for "resale":
· Chan said that she served three to
four clients every night and explained that she and the other hostesses
"weren't exactly forced to take clients but we were pressured, and if we
didn't cooperate our lives could be made very difficult. So everyone learned to
do as we were instructed. I had to take clients from the first day. I had never
done this type of work before, and I had to serve about three or four clients
every night. The mama said we had to work hard to pay off our debt within five
months, or she would sell us again."(119)
· Kaew said she "saw lots of
women who tried to run away from their debt, but were caught and resold, even
caught back in Thailand."(120)
· According to Miew, she had to be
careful in asking clients to help her escape, because "if I asked a customer
to help me escape and he told my mama, I would be sold to another place with
double debt."(121)
· Janya was resold after more than a
year of working to repay her debt because her boss, a Thai woman, owed heavy
gambling debts and wanted to return home to Thailand. It then took her another
year to repay her debt to the second snack bar.(122)
Samutkupt's
discussions with Thai sex workers in Japan confirmed that "indebted women
could be resold, because they were under contract. They might be resold for
misbehavior, or for some other reason, such as because their boss was in debt,
or because the club owners changed."(123)
Tactics
to prevent escape
Passport
Deprivation
One
of the ways in which brokers and employers prevented women from attempting
escape was by confiscating their passports and other documentation. None of the
women Human Rights Watch interviewed were allowed access to their passports
while in debt, and in some cases women could not get their passports back even
after their debt was paid. Khai's mama kept her (fake) passport while she was
in debt, and then, when Khai finished paying off her debt in 1992, demanded a
fee for its return. Khai was told to pay 50 bai (500,000 yen; US$4,000) and,
since she didn't have the money, she never saw her passport again.(124)
Without their passports and other papers, women were left without any proof of
their identity, making it difficult for them to arrange transportation back to
Thailand. A Japanese man who has helped many Thai and Filipina women escape
from debt bondage in snack bars explained that, when he attempts to rescue
women, most of them are very concerned about their passports. Their employers
have told them that they cannot go home without a passport or identification,
and the women believe them.(125)
Furthermore, foreigners in Japan are required to carry their passports with
them at all times. Failure to produce a passport upon demand by a police or
immigration official is punishable by a fine and often leads to detention as a
suspected illegal immigrant. Thus, if a woman leaves the snack bar without her
passport, she faces the risk of being placed into detention by police or
immigration officials. Pot explained that "the mama had my passport so I
never dared to run away or even consider running to the police. Without my
documents I was sure I would be arrested and jailed. I never got my passport
back from the mama even after my debt was paid."(126)
Snack
bar employers also used strict supervision and restrictions on women's freedom
of movement and communication to limit opportunities for successful escapes.
Virtually all of the women interviewed by Human Rights Watch complained that
every aspect of their lives, during both working and non-working hours, was
controlled by the mama while they were in debt. They were housed in apartments
with other snack bar hostesses under the supervision of the mama, and they
could not go out of the apartment without an escort, if at all. Communication
was also tightly controlled. Women were often forbidden to speak in Thai, and
one woman reported that though she could send and receive letters, both
incoming and outgoing mail was opened and read.
· Nat worked in a bar with a
Singaporean mama. "The mama had lived in Japan for twenty-four years and
had been employing Thai women. Because she often traveled to Thailand, she
spoke fluent Thai and knew well how to scold in Thai. The mama managed the
women very strictly. She watched our every move from her house. Video cameras
were set up for this purpose at the snack bar and in the room on the second
floor where we lived. All doors made a sound when opened or closed and we could
not go anywhere.(127)
· Miew lived next door to the snack
bar and was watched all the time. "There was a motion sensitive light that
went on if anyone went up or down the stairs to the apartment. I don't know who
was watching us, but someone was."(128)
· Rei called home about once a month for
thirty minutes and was also able to send and receive letters. But she explained
that none of the women were allowed to go out alone.(129)
· Pong worked at a snack bar with
eight other Thai women. "I lived with the mama in the same apartment, and
I had no freedom to go out. I was watched and controlled all the time. When
somebody went out to buy food, another woman had to go with her. Mama ordered
the Yakuza to watch the women to prevent escape. Mama told us that if anybody
escaped from here, she would be killed." Pong's communication with family
members in Thailand was also strictly limited. "I could send letters to my
family in Thailand, but I could not receive any letters from my family because
I was prohibited from telling our address to anybody."(130)
The
extreme isolation many women are subjected to was described in wrenching words
in a letter written by one Thai woman, who has since disappeared, to her
father:
I
live without hope. What I do everyday is just have customers. I cannot go out.
There are more than ten Yakuza here. This letter must be hidden from them. If
they find it, I will be beaten. If I try to run away from here, I will be
killed, and my body will be thrown to the sea. . . . I do not know where I am
now. All of us do not speak. There are lots of Thais and Filipinas. I am
prohibited to talk to them. . . . The Yakuza are always watching me carefully.
I am forced to stay at the place where Yakuza live. The restaurant where I work
is located on an island. The Yakuza are threatening me. . . . Living here is
like living in hell. Yakuza sometimes take us somewhere in order for us to get
customers. They pack us into a truck without windows. I cannot look outside.(131)
Finally, many women reported that brokers and
employers used physical violence and threats of violence to frighten women into
submission. Women were beaten for failing to please their clients, for failing
to prevent a coworker's escape, or for other acts of disobedience.
· Khai complained that the clients
would not use condoms, and "if I tried to get a client to use one and he
told the mama, I would get in trouble. If I did anything that did not please
the client and he complained I would get beaten." She also said that the
mama beat the women at the snack bar if they asked clients for any tips or
favors.(132)
· Jaem explained that she was beaten
often by her employers because "I wouldn't say I was wrong when I hadn't
done anything wrong."(133)
· Phon arrived in Japan in 1993 at
age eighteen and was "sold" to a snack bar owner named Yoko. When two
of her coworkers escaped from the snack bar, the boss "beat and kicked me
and another woman, asking if we knew something about the two women's
escape."(134)
Threats
and intimidation were commonly used to prevent women from trying to escape, and
women often heard stories of others who were severely punished, and even
killed, for fleeing before they were released from their debt. Rei told Human
Rights Watch about an eighteen-year-old woman who was caught trying to escape:
"they took the girl back and the mama sold her to the Yakuza. Now she has
to work for them in a Yakuza brothel, or 'black jail,' indefinitely with no
pay. . . . Some women who try to escape are killed."(135) Another
woman, Miew, explained that "a friend of mine working at the same snack
told me about a woman who had tried to escape. The first time she was caught
and returned to the snack and then, when she tried again, she was killed and
found dead in the forest. My friend said that if a woman escapes, she is killed
and thrown away in the forest or the ocean."(136)
Suriya Samutkupt told Human Rights Watch that in his conversations with Thai
women who had been released from debt bondage in snack bars in Japan, he also
"heard of many others who had disappeared, either resold or killed by the
Yakuza. . . . The women had heard stories of women being thrown into the sea or
into the forest for disobeying their bosses." He went on to explain,
"I don't know if these stories were true or if they were just threats used
as a control tactic," but regardless of their accuracy, they were
effective in eliciting obedience. Despite the terrible conditions that they
described, none of the women Samutkupt met had ever tried to escape.(137)
Some
employers also told women that if they left the snack bar before their
"debts" were repaid, their family members would face violent
retaliation back in Thailand. Korn, for example, whose successful escape from
debt bondage is described below, told Human Rights Watch, "even though we
[Korn and one of her coworkers] escaped, we will not return to our families in
Thailand because our agents know where we are from and might seek revenge. My
mama threatened to kill my mother and older sister if I ever ran away."(138) Human
Rights Watch was unable to determine whether such retaliation was commonly
carried out in practice, but according to shelter staff and other advocates
whom we interviewed in Tokyo, Kyoto, and Bangkok, these threats are credible,
and the fear generated by such threats serves as a significant deterrent
against escape attempts and other acts of disobedience.(139)
Excessive hours
Nearly every woman Human Rights Watch
interviewed was forced to work seven days a week while in debt, without days
off for rest or, in some cases, even for illness.(140) Typically, the women were taken to the snack bar at
6:00 or 7:00 p.m and worked until at least 2:00 or 3:00 a.m. They provided
sexual services for two to four clients each night and often performed other
tasks as well, including cleaning, washing dishes, serving food and drinks, and
entertaining clients by singing or playing games with them at their tables:
· Rei explained that she tried to
work hard to pay off her debt as fast as possible. "If I was sick I could
rest for two or three days and mama gave me medicine (the cost of which was
added to my debt). But I rarely stopped, even when sick, and the mama pushed me
to work." Rei said her mama insisted that she serve at least two clients a
night, and most nights she served three.(141)
· In one of the snack bars where Nuch
worked, she was woken up every morning at 9:00 a.m. to clean the house and the
snack bar before lunch. After lunch, she and the other women from the snack bar
had to work in a field behind the bar where the owners grew vegetables and
rice. They worked there until dinner-time, and they were closely supervised to
make sure they did not steal any produce; anything they wanted to eat from the
fields had to be purchased with their tip money. After dinner Nuch went to work
in the snack bar, serving clients from 6:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. as she struggled
to repay her debt.(142)
· Lai
was twenty-three when a friend in southern Thailand recruited her to go to
Japan in 1993. Once there, she was forced to work every day from 7:00 p.m. to
2:00 a.m., without any compensation or days off. Her clients paid 20,000 yen
(US$180) for two hours or 30,000 yen (US$270) for an overnight stay, but the
money went straight to the snack bar owner.(143)
Several women reported taking contraceptive
pills without any days off (to allow for
menstruation), so that they could go out with customers every day of the month.
Some women said their mamas "forced" them to take pills daily; in
other cases, they felt compelled by the urgent need to pay back their debt as
quickly as possible:
· Khai told us that her mama made her
pay for her own birth control and take it without any days for menstruation:
"I bought the birth control pills on the black market for 2,500 yen [US$20(144)] per
month. I didn't have my period for one and a half years. Then when I stopped
taking birth control I bled every day for one and a half months."(145)
· Kaew had been sterilized so she did
not need to take birth control pills for contraceptive purposes. But, she said,
I took the pill daily so that I wouldn't get my period and could work every
day. The mama said to me, 'don't let your period come, or you'll never finish
paying your debt.'"(146)
One woman we interviewed was able to avoid
taking birth control pills without regular breaks by sitting on ice to clot her
blood when she was menstruating, so that she could still serve clients.(147)
Abuse
by clients
Women's
inability to turn down customers meant that they were often forced to tolerate
even the most abusive clients. Many of the women we interviewed explained that
some of their clients were sadistic and violent:
· Khai told us, "I was beaten by
clients several times. One client even burnt me many times with a
cigarette." But Khai was never allowed to refuse clients. "The
clients could do whatever they wanted to me. There were times when I was
bruised all over by the clients and still the mama made me go with them for as
long as the client was willing to pay. . . . One Thai woman who worked with me
was beaten by a client and when she returned to the snack bleeding the mama
stilled yelled at her and blamed her for not pleasing the client. The mama kept
saying it was her fault for not pleasing him."(148)
· Rei also reported having to accept
every client and fulfill all of their requests. "The client could do
anything they wanted with me and could ask me to do anything and I couldn't
refuse. The only thing the mama said to the clients was 'these women belong to
the Yakuza so be careful with them.'"(149)
· According to Jo, "Some clients
were violent with us. Once we went out with a client, we had to follow his
instructions and satisfy him."(150)
A
volunteer staff member at a Japanese women's shelter told Human Rights Watch
that, during the year and a half that she worked there, from early 1998 to
mid-1999, nine Thai women escaped to the shelter from snack bars and two
escaped from brothels. Several women reported traumatic experiences with
clients, including one woman who was forced to have sex in the snow, and was
then left in the snow by her client when she fainted. She was rescued by her
mama, who went to find her when the client returned with only the woman's
clothing.(151)
Women working in debt bondage in Japan's sex
industry face serious risks to their physical and mental health. These include
the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)--including
HIV/AIDS--from their clients. Several women interviewed by Human Rights Watch
explained that they were unable to negotiate or insist on condom use,
especially while they were still in debt. Kaew said she tried to use condoms
during oral sex "but some of the clients refused to use the condoms."(152) Nam explained, "I
could not refuse clients, and very few clients used condoms."(153) We also spoke to a Thai
mama, Sri, who told us that while she tried to convince clients to use condoms
with the women who worked for her, she did not insist on it; if clients refused
to use a condom, the women had to follow their clients' wishes or it would be
bad for the snack bar.(154) A staff worker at MsLA,
a women's shelter and hotline and counseling center in Yokohama, corroborated
the testimony of Human Rights Watch interviewees regarding condom use:
"Thai women are very concerned about STDs. They ask for condoms but ten
out of ten customers refuse. Condoms are a common form of birth control in
Japan, but it is something to be used with wives. Men feel that since they have
paid for the services of a prostitute, they should be able to do whatever they
want."(155)
Women's limited access to medical testing and
treatment exacerbated the health risks they faced from sexually transmitted
diseases. Restrictions on women's freedom of movement meant that they could not
visit a doctor without their mama's approval, and, typically, her
accompaniment. Language barriers--coupled with a lack of interpreters in
Japanese hospitals and clinics--compounded the problem, making it impossible
for women to communicate directly with health care providers. Indebted women
also lacked the funds to pay for exams and medication, and their undocumented
immigration status served to exclude them from nearly all government health
care subsidies, including government-subsidized HIV/AIDS treatment. Not only
did this mean that women's access to medical care depended on their mamas'
decision to pay for it, it also meant that visits to the doctor could prolong
their period of indebtedness, as all health care costs were added to their
debt.
The result was that, while in debt, women's
access to testing and medication for STDs and other illnesses was strictly
controlled by their mamas. Some women were never tested. Pong, for example, explained that she was never checked
for STDs, even though very few clients used condoms.(156) Other
women were
given blood tests, but the results were provided to their mamas--in violation
of their right to privacy--while being withheld from the women themselves.
Providing medical test results to the women's managers constitutes a serious
breach of the principle of doctor-patient confidentiality. Still other women
were given the results, but could not afford to pay for the medication they
needed. And those who did receive treatment saw their debts increase as a
result:
· Rei told Human Rights Watch that
while she was working as an indebted snack shop hostess, she and her coworkers
went to the hospital once a month for blood tests to check for STDs and
HIV/AIDS. The cost of the health visits were added to the women's debt, and the
test results were given to the mama. Rei knows that she had syphilis twice, but
she does not know whether she has HIV/AIDS because her mama never told her.(157)
· Soi worked at a snack bar in Chiba
prefecture for two months and then was transferred with her mama to a snack bar
in Mie prefecture. During the four months that she worked without compensation,
from October 1990 to January 1991, she and the other hostesses were taken to
the doctor for blood tests twice a week, but the doctor discussed the results
only with their mama. In Soi's words, "The doctor checked us for diseases
by taking out blood and listening to our chests with a stethoscope. The mama
paid the doctor. The doctor never told us our diagnosis. He would tell the
mama. . . . The mama said she would tell us if we were sick."(158)
· When Khai had her blood checked,
the health center told her that she "had too many white
cells"--meaning she was HIV-positive--but her mama refused to give her
money for medication.(159)
· Ooi
saw a doctor once while she was at the snack bar. "The doctor took my
blood and examined my vagina. It took a week for me to find out my results. I
was told I did not have syphilis. But I was not told anything else. The mama
made me see the doctor. One of the clients asked the owner to bring the women
for medical check-ups because some diseases can be transmitted. So the owner
told the mama to take the girls to the doctor because if the client got a
disease, then he might take back his money. The mama paid the doctor's fee.
After I got back to the apartment, the mama told me that my debt would be
increased. . . . One month before I was arrested, I was taken to a hospital for
a check-up. The doctor gave me a month's supply of medicine. I did not know
what the medicine was for."(160)
Based on her conversations with Thai women, a
staff member at MsLA observed, "Half the women get regular checkups and
the medical fees are added to their debt. The other half have no way of knowing
if they have any disease."(161)
There is also some evidence that women
trafficked from Thailand into the Japanese sex industry are at risk of
developing serious mental health problems as a result of the abuses they
suffer. Though there are no statistics estimating the extent of mental
disorders among undocumented female migrants from Thailand in Japan, such
problems have been identified by
physicians who treat foreign patients in Japan as one of the major medical
problems facing Thai women.
Takashi Sawada, a physician at the Minatomachi Medical Clinic, told Human
Rights Watch that, in his experience, acute psychosis and substance abuse are
prevalent among Thai women working as entertainers or sex workers in Japan.(162) Human
Rights Watch spoke to several women who appeared to be suffering from
addictions and/or serious mental health problems after working in debt bondage
in Japanese snack bars. A few of their stories are related below, though we do
not have sufficient information or expertise to reach definitive conclusions
about how or why their problems developed:
· When we met Khai, she had escaped
from debt bondage in a snack bar and was working on the streets in Osaka. She
was living with a Japanese boyfriend, and explained that she was trying to stop
working, but without the work she gets bored and has no money of her own.
"I am still addicted to the drug 'U' and so I need some money. I get angry
with myself sometimes and beat myself by sticking needles in my arms and
banging my head against the wall hard. If I am drunk or on drugs I feel better.
I often have severe headaches."(163)
· Bee was working at a bar in Bangkok
that served primarily Japanese clients when a friend of hers asked her to go to
Japan. Bee agreed, but when she got to Japan and was sold to a snack bar in
Ibaraki prefecture, the conditions proved unbearable. She began consuming large
amounts of cough syrup and drugs, and then had problems with her nerves.
"I became crazy and then the neighbors reported me." It is not clear
whether her neighbors called the police or the hospital, but Bee was taken to a
mental hospital, where she was treated and then turned over to the police.(164)
· Four months after her baby was
born, Faa began having temper tantrums. She was eventually sent to a
psychiatric hospital in Japan and then transferred to Thailand. When we spoke
to Faa at the psychiatric hospital in Thailand, she did not remember her temper
tantrums or know why she had been committed to hospitals in Japan and Thailand.
The hospital staff believed that her mental disorders were probably a result of
her addiction to medicated cough syrup during the nearly four years she was in
Japan.(165)
Japan's
public health system provides for free treatment to undocumented migrants whose
cases are so severe that they are considered at risk of physically harming
themselves or others and are in need of emergency intervention. But for women
with less extreme problems, the high cost of treatment can deter them from
seeking assistance. The fact that there are few Thai-speaking psychiatrists in
Japan means that effective care is often unavailable even in emergency cases.(166)
Snack bar hostesses may also suffer from a range
of illnesses or injuries, particularly given the excessive work hours and the
prevalence of physically abusive clients and/or employers. Again, Human Rights
Watch found that the risk to their health was heightened by their dependence on
their employers for access to medical care and medication: they needed
permission from their mama to see a doctor, as well as a "loan" to
pay for the visit and any necessary medication. And again, the cost of any
medical care that women did receive was added to their debts and thus could prolong
their period of debt bondage. Joy reported, "We
had to work even if we were ill or menstruating. And as long as we were in
debt, we were not allowed to go to the doctor, even if we were sick."(167) Wanna
described her mama as a "cold-hearted woman," and complained that
"when I was ill I had to take clients."(168) Nuch
said that when she developed a rash and fever, her mama bought her medicine,
but did not take her to see a doctor and the cost of her medicine was added to
her debt.(169)
Women
continue to face problems in obtaining affordable health care after being released
from debt. Excluded from government
health benefits on the basis of their immigration status, the high cost of
medical care could prevent women from even seeking treatment. Rei told Human
Rights Watch that, while she was working as a sex worker on the streets, after
paying off her debt in a snack bar, a client took her to an apartment and threw
her down a flight of steps. Despite her resultant injuries, she did not go to a
doctor: "I had no health care
insurance and no money." Instead, she simply stayed at home for a month
without working.(170)
Women who
successfully obtain medical care find themselves saddled with expensive medical
bills. Most found the money to cover their bills, but those without the
resources to pay could be forced into excruciating choices. Nid explained that,
when she was pregnant in 1995, her inability to pay her medical expenses, which
totaled 800,000 yen (US$8500), nearly led her to give up her unborn children to
a woman who offered to cover her hospital bills in return.(171)
Fortunately, staff members from the Japanese NGO Saalaa intervened and assisted
Nid in arranging both child care and a hospital payment plan.(172)
In
1994, a staff worker from OASIS, a Japanese women's association that was set up
in 1983 to help foreign workers in Japan, noted that "Japanese authorities
reported that twenty Thai
girls died in 1993 after working in the snack bars or brothels because of
various 'illnesses.' The illnesses were caused by the fact that they were
forced to work too hard and because they had no time to rest and no money to
see a doctor."(173)
In interviews with Human Rights Watch in
1999, Thai officials, including the First Secretary of the Royal Thai Embassy
in Japan and the Japan Desk Officer at the Consular Affairs Department of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, cited similar mortality rates for Thai women in
Japan, stating that about fifty Thai nationals die in Japan each year, and the
majority of the deceased are women. They did not, however, provide any
information about the causes of death.(174)
In
some cases, a woman's release from debt bondage was expedited by a client who
paid off her outstanding debt. Women referred to this as "dat tact"(175):
· Soi had spent two months working in
a snack bar without compensation, when one of her clients, Mr. Takashi,(176) paid
her boss to release her. "He came to the snack for the first time in
December 1990. He met me there, bought me [for the night], and then bought me
about ten times after that. Then he proposed to me. I did not understand what
he was saying so the mama interpreted for me. He asked me to stop working at
the snack and to live with him. He paid 1.5 million yen [US$11,000] to my boss
to set me free. I left the snack in January 1991 and started living with Mr.
Takashi and his eighty-two-year-old ailing mother. I got a job and worked
illegally at a button producing factory. I worked there for a year and a half.
In November 1993, Mr. Takashi and I went to the ward office to get married. I
went to the office with my real passport, which I had brought to Japan with me
[though she entered Japan on a Malaysian passport]. It had no 'entry' stamp for
Japan, but the ward office said I could get married if I had my real
passport." When she spoke to Human Rights Watch in March 1994, Soi had
applied for a visa as a spouse of Japanese national and hoped to receive it
within the year.(177)
· While Kaew was working to repay her
debt at a snack bar in Nagano prefecture in 1992, she met a man who was a
friend of the owner. "He came to the snack bar often, but he never took
women out, he just talked to them. I had to talk to him, and at first I was
upset because I knew he wasn't going to pay to take me out, but then he gave me
tips just to sit and talk. He told the owner that he liked me and asked to buy
out my contract, and the owner agreed since it was his friend. Usually, they
didn't allow men to buy women out. So he paid the 130 bai [1.3 million yen;
US$10,000] that I owed [she had already repaid 250 bai (2.5 million yen;
US$20,000)] and set me up in an apartment. He gave me money, and I also
continued to work at the same snack bar, but I wasn't in debt so I earned
money."(178)
Samutkupt
found that it was common practice for clients to "buy" women out of
debt in the snack bars and then take them as mistresses. The women he met with
in Ibaraki prefecture explained that while they were in "debt," "they dreamt of
getting out of their contract, and their goal was to be bought out of
debt." Many of the women he
interviewed had been "bought out" by Japanese men, who then rented
apartments for the women, gave them spending money, and visited them once or
twice a week.(179)
Women
preferred "dat tact" to remaining in debt bondage, but they were also
vulnerable to being exploited by the person who had purchased their
"release" and thus felt entitled to demand services and obedience.
Furthermore, the women continued to live in fear of deportation and became
dependant on their "boyfriend" for protection against the authorities
and access to housing, medical care, and other necessities. We interviewed one
woman who was "released" from debt by her "boyfriend" while
she was working at a snack bar in 1985, only to be told that she owed him a
debt of 80 bai (800,000 yen; US$3300):
· Sri had been working in Japan for
five months when her Japanese 'boyfriend' paid off the rest of her debt--she
never found out how much that was -- and took her to live with him. Then he
brought her to Kofu, where he had just opened a snack bar of his own. "He
told me I was to work there and pay off another debt of 80 bai [800,000 yen;
US$3300]. He then bought another ten Thai girls for 180 bai [1.8 million yen;
US$7500] each, and each of these girls had to work off a debt of 300-350 bai
[3-3.5 million yen; US$12,400-14,500]. The girls' debt varied according to
their age and beauty, the younger and more beautiful they were, the higher
their debt. I was told that my debt was less because I was to be the mama
in that snack."(180)
Most
women worked until they were told that their debt was "finished."
While the amount of time it took women to repay their debts varied greatly,
most of the women whose cases Human Rights Watch documented were released
within a year:(181)
· Joy was "sold" to a snack
bar in Gumma prefecture in 1991, where she was held in debt bondage and forced
to work every day to repay a debt of 350 bai (3.5 million yen; US$26,000). She
described her mama as "mean and malicious." "If we [Joy and her
coworkers] didn't listen to the mama, she reported us to the Yakuza. We had to
work even if we were ill or menstruating. And as long as we were in debt, we
were not allowed to go to the doctor, even if we were sick." But after two
and a half months, Joy had repaid her debt, and she went to work at a factory,
earning about 130,000 yen (US$1000) a month after taxes.(182)
· When Pat went to Japan in 1990 at
age twenty-four, she said, "I understood that I owed a debt of 2.3 million
yen [US$16,000] and what type of work I would do. But I didn't know how long I
had to work, and in the end I spent more than a year finishing my debt because
I was resold to other snack bars several times." After her debt was
"finished," she moved in with her forty-three-year-old Japanese
boyfriend, whom she later married.(183)
· Lee agreed to come to Japan in
1991. "The agent told me I would work serving drinks in Japan. I did not
know until after I arrived that I had to pay off my debt of 400 bai [4 million
yen; US$30,000] through prostitution. That time was very difficult. I was sent
to a snack bar, and it took me seven months to pay off my debt. I had one
regular customer who came every other night which helped, but besides him I had
to serve any client who wanted me and I couldn't refuse." Lee stayed at
the snack for several months after repaying her debt, until she had saved
enough money to move. Then she got a job at a snack bar near Narita airport in
Chiba prefecture, and worked there for more than a year.(184)
After
they were released, most of the women continued to work in Japan, either in sex
work or other types of employment. These women were finally able to collect
wages for their work, and many women sent significant amounts of money home to
their families in Thailand. Non-indebted hostesses in the snack bars had more
choices about where they worked, when they worked, the types of services they
performed, and the clients they accepted. However, some women reported that
their mamas continued to exercise abusive levels of control, even after their
debt was repaid. In some cases, women found themselves with no choice but to
continue working at the same snack bar, because they did not have enough money
to leave:
· Phan spent five months paying off a
debt of 400 bai (4 million yen; US$30,000) after she arrived in Japan in
January 1991. Then she agreed to enter into a second debt. "The mama asked
me if I wanted another contract. I was not allowed to earn the money I made and
save it along the way--the mama explained that according to her system, you had
to take the advance and then worked it off. So I agreed to extend my contract
by 100 bai [1 million yen; US$7,500], which I sent home to my family. The mama
said that for 100 bai I would have to pay off a debt of 200 bai [2 million yen;
US$15,000], and I agreed. During the second debt, a client offered to 'dat
tact' [pay off the rest of Phan's debt to have her 'released'], but the mama
wouldn't allow it. I never went out of the apartment or snack because I was
afraid of the mama's temper and also because I knew I was illegal and could be
arrested. Then after I paid off the second 'tact' [contract], I took 150 bai
[1.5 million yen; US$11,000] advance to send to my family and worked off a
third debt of 300 bai [3 million yen; US$22,000]. In all I worked in this snack
for the Taiwanese mama for more than a year. Once I paid off my third debt [in
early 1992], I worked to get an extra 20 bai [200,000 yen; US$1,600] to leave.
. . . The mama warned me that once a woman leaves her snack she has to leave
the town of Kofu. This is because the mama is afraid that if the woman
goes to work at another snack, her clients will follow her and take the mama's
business away. So I went to work in an 'awk kaek' snack in Shinjuku,
Tokyo." Two months later, however, Phan decided to return to Kofu because
her friends and regular customers were there. "When the mama from the
snack I had worked at found out I was back in town, she threatened me, telling
me to either work for her or to leave town. I refused. Then the mama with her
older sister, a friend and two Yakuza members (who were also taxi drivers) took
me out of town and beat me up." Phan left again, and this time stayed away
for almost a year, until her Japanese boyfriend in Kofu offered to pay off the
Yakuza to allow her to return.(185)
· Khai said that while she was in
debt in 1992, her mama yelled at her, telling her that if she did not work
harder to please the clients it would take at least a couple years for her to
pay off her debt of 340 bai [3.4 million yen; US$27,000]. "But, I worked
hard and actually paid off my debt in six months. I paid off my debt faster
than any other woman in that snack. Then the mama told me I had to work for an
additional two months at the snack, but I didn't have to take clients if I
didn't want to. I still had to go with clients in order to get some money to
leave the snack with, but I did not have to take as many clients as before.
After these two months, I didn't have enough money saved to leave, and I didn't
know where to go. But the mama told me I had to pay her 50 bai [500,000 yen;
US$4,000] a month to continue working there. She also told me she would give me
the (fake) passport that I traveled to Japan with, if I gave her 50 bai. I told
her I had already paid off my debt and had the right to get my passport back.
However, the mama insisted on the 50 bai and so I said 'forget it.' Soon after
that, the mama sold me to another snack. I left with very few clothes or
possessions. This snack was run directly by the Yakuza. I was told I was again
in debt; this time for 200 bai [2 million yen; US$16,000]."(186)
The testimonies of women who escaped from debt
bondage provide important insights into the difficulties and dangers of such
attempts. Unfamiliar with Japan and far from their friends and family, women
did not know where to go or who to turn to for help. Many resisted turning to
Japanese authorities. Unable to communicate in Japanese, aware of their illegal
status, and believing--in at least some cases correctly--that their employers
had connections to the police, they feared being arrested and punished as
illegal aliens or returned to their employers. Moreover, while all of the women
Human Rights Watch interviewed about their escape attempts were successful,
there is evidence that others are not so fortunate. As related above, Human
Rights Watch heard stories of women being caught and killed or otherwise
punished for trying to escape before their "debts" were repaid. We
were not able to verify these accounts, but the fear they instilled in
trafficked women was potent and real.
Human Rights Watch spoke to one woman who was
returned to her snack bar owner by the police after she voluntarily surrendered
to them in an attempt to get home. Sri recalled,
When I arrived in Japan [in 1985] I was first
sent to a snack bar in Ibaraki prefecture. I worked there for only one month.
Then there was a fire at the snack, and the police came to the snack and asked
who wanted to go home. I said I wanted to go home and asked to be arrested. The
police took me and two other Thai women who also wanted to go home to the
police station. We were separated at the police station and questioned by the
police, but only about the fire. When the questioning was done the police
released us the same day to our snack bar owner. The owner sold us to another
snack in Ibaraki for 80 bai each [800,000 yen; US$3300].(187)
In a widely reported incident in the early
1990's, two police officers were forced to resign after releasing two Thai
women in their custody to a former Yakuza member. An advocate who later
assisted these women provided some of the details of the case to Human Rights
Watch:
On May 24, 1991, in Suzuka city, Mie prefecture,
three Thai women were arrested. One Japanese man was with the women. There was
some trouble and the police hit the man, and the man later said he would sue
the police. He had gotten a doctor's certificate as proof of his injuries. The
police negotiated to return the women to him if he would drop the charges. . .
The police arranged with the man to release the women to him at Nagoya station
on their way to Nara city. The police would pretend that the women had escaped
while going to the toilet. It turned out that the Japanese man was a former
member of the Yakuza and was at Nagoya station with a current member of the
Yakuza. Of the three women, two were thus returned to the Yakuza. The other one
was taken to Tokyo Immigration. This case was widely reported in the media in
the end of July. The police chief of Mie prefecture was transferred. The top
officer from Suzuka city was forced to resign, with pension. He was the one
responsible for investigating the case. The two police officers from Suzuka
city who had directly negotiated with the man were also forced to resign on
July 25, 1991, but were not charged with any crime. These two were members of
the crime prevention unit that deals with bars, gangsters, and so on.(188)
An attorney working with a women's shelter in
Tokyo explained to Human Rights Watch that "there are many cases in which
women are returned by the police to snack bars because they cannot speak
Japanese." She recounted one case in which a Filipina woman went to the
police after being assaulted at the snack bar where she was working: "She
was pushed down a flight of stairs and went to the police for help. The police
returned her to the bar. She ran away twice and eventually went to [the
shelter]."(189)
Women were also reluctant to turn to Japanese or
Thai authorities because when officials assisted women in escaping, the women
were deported as illegal aliens without any opportunity to seek back wages or
other compensation for the violations they had faced. Still, Human Rights Watch
interviewed four women who successfully relied on the assistance of Japanese or
Thai government officials in their attempts to escape from debt bondage in
snack bars (Miew, Korn, Gaew, Chan), and we received testimonies of two more
cases from staff at Japanese women's shelters (Lai, Phon).(190) These
women preferred to return to Thailand, even empty-handed and fearing
retaliation from their traffickers, rather than continue to face the abuses of
their bosses and clients.(191)
· Chan
had been working in debt bondage for three months when a client left her to
take a taxi back to her apartment alone. Instead, she took the taxi to Tokyo
and asked how to get to immigration. Immigration officials were not very
helpful. "My mama's husband had followed me to the Japanese immigration
office, but neither the Thai translator nor the immigration staff would help me
hide from him." Finally, the Thai translator called a travel agent to help
arrange Chan's trip back to Thailand, and the travel agent referred her to a
nearby guesthouse for the night. The next day, Chan went to the Thai Embassy
and, after spending one night there, she was sent to stay at a women's shelter
until she was deported later that month, in February 1994. After Chan was
deported, an agent followed her to her home in Korat asking for the rest of the
debt. "I was afraid, so I left my family's home and came to Bangkok. I am
still afraid they are following me even though it is one year later. I am
afraid that if they catch up with me they will kill me. When I was in Japan, I
heard that that is what they do to those who don't repay their debt. That is
why very few women dare to escape. Everyone I knew stayed and finished their
debt."(192)
· Miew's
mama was very concerned about preventing escape attempts. "The mama told
us [Miew and her coworkers] that if we tried to escape we would be followed and
found by the Yakuza or police. She also took a pornographic photo of me to
prevent me from escaping." Furthermore, one of Miew's friends at the snack
bar told her about a woman who was killed for trying to escape. Still, Miew
began thinking about ways to escape as soon as she realized the conditions
under which she had to work to repay her debt. After about three months, in
April 1999, she succeeded in escaping. "I asked many customers to help me
escape. It was difficult at first because I didn't know who I could trust and I
didn't speak enough Japanese to explain what I wanted to my clients. Also, if I
asked a customer to help me escape and he told my mama, I would be sold to
another place with double debt. Finally, a customer that really liked me agreed
to help me escape. I was lucky to get a regular customer who liked me. He
contacted the Thai Embassy and got them to make up a CI paper [a CI paper, or
"Certificate of Identity," is a temporary travel document that
permits a Thai national who lacks a valid passport to reenter Thailand] for me
(to prove my nationality, my family sent my house registration documents to the
Embassy from Thailand). One day when the CI was ready, the client and I planned
my escape. According to our plan, he drove down the street next to the
apartment when I went to take the garbage out, and I jumped into the car. I was
afraid of being seen so I laid down on the floor of the car while we drove
away." Miew stayed at a women's shelter in Tokyo while awaiting her return
to Thailand. While she was there, she told her story to the police. "At
first I was afraid of the police, because I thought they might tell someone
where I was staying. But the shelter staff told me not to worry about that. So
I gave all of the information to the police because I was angry at my boss and
mama, who told me I owed heavy debts. Also, some other women at the snack
wanted to escape."(193)
· In
1995, Korn and Gaew accepted job offers at a snack in Chiba prefecture, but
then found that they had been sold into debt bondage. According to Korn,
"As soon as we realized we had been tricked, we tried to escape."
Korn wrote to her brother in Thailand, who asked a journalist to help her. The
journalist knew an official at the Thai Embassy in Japan, Udom Sapito, and sent
him the photograph and telephone number of the snack, which Korn had given her
brother. Sapito then referred the photograph and telephone number to a women's
shelter that assists trafficking victims and other foreign women in Japan, and
the shelter staff arranged a rescue attempt by Japanese men posing as snack bar
clients. The rescue was successful and Korn and Gaew were taken to the women's
shelter to await deportation. But as mentioned above, these women told Human
Rights Watch that they would not return to their families because of the
threats of retaliation made by their mama. (194)
When we spoke to the then recently-appointed
First Secretary of the Thai Embassy, Nopporn Ratchawej, in April 1999, he told
us that in his first three months at the Embassy, he had helped rescue four
women who were being held against their will in snack bars or brothels. He had
arranged to meet them near their place of work or residence, took them back to
the Embassy, and then placed them in privately-run Japanese women's shelters.
And he had done this without the help of the Japanese police. He explained to
Human Rights Watch that he did not have time to ask for their assistance:
"One woman, for example, called at night and I had to meet her the next
morning. She was working in [a Tokyo suburb], and she said she could get out
when the mama was sleeping in the morning. So I told her to meet me at the
subway station the next day."(195) Human
Rights Watch later met this woman while she was staying at a woman's shelter
awaiting her return to Thailand. She said that her agent in Bangkok had
promised her a job as a waitress, but when she arrived in Japan she was forced
to work in a brothel, serving numerous clients each day. So she called a relative
in Thailand to get the Thai Embassy's phone number in Tokyo, and then managed
to call the embassy one night when her employers were sleeping.
"Fortunately," she said, "I spoke to an officer who understood
my situation. He told me how to get to the train station and then he brought me
to stay at [the woman's shelter]."(196)
Occasionally, women may escape from debt bondage
without turning to government officials for assistance. The following women
escaped from their initial employers and then continued to live and work in
Japan for several years, despite threats of retaliation from their traffickers:
· Bee
escaped from a snack bar in Yokohama without fully repaying her debt, but her
agent, who was also one of her relatives, found out and threatened her family.
"The agent went to my family and warned 'if Bee cannot pay her debt, I
will take your land and house from you.' My family was shocked and they
contacted me, saying 'there is a big problem, so send money to us
immediately.'" So Bee sent them money to pay off the agent.(197)
· When
Pong went to Japan with one of her sisters, she had an older sister who was
already working there. Pong explained that she was able to escape because she
had this older sister living in Japan whom her mama did not know about:
"After two months, I called my older sister and ran away. I had argued
with the mama before and told her that I would call the police, and she said to
go ahead, that I had more to fear from them than she did. I wasn't afraid of
the mama. She was also without legal status. She was from Laos, and she
couldn't go out without her boyfriend's permission. When I left, I threatened
to go to the police, so the mama didn't dare do anything. But when I called the
snack bar later to talk to one of the other women, the woman told me that the
mama had sent the Yakuza to follow me.(198) But
the Yakuza couldn't find me because I had gone to my older sister's. My other
sister stayed at the snack for three more months. She was afraid to escape
right away. When she left, she had been working for five months so she had one
month of debt left."(199)
· Khai
escaped with the help of a Yakuza member after being resold by her mama to
another snack bar. She explained, "This snack was run by the Yakuza
directly. I was told I was again in debt and this time for 200 bai. I paid off
nearly 100 bai of this debt. Then I met a Thai woman who invited me to work in
Osaka. I ran away from the snack with the help of a Yakuza member. I had to
leave without anything and the Yakuza member gave me ten bai to go to
Osaka."(200)
Nearly all of the women trafficked to Japan
eventually return to Thailand. Most voluntarily surrender to Japanese
immigration officials after they have been released from debt and have decided
to go home. Some turn to the authorities for assistance in their efforts to
escape from debt bondage. And others are arrested during police or immigration
raids. In all of these cases, the trafficked women are deported to Thailand as
"illegal aliens," without any official acknowledgment of the coercive
nature of their migration and employment in Japan. While Thai and Japanese
officials sometimes facilitate the women's deportation, helping them obtain the
necessary documentation and funds for the trip, neither government takes any
steps to provide trafficked women with redress for the abuses they have
suffered. Moreover, some women have reported abusive treatment by Thai
immigration officials upon their arrival back in Thailand, and others have
found themselves indefinitely barred from reentering Thailand due to their
inability to provide proof of Thai nationality. Finally, trafficked persons who
are arrested by Japanese officials are subjected to punitive treatment that is
wholly inappropriate for victims of trafficking and, often, fails to meet
minimum international standards for due process and treatment of detainees.
In 1995, the Immigration Bureau estimated that
about seventy percent of foreigners who overstay their visas in Japan
eventually surrender to authorities voluntarily in order to return to their
country of origin.(201)
Human Rights Watch found that this was common practice among women from
Thailand, and most of the women we interviewed returned to Thailand after
voluntarily surrendering to immigration. Some had just escaped from the abuses
of debt bondage, but most decided to return some time after their debt had been
repaid in order to rejoin the families they had been working to support. Women
who surrendered voluntarily were generally issued deportation orders by
Japanese immigration officials and then allowed to await their deportation
without being held in detention facilities. Those in need of shelter were
referred by Japanese or Thai officials to privately-run women's
shelters--government women's shelters do not accept undocumented
migrants--where they stayed while travel arrangements were made. For women with
the necessary documentation and funding for the return trip to Thailand, these
arrangements could be completed within a few days.
Other women, however, faced long delays as they
tried to collect the identification and funds needed to return home. In some
cases, Thai or Japanese officials facilitated women's deportation by contacting
their employers and demanding their passports and/or travel money. Chan
explained to Human Rights Watch that, after she escaped from her snack bar in
1994 without any identification or money to return home, "The Thai embassy
called the mama for my passport. After talking with her for a long time, the
bar owner sent the passport and 50,000 yen (US$490) for the air ticket."(202) A
local government labor official in Tokyo confirmed that this is regular
practice among Japanese immigration officials as well:
I have heard that immigration officials try to
get unpaid wages back themselves in some cases to pay for plane tickets. I
understand that they do this because detainees don't have any money, but they
should get back all of the wages, not just enough to cover travel expenses.
Sometimes they will ask for more than just the travel expenses, but if the
detainee has enough for the ticket already, they won't contact the employer at
all.(203)
Attorney Yoko Yoshida, who has assisted migrant
women in detention, confirmed this practice, though she described it somewhat
differently: "The interest of immigration officials is to deport
foreigners, and they don't want to use Japanese government money.(204) So
they use the provision in the Immigration Act that prohibits employing illegal
migrants as a threat to get travel money from employers. They are not
interested in punishing the employers or collecting the women's wages. In some
cases, they will enforce penalties for employing illegals, but only when the
working conditions are very bad or there are many workers."(205)
Women who cannot produce a valid
passport--either because they entered Japan on fraudulent papers or because
their documents were confiscated by their brokers or employers and cannot be
retrieved--must convince Thai Embassy officials that they are Thai nationals,
in order to obtain a "Certificate of Identity" (CI paper) that allows
reentry into Thailand. An officer at the Japan Desk of the Thai Ministry of
Foreign Affairs' Division of Consular Affairs in Bangkok told Human Rights
Watch that she contacts family members of women who wish to return to Thailand
to collect birth certificates, house registration, and other documents, and
then sends these papers to embassy officials. The First Secretary of the Thai
Embassy in Japan, Nopporn Ratchawej, said that he can also issue CI papers on
the basis of a personal interview.(206)
The Thai Embassy will also assist women in
collecting the necessary funds to return home by contacting friends in Japan or
asking the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs to collect money from the women's
relatives in Thailand. Eventually, if a woman is still unable to raise enough
money for her airfare, the Thai government will give her a loan. The Japan Desk
Officer at the Consular Affairs Department of the Thai Ministry of Foreign
Affairs explained to Human Rights Watch that there is no deadline for
repayment, but there is a ban on traveling abroad again until the loan has been
repaid.(207)
Women who cannot produce any proof of identity,
however, face a more intractable problem. In particular, women whose
nationality was questionable--or undocumented--before they left Thailand can
find it extremely difficult to prove their nationality after being trafficked
to Japan. Human Rights Watch found that staff of Japanese NGOs have stepped in
to help women in particularly difficult cases. Reiko Aoki, Secretary of the
Kyoto YWCA, described the case of a Thai woman who was born in Bangkok, but
whose birth was never registered: "This woman went to Japan and worked,
and then she wanted to return to Thailand, but they wouldn't accept her because
she wasn't registered as a Thai national. It took us six months to get in touch
with the man she thought was her father, get him to go to the hospital where
she was born, get the hospital to issue a birth certificate, and then finally
get permission for this woman to return to Thailand."(208)
Other women have found themselves barred
indefinitely from reentering Thailand. One woman interviewed by Human Rights
Watch in Japan explained that she wanted to return to Thailand, but had no way to
prove her identity. Khai grew up in Thailand, but she has no idea where she was
born. At age four she was taken to Bangkok to live with a family as their maid.
She was never allowed to go to school because she had no official papers, and
she was always told that she was a refugee. When Khai was about sixteen years
old--she is not sure of her exact year of birth--she went to see the doctor who
had arranged her placement in this family's home:
I insisted he tell me where my mother was. The
doctor told me my mother had remarried and had two more kids so I should not
make things difficult for everyone. Then I went back to the home of the family
who raised me. I tried to swallow enough medicine to kill myself because no one
cared about me. I was so lonely and everyone was disgusted by me, even the
other kids. It was like I wasn't human. The family even referred to me as an
animal, rather than a person. I was taken to the hospital where I was treated
for one month for the overdose. During that time no one came to see me and the
staff treated me so badly.
When I was released I went to the house to get
my belongings and left to find a job. The son of the family I was living with
rented me an apartment and brought me clients to prostitute myself. I was a
prostitute just as I was beginning to get breasts and before I even started
menstruating. I worked for this "brother" for quite some time.(209)
Khai was trafficked to Japan in December 1991.
After working for eight months to pay off her debt in one snack bar, and then
being resold to another, Khai escaped. When we interviewed her in 1995, she had
been working independently at snack bars and on the streets since her escape,
sending her earnings to a friend in Thailand who she thought would help her get
a Thai ID card. As she explained, "I sent all my money to my friend's
account in Thailand. I recently learned that my friend spent all my money and
didn't save it for me as she had promised. So, now I have no savings at all. I
gave my friend so much money believing she would help me get a Thai ID card. I
would like to go back to Thailand."(210)
In our conversations with activists and lawyers
in Japan, Human Rights Watch learned of numerous cases in which women were
denied the right to return to their homes and families in Thailand. Rutsuko
Shoji, the Director of HELP Asian Women's Shelter in Tokyo, told Human Rights
Watch about three cases that HELP was pursuing at the time of our interview.
The women concerned had traveled from Thailand to Japan through trafficking
networks, who provided them with false passports, handled their travel
arrangements, and then delivered them into debt bondage labor in Japan. Two of
the women were hilltribe people and the third was a third generation Vietnamese
"refugee" from Thailand.(211) The
Vietnamese woman was born and raised in a designated refugee camp in Thailand
and had lived in Thailand continuously until leaving for Japan at age sixteen.
Her family members were later accorded Thai citizenship under legislation that
was adopted after she had left the country. The two hilltribe women grew up
with their families on the Thai-Burma border. Their births were not officially
registered, and they did not possess official Thai citizenship, though one had
a hand-written letter from a village leader in northern Thailand stating that
she was born in December 1968 in his general vicinity.
When we interviewed Shoji in April 1999, these
three women were living in a state of legal and social limbo. They had been
denied permission to reenter Thailand, despite their strong links to the
country, as evidenced through their family ties, place of birth, language, and
long-term residency in the country. The Japanese authorities, on the other
hand, had issued them orders of deportation; while they were allowed to reside
outside of detention facilities, they did not have the right to work and could
not access any of the health or social services that are reserved for Japanese
citizens and long-term (or permanent) legal foreign residents.(212)
The women first realized that they were
"stateless" after they surrendered voluntarily to Japanese
immigration officials, expecting to be issued CI papers by the Thai Embassy and
repatriated. The Thai Embassy, however, refused to recognize them as Thai
nationals and denied them permission to reenter the country. The women then
turned to HELP for assistance. HELP staff members tried without success to
convince Thai officials to allow the women to reenter Thailand. They also
lobbied the Japanese government to regularize the women's status by granting
them special residency permits. They hoped that if the women had permission to
reside in Japan, the Thai government would provide them with at least temporary
visitor visas for Thailand. But Japanese officials also dragged their feet.
Under pressure from the Tokyo bar association, the immigration bureau
eventually agreed to accept the women's applications for permits, but many
months passed before the women were called in for interviews to complete the
application process.
When Human Rights Watch followed up on the
women's situation in March 2000, they were still in Japan, but progress had
been made. With persistent efforts on the part of HELP staff members, as well
as pressure from local protection officers of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees, two of the women had been issued one-year Japanese
residency permits with reentry permission. In response, the Thai government had
agreed to issue them visitor visas for Thailand. The third woman could probably
have gotten a permit as well, but HELP staff members had lost touch with her.
She left Tokyo when it seemed she had little chance of ever being able to
return to Thailand, and HELP staff members were unable to locate her to tell
her about the progress they had made with Japanese officials.(213)
Human Rights Watch interviewed one woman who
managed to return to Thailand from Japan despite her lack of citizenship. Her
testimony demonstrates how the Thai government's unyielding policy provides
criminals and corrupt government officials with opportunities for profit:
Phan was born in Burma, but moved to Thailand
with her family as a young teenager. Her experiences of being trafficking into
Japan and then working under conditions of debt bondage are described in the
previous two chapters. About four years after arriving in Japan, Phan decided
that she wanted to return to Thailand. She had repaid her debt, saved some
money, and was pregnant with her Japanese boyfriend's child, and she wanted to
have the baby in Thailand where it would be less expensive and her extended
family would be there to support her. Phan recalled, "When I told my
friends I wanted to go home, they told me about 'Y.' They said he could help to
get me home. 'Y' told me I would either have to buy an illegal Thai house
registration or else agree to go back to Burma. So I bought a fake Thai house
registration for 30,000 baht [US$1,200] plus another 6,000 baht [US$240] to get
it and send it to me. When I received the documents I went to the Thai embassy
with 'Y.' I gave them the documents and four photos and received my CI. . . . I
returned to Thailand in 1995. When I arrived at Don Muang airport I just walked
off the plane and a Thai immigration officer asked me 'are you the young
Burmese girl?' I said 'yes.' The same friend who had arranged for me to get a
fake Thai house registration had also arranged for me to get through
immigration. I paid the immigration office 15 bai [150,000 yen; US$1,600] in
Japanese yen. I had also bought three bottles of whiskey--one for the
immigration officer and one for [my friend's] relative and the other for my
father."(214)
Once they obtain the necessary funds and
paperwork for their return to Thailand, trafficked women are deported by the
Japanese government as illegal aliens. In accordance with Japan's usual
deportation procedures, fines and jail terms for immigration offenses are
typically waived or suspended, but a temporary ban on reentering Japan is
imposed on the basis of the women's alleged immigration offenses (until
February 18, 2000, this penalty was one year; it has since been increased to
five years).(215)
Human Rights Watch recognizes states' right to control their borders. However,
Japan's application of this punitive measure when repatriating victims of
trafficking is symptomatic of the government's generally inappropriate response
to the problem of trafficking. Far from being treated as victims of serious
human rights abuses, trafficked women are held responsible for violations of
Japanese immigration laws that have resulted directly from their being
trafficked. In addition, for women who have started families in Japan--and seek
to return to Thailand so that they can reenter Japan legally on spousal
visas--this penalty has meant long family separations.
After women arrive in Thailand, those traveling
on CI papers have to submit to a special interview with Thai immigration
officials at the airport: Human Rights Watch was told that officials often try
to extort money from the women returning from Japan. Nung told us that when she
surrendered to Japanese immigration authorities, an officer warned her that she
might have trouble with the immigration officials at the airport in Thailand.
Later, when she arrived at Don Muang airport, "an officer who knew I had returned
from working in Japan asked me to pay 10,000 yen [US$84(216)]. At
that time, I had only 1000 baht [US$40] in my purse, and he took 500 baht
[US$20] away. My friend had 5000 yen [US$42] taken away by officers."(217)
Another woman, Pong, explained how she avoided giving money to immigration
officials when she arrived in Thailand in 1991. Since she was traveling on CI
papers, "I had a long interview with immigration officers in the airport
here. They asked me whether I made a lot of money, and when I said 'no' they
didn't bother me. Usually, if you say you made lots of money, they ask for
some."(218)
Though most women voluntarily surrender to
authorities, many others are deported after being arrested by police or
immigration officials for their undocumented immigration status. Human Rights
Watch found that their treatment routinely violates international standards.
Victims of trafficking are subjected to arbitrary and sometimes prolonged
detention, without sufficient judicial oversight. They are not informed of
their rights, including their right to consular assistance, and there is a
strong presumption of guilt in the determination of their cases. Human Rights
Watch also found evidence of substandard, and even abusive, detention
conditions, as well as excessive restrictions on--and censorship of--detainees'
communication.
During raids on snack bars and other
establishments where undocumented migrants are employed, trafficking victims
are routinely arrested and then detained until their deportation date. Police
even arrest and detain women who are clearly working under coercive conditions
at the time of the police raid. This treatment is inappropriate, as women who
have been deceived into entering the country illegally; placed into debt bondage
upon their arrival and forced to remain in the country until after their visas
have expired; or forced to perform activities "outside their visa
status" are not guilty of the associated immigration offenses.
Human Rights Watch interviewed two women who
were arrested for immigration violations and received detailed testimonies from
four others. At least four of these women were victims of trafficking; the
other two did not provide enough information about the circumstances of their
travel or initial job placement to determine whether or not they were
trafficked. One of the women we interviewed was arrested before her debt had
been repaid:
· Nuch
was arrested in 1993 when police officers raided the snack bar where she was
being forced to work off a debt of 380 bai (3.8 million yen; US$34,000).
According to Nuch, the police came at 9:00 a.m. before anyone had gotten up,
and, when the mama's daughter opened the door, she was faced with numerous
police officers and police cars. The officers included three Japanese women who
spoke Thai. Nuch recalled, "they asked me and the others in Thai whether
we wanted to go home, and said if so, to get our clothes. Only myself and one
other woman got our clothes, but everyone was arrested: the mama, her husband,
his two Taiwanese friends, and the seven Thai women [who worked in the snack
bar]. One Thai woman had just finished paying off her debt after two years and
was about to be paid for the first time for twenty clients. She was especially
upset. We were all taken to the police station in the town. There we were asked
for all of the details about what had happened to us."(219)
Nuch was then detained in three different jails
over the next few months before being transferred to an immigration detention
center, and finally returning to Thailand.
In another case we documented, seventeen Thai
women who were working in debt bondage in Kofu were arrested and deported for
overstaying their visas. The mama of the bar, Sri, insisted that she treated
the women well, but she also described coercive conditions amounting to forced
labor. Her boyfriend, the snack bar owner, "bought" the women and
forced them to repay a debt of approximately twice their purchase price. Sri
paid the Yakuza each month for services which included following any of the
women who ran away. When the snack was raided in 1992, all of the women were
detained and deported, but the snack bar owner spent only twenty days in jail.
As Sri recalled:
The snack was raided and all seventeen girls
working there were arrested; only I managed to escape. I think the snack next
door reported us because they were jealous of our business. My boyfriend was
arrested and had to pay 500 bai [5 million yen; US$39,500] and spend twenty
days in jail. Afterwards he was on probation for three years and was not
allowed to operate another snack during that time. The seventeen girls were
detained as overstayers and deported back to Thailand.(220)
Newspaper accounts of raids on snack bars and
other entertainment venues also consistently indicate that Japanese officials
arrest foreign women for immigration violations, such as failure to carry their
passports, overstaying their visas, or working without proper work visas, even
when they find clear evidence of coercion on the part of their employers.(221)
Persons detained for immigration offenses are
almost always kept in detention until their day of deportation. Human Rights
Watch conducted interviews with (or received detailed interview transcripts
from) six women who recounted their arrests for immigration violations. Orn,
who was seven months pregnant, was allowed to reside at a women's shelter in
Tokyo while she awaited her deportation date.(222) But
the other five women were forced to remain in detention while arrangements for
their deportation were being made, even though at least three of them had been
trafficked into Japan.(223)
International human rights standards provide that
detainees have the right to prompt judicial review of both the initial
detention decision and any continuance of detention.(224) The
strong presumption towards continued detention in immigration proceedings, and
the lack of either periodic review or time limits for continued detention,
suggests a violation of the right to fair legal procedures for the review of
detention decisions. Japanese immigration law provides that suspects may be held
for up to sixty days before a deportation determination is made,(225) and
indefinitely once deportation orders have been issued.(226) The
law does not explicitly mandate the continued detention of all suspects, but
internal guidelines prepared by the Immigration Bureau state, "As regards
the deportation procedures, though there are no explicit provisions stipulating
that all suspects should be detained, it is understood that the Act provides
for a so-called 'detention always comes before deportation' ('detention in
principle') policy."(227)
The Immigration Control Act allows for provisional release of persons detained
under written detention or deportation order,(228) but
in practice such release is rarely granted. The Immigration Review Task Force
(IRTF) found that only one of forty applications for provisional release is
accepted, and concluded that release is generally granted only to "those
who are prepared to leave at their own expense and are married to Japanese
nationals."(229)
Attorney Yoko Yoshida similarly explained, "Provisional release, even on
bail, is never granted to overstayers unless they are married to a Japanese
person. A detainee can ask for provisional release, but they will be refused
unless they have a connection to a Japanese person, like a Japanese
husband."(230)
Rieko Aoki, who assists foreign women through her work with Asian People
Together (APT) at the Kyoto YWCA, told Human Rights Watch about a migrant woman
who was detained for immigration violations when she went to the police after
being raped by an assailant armed with a knife:
We tried to get provisional release for her.
This woman was suffering from injuries she had sustained when she was raped by
an assailant who was armed with a knife, and so she was suffering in detention.
. . . We asked the immigration officials and the judge to release her, but they
refused, saying that because she was an overstayer she had no address. We
offered to be responsible and to use the YWCA's address, but they still
refused. So she was detained until she was deported.(231)
According to local advocates in Japan, it is not
unusual for the period of immigration detention to exceed six months.(232) Human
Rights Watch interviewed one woman, Kaew, who spent only five days in the Tokyo
IDC before returning to Thailand. "I didn't have to stay long," she
explained, "because I had my passport and enough money for the trip
home." But she also noted, "Many women had been in the IDC for a long
time."(233)
As explained above, the deportation of trafficked women is often delayed by the
difficulties they face in obtaining the necessary documents and funding to
return home. In at least one case in the early 1990s, a woman from Thailand was
held in detention for nearly two years while her nationality was in dispute.(234) The
Immigration Review Task Force has reported that detention pending deportation
is also commonly prolonged because detainees cannot afford to pay for the trip
back to their country of origin.(235) The
Japanese government does provide some money to cover foreigners' deportation
costs, but this funding is used at the discretion of immigration officers;
there is no mechanism for detainees to apply for or request these resources.(236)
Detention becomes arbitrary when immigration
detainees are held indefinitely and do not know when they will be released.(237) To
protect against the arbitrary or capricious detention of undocumented migrants,
all efforts should be made to minimize the period of detention. Human Rights
Watch believes that when initial attempts to secure the funding and documentation
for a person's deportation from Japan fail, a review system should be in place
to assess the need for continued detention on the basis of specified
conditions; if detention is continued, it should be subject to periodic review.
Our research also indicated that deportation
procedures fail to uphold the rights of those detained and make it virtually
impossible for them to understand, let alone challenge, the proceedings.
International human rights standards guarantee detainees the right to be
presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right not to testify against
themselves, the right to an attorney, adequate opportunities to communicate
with and receive visits by legal counsel and family members, and the right to
be informed of their rights and of the charges against them promptly and in a
language they understand. Foreign detainees should also be given the
opportunity to communicate with representatives from their country's embassy or
consulate.(238)
Japanese immigration procedures fall far short of these guarantees. They are
characterized by a presumption of guilt, highly restricted access to legal
counsel, and a failure to adequately explain or translate charges and
procedures.
The Immigration Control Act provides that a
person accused of entering Japan without a valid passport--an offense which
carries penalties of up to three years of imprisonment--"shall prove for
himself" that s/he is not guilty.(239) It is
unacceptable to place the burden of proving innocence on the defendant.
Moreover, immigration procedures make it nearly impossible for the accused to mount
an effective defense. Critical decisions are made behind closed doors with
little opportunity for suspects to present a defense. Both the initial
determination of guilt by the Immigration Inspector and the review of suspects'
objections by the Minister of Justice are made without the benefit of any type
of hearing or trial. The only opportunity for the accused or her representative
to produce evidence and cross-examine witnesses is during the hearing (if the
accused requests one), and even these procedures are heavily restricted and
controlled by the Special Inquiry Officer (SIO). Only one of the suspect's
relatives or friends may be admitted to the hearing, and even then only with
the SIO's permission; although the suspect may request that certain witnesses
be ordered to come forward and testify, it is up to the SIO's discretion
whether to call the witnesses.(240)
Immigration officers routinely interrogate
suspects to establish grounds for deportation without making any effort to
inform them of their right not to incriminate themselves or their right to an
attorney.(241)
Access to attorneys is strictly limited and monitored throughout the period in
which detainees are held and determinations regarding their deportation and/or
punishment for immigration violations are made.(242) There
is no provision for appointing legal counsel for those who cannot afford to
retain a lawyer themselves.(243)
Virtually all proceedings are conducted entirely in Japanese without the
presence of an interpreter, including the written summary record of
interrogations, which the suspect is asked to sign to establish its
truthfulness.(244)
In 1995, Immigration Review Task Force members went to the Philippines and
interviewed ten persons who had recently been arrested, detained, and deported
from Japan. In every case, they found that "no interpreter nor adequate
translation of procedural information or legal rights was given by immigration
authorities. All interviewees felt they could not fully understand the charges
against them, what they were being interrogated about nor what their legal
status or rights were."(245)
Finally, while Human Rights Watch did not document any cases in which detainees
specifically requested diplomatic assistance and were refused, the First
Secretary at the Thai Embassy explained that Japanese immigration officials
only contact the embassy regarding Thai detainees after deportation orders have
been issued.(246)
In addition to procedural violations,
immigration detainees regularly face conditions that could amount to
ill-treatment in custody, ranging from physical and verbal abuse to substandard
sanitary conditions and insufficient opportunity for exercise.(247) Nuch
recounted conditions of overcrowding and poor sanitation as she described her
experience in immigration detention in 1993: "We all slept on the floor
with thin mattresses that we rolled out each night. There were about thirty
Thai women in each room. Each room was about the size of a three car garage.
There were thousands of illegal immigrants in this place. There was one toilet
in each cell. Each cell was taken to shower once a week and we all had to fight
over time allotments for showers as everyone wanted to take longer showers than
allotted and the others were afraid the time would be up before they got their
shower in."(248)
Nuch also told us that the food was so bad that the women usually bought instant
noodles to eat, despite their limited funds.(249) Gap
said that when she was detained at the Osaka immigration facility in 1997, she
was only allowed to shower once or twice a week,(250) and
Kaew confirmed that at the Tokyo immigration detention facility, only one
shower was permitted each week: "I didn't get to shower while I was there
because showers were on Monday, and I was arrested on a Wednesday and then left
on Monday before shower time."(251)
When the Immigration Review Task Force (IRTF)
interviewed women from the Philippines about their experiences in Japanese
immigration detention, they received similar accounts of substandard
conditions. Not only were women limited to one or two showers per week, each
shower was limited to five to ten minutes, and the shower room was unsanitary
with body hair and mold on the floor and walls. Women also complained about the
lack of outdoor exercise; in the Tokyo IDC, detainees were not allowed outdoors
at all, and, in Ushiku, detainees were allowed outside only once a week.(252)
Continuing investigation by IRTF has revealed that this problem persists. In
1996, a Chinese woman, her seventy-three year old mother, and her infant child
were held in detention pending deportation in the Nagoya Immigration Detention
Center for thirty-six days.(253)
During this time, the family was allowed outside exercise only once.(254)
Human Rights Watch also heard allegations that
the Immigration Bureau tolerates degrading and abusive treatment by immigration
officials in detention facilities, including violence and sexual assault, as
well as excessive application of severe disciplinary measures such as solitary
confinement with physical restraints. While the women we interviewed did not
report such abuse, credible accounts documented by foreigners' rights advocates
point to a serious problem. In October 1994, a group of lawyers established a
telephone hotline to investigate rights abuses of foreigners. In the first two
months, they received calls from thirty-five detainees, identifying themselves
as Thais, Iranians, Peruvians, Americans, Argentinians, Myanmarese,
Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, and others, who claimed to be victims of violence at
the hands of immigration and police officials.(255) IRTF
member Toru Takahashi explained to Human Rights Watch that some efforts had been
made to improve the human rights situation in immigration facilities in
response to the widespread accounts of abuse that were publicized during the
early nineties. "But," he concluded "these efforts did not last
long," and abuses have continued.(256)
Lack of access to immigration detention
facilities makes it difficult to obtain information about abuses. Unable to
interview detainees in Japan, members of the Immigration Review Task Force have
traveled to detainees' countries of origin to obtain their testimonies after
their deportation. When the Immigration Review Task Force went to the
Philippines in 1995 to interview Filipinas who had been held in the immigration
detention house in Kanagawa prefecture, they received numerous accounts of
verbal and physical sexual abuse. Young women described being taken to private
rooms by immigration officers who proceeded to verbally assault them with
sexual innuendoes, stories, jokes, and questions and to fondle them with their
hands. One interviewee said that male immigration officers would often spy on
the women taking showers, and another complained of a male officer who walked
around her cell and watched her at night, keeping her from being able to sleep.(257) In
1994, a female detainee in TRIB, the Tokyo immigration facility, described the
harrowing incidents of sexual harassment and rape that she endured there:
During my stay there, I was raped by several
officers. First, a female officer brought me to another room where one male
officer waited for me. The female officer bowed to him and left the room. The
male officer compelled me to take off all my clothes, and when I became naked,
four to five officers entered the room and raped me for many hours. When I
tried to resist, they hit me. The rape incidents occurred regularly towards
female inmates inside the facility. My female roommates, Persian, Korean,
Filipina, Thai, were subjected to this violence as well.(258)
In December 1994, allegations of routine
physical abuse of detainees were confirmed by a former immigration official,
Takeshi Akiyama, who explained that he had resigned from his position as a
guard in a Tokyo immigration detention house because he could not stand the
treatment of the detainees. He estimated that about ten percent of the
immigration officers in the Kita Ward where he worked used violence under the
guise of "taming" or "punishing" detainees, and he
explained, "Violence against detainees who didn't listen to what they were
told was a daily occurrence."(259) Some
guards, he said, would threaten detainees who failed to follow instructions
saying "I will kill you" or "Do you want to go home in
ashes?" and they would continue to kick and punch them even after they had
collapsed on the ground.(260)
Akiyama further asserted that his superiors ordered guards not to beat
prisoners in the face, where injuries would be more obvious, and he quoted one
of his colleagues as saying, "Even if they die we can just handle it by saying
it was an accident."(261)
During the week following the press conference, more than twenty people called The
Japan Times supporting Akiyama's claims.(262)
Perhaps even more disturbing than these
allegations was the muted response of the Japanese government. Officials
downplayed the seriousness of the accusations, denied any wrongdoing, and
continued to deny advocates access to detention facilities. On December 20,
1994, Masaki Kazawa, chief of the immigration bureau's enforcement division,
announced that officials had investigated Akiyama's claims over the weekend,
interviewing several officials who had been assigned to detention centers in
Tokyo, Osaka, and Fukuoka at the time of the alleged incidents, and found no
evidence or reports of such actions. One ministry official told reporters,
"It is a groundless report." Kazawa admitted that officers
reprimanded detainees who would not follow instructions, but he denied that
they used threatening or violent words. He also said his ministry did not plan
to conduct hearings with detainees currently in custody because the newspaper
reports did not mention complaints from them.(263)
Reports of abuse in immigration detention have slowed since the mid-1990s, but
incidents of violence continue to occur and immigration authorities continue to
evade accountability. In August 1997, for example, when an Iranian man died in
custody at the Tokyo Kita-ku Immigration Detention Center, immigration
officials insisted that he had fallen down and banged his head. After a
forensic report concluded that the man's death was the result of a severe
beating, the police investigated and eight immigration officers were charged
with assault, but the prosecutor dropped the case and the officers were never
indicted.(264)
In one highly unusual case, a Chinese woman, Tao
Ya Pin, successfully sued for compensation after being beaten to the point of
unconsciousness by immigration officials in the Second Tokyo Regional
Immigration Bureau (TRIB) detention house. Her success was possible only as a
result of exceptionally strong evidence coupled with immediate and concerted
action on the part of lawyers, who persisted in pursuing Tao's case after she
was deported. Tao was arrested along with eight of her coworkers in a joint
immigration and police raid on October 31, 1994. During her interrogation, she
was brutally beaten in the presence of several immigration officers, none of
whom sought to intervene.(265)
In Tao's words:
I was punched an incredible number of times
while my hands were handcuffed behind me ... They disregarded my answers, and
they grabbed my hair, pushed down my face, then hit me over and over again in
succession. I lost my strength and became nauseous. Suddenly, I vomited blood.
When the man saw this, he started hitting me again ... Did I commit a crime to
deserve this treatment? If I committed a crime, I should be punished by the
law. I simply overstayed my visa.(266)
Tao complained of shortness of breath and head
pain and asked to be taken to a hospital, but her request was denied until the
late afternoon of the following day, November 2, in order that the questioning
could continue. As a result of this interrogation, the immigration officer
determined that Tao should be officially detained.
While Tao's interrogation at TRIB was underway,
immigration officials released a few of her former coworkers who had witnessed
Tao's abuse. When they reported what they had seen, an attorney visited Tao in
detention and verified her injuries, and Tao later filed a law suit for damages
against the state as well as a criminal case against the immigration
enforcement officer who assaulted her.(267)
Photographs of Tao's badly swollen face while she was in detention prompted an
unprecedented admission from immigration officials that force had been used,
and Tokyo Immigration Control Authorities reprimanded one of the officers for
using violence during the interrogation.(268)
However, charges that unnecessary force had been used were denied; immigration
authorities explained that "only one immigration enforcement officer in
charge assaulted Tao . . . she was hit only twice in the interrogation room and
twice in another room . . . and this was done so as to stop her from acting
violently or trying to kill herself."(269)
Immigration officials furthermore worked to obstruct Tao's access to justice by
deporting her to China on December 3, 1994, a month after her allegations were
made. Departing from usual practice, the Japanese Immigration Department
covered all of her travel expenses, in an apparent effort to remove Tao from
the country quickly and thereby induce her to abandon her charges against TRIB.(270)
The attitude and actions of Japanese immigration
authorities--even in the face of substantial evidence of abuse--reconfirms the
general situation of impunity with which immigration officers can violate the
rights of detainees. According to IRTF, investigations of cases of injury and
even death in Japanese immigration detention facilities are regularly handled
by immigration authorities behind closed doors.(271) There
are no established procedures for filing complaints about mistreatment during
detention in immigration facilities or prisons in Japan, and, while some
complaints have been brought to court, these cases have generally proven
unsuccessful.(272)
One of the factors facilitating abuse of those
held in immigration detention facilities is that heavy restrictions are placed
on detainees' ability to communicate either with outsiders or with each other,
restrictions that Human Rights Watch understands to exceed the "reasonable
conditions and restrictions" on communication allowed by the Body of
Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or
Imprisonment.(273)
Furthermore, these restrictions are coupled with very limited access to
detention facilities and detainees by monitors and other advocates.(274) When
three members of the Japanese Diet were permitted to inspect immigration
detention centers in 1994, even they were only granted permission to observe
the facilities and not to interview detainees independently.(275)
Regulations governing immigration detainees'
communication allow wide latitude to individual directors. The Immigration
Control Act provides that a Director of the Immigration Center or Regional
Immigration Bureau may, when "he considers it necessary for security or
sanitation purposes," "inspect communications the detainee dispatches
and receives" and "prohibit or restrict the dispatch and receipt of
communications."(276)
The more-detailed "Regulations for the Treatment of Detainees"
states:
When a detention center/prison warden deems that
the contents of correspondence written by a detainee serves to obstruct the
security of the penal institution, the warden may make the detainee correct
and/or delete the sentence(s) in question. Further, if the detainee refuses to
oblige the warden in making such corrections/deletions, the written
correspondence then becomes the property of the penal institution. The above is
applied to written correspondence received by the detainee as well.(277)
Citing the need to protect institutional
security, the Immigration Bureau has refused to further clarify the rules and
guidelines governing the censorship of correspondence, so the actual standards
being employed remain obscure.(278)
While the high degree of discretionary power
granted to individual directors and wardens leads to variations between
institutions, Human Rights Watch and others, including the Immigration Review Task
Force, have found that detainees consistently report that tight controls are
exercised over all written and verbal communication. Visits are highly
restricted and all conversations must be conducted in a language understood by
the guards. Kaew S. explained to Human Rights Watch that her boyfriend was
allowed to visit her while she was in the immigration detention center in
Tokyo, but "[w]e could only speak in Japanese, so others who didn't know
Japanese couldn't talk at all."(279)
Telephone calls and written communication are also strictly limited. At TRIB,
detainees are forbidden from making or receiving any telephone calls; if a
detainee needs to make a phone call, an immigration officer has to make the
call on the person's behalf. And officials there have essentially forbidden all
written correspondence with family members, friends, and even legal counsel.
The only correspondence they allow is letters aimed at securing funds for deportation.
At Ushiku Detention Center, regulations regarding telephone use are less
strict, but detainees are prohibited from discussing complaints about
mistreatment.(280)
And a detainee at Ushiku who tried to describe his mistreatment in letters
written to Japanese Diet members in November 1998 was ordered to cross out
statements, such as "after that I was immediately locked up together with
the existing criminals and overstayers in their detention rooms," before
the letters could be mailed.(281)
Human Rights Watch found that Thai women who
come into contact with the Japanese criminal justice system outside of the
deportation context also face serious violations of due process, as the
inadequacy of general due process protections in Japan is exacerbated by the
women's lack of Japanese language skills and unfamiliarity with the Japanese
legal system. As in the immigration system, these procedural problems prevent
women from effectively challenging, or even understanding, the charges against
them. Some practices in the Japanese criminal justice system violate the
minimum guarantees provided for criminal suspects under international human
rights law, which requires that all persons facing criminal charges have the
right to legal assistance (free of charge, if the accused does not have sufficient
means to pay for it), the right to be informed of the right to legal
assistance, and the right not to be compelled to testify against oneself or to
confess guilt. The ICCPR also explicitly provides that anyone charged with a
criminal offense has the right "to be informed promptly and in detail in a
language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against
him" and "to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot
understand or speak the language used in court."(282)
Concerns about persistent rights violations against both foreigners and
Japanese nationals have been voiced by the Japan Civil Liberties Union, the
Japan Federation of Bar Associations, and other Japanese advocates.(283) Such
concerns were also noted by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in its
review of Japan's compliance with the ICCPR in 1998.(284)
Nuch told Human Rights Watch that she spent
months in prison without ever understanding why she was being held. When she
and the other women from the snack bar were brought to the police station,
"we were asked all the details about what had happened to us. The Japanese
women who could speak Thai translated. The Japanese translators told me and the
others that we didn't have to talk unless we wanted to. I told everything. The
police and translators told me they would help me go home." But instead,
Nuch was kept at the station for the next ten days, then transferred to another
police station for two more days, and then moved to a jail where she spent the
next two or three months. During this time, Nuch was repeatedly questioned
about her experiences, but she did not have a lawyer, and she was never
provided with a statement of any charges against her, nor of any judgements on
her case.(285)
The Japanese NGO Hand-in-Hand Chiba reported
that foreign detainees are hardly ever informed of their rights to request a
lawyer, and, even when they are informed of this right, police discourage them
from exercising it by stressing the costs of lawyers' fees. Lawyers are also
barred from attending police interrogation sessions during suspects' initial
period of detention.(286)
One Thai woman whom we interviewed was arrested by police as an overstayer in
early 1997 and held in police detention for twenty days before being
transferred to an immigration detention facility. She was interrogated every
day during her detention, without ever seeing a lawyer.(287)
According to NNSMW-Japan, foreign detainees have reported the following
statements made by police after their arrest: "There are no lawyers in
Japan"; "If you sign the investigation report, a lawyer will
come"; "A lawyer can do nothing. You are just throwing money away,
and then what will you do? If you admit to the crime we will let you go";
and "Even if you get a lawyer, you will still never be released because
lawyers are powerless."(288)
In the criminal trials of several Thai women
arrested on murder charges in the early amd mid-1990s, these problems were
compounded by inadequate translation and interpretation services. Without such
assistance, women were unable to clearly understand the charges against them,
accurately communicate their testimonies, or follow the proceedings as their
cases progressed. Staff members of Hand-in-Hand Chiba, who closely monitored
these trials, concluded that inadequate interpretation during the investigation
at the Public Prosecutor's Office led to repeated incidents of misunderstanding
during the trials and that insufficient interpretation during trial proceedings
led defendants to accept the court ruling before they were able to fully
understand it.(289)
Hand-in-Hand Chiba tried to assist the defendants by voluntarily translating
all of the statements of the prosecutors and the court decisions into Thai
using their own time and resources.(290)
One of these cases, which became known as the
"Shimodate Incident," involved the arrest of three Thai women for
murdering and robbing their mama at a snack bar in September 1991. A team of
volunteer lawyers was assembled to present their defense, and according to one
of these lawyers:
The three accused women were arrested and held
for three days before they got a lawyer. They were held in police lockups for
twenty days, during which time they were questioned everyday by the police
without the presence of their lawyers. The police took a statement, including a
confession, from each of the women. A police interpreter assisted with the
statement. The women claim that they never received a Thai translation of their
statement in writing, only a verbal translation which did not mention anything
about conspiracy to commit murder or robbery. Although the women claim that
they never admitted to any premeditation nor an intent to commit robbery,(291)
either the translation was messed up or the police put in a different version
of what happened because the final statement said both. The women claim that
they did not plan to murder the boss, that they only wanted to take back their
passports, not any money or jewelry, and to escape.(292)
At the trial, the defense attorneys argued that
the police statements were flawed and the interpreters had been incompetent,
noting that "even the judge had to ask an interpreter to speak more
clearly because her Japanese was so bad."(293) But
the judge dismissed these claims and sentenced the women to ten years of
imprisonment each.(294)
Upon appeal, the women's sentences were reduced to eight years, but the judge
refused to acknowledge any problems in interpretation or translation and
maintained the conviction for murder for robbery.(295) While
there have not been any arrests of Thai women on such serious charges in the
last several years, the advocates who followed those cases remain concerned as
the criminal justice system has not acknowledged or addressed these issues.
As in immigration detention facilities,
detainees in the criminal justice system also face strict restrictions on all
forms of communication.(296)
These controls make it difficult for detainees to communicate with their
lawyers while investigations and trials are proceeding, and impede detainees'
ability to discuss abuses they may have suffered at the hands of prison
officials. The rules have a particularly heavy impact on foreign detainees
without Japanese language skills, as conversations with visitors must be
conducted in a language that guards understand, and all foreign language
correspondence must be translated, at the detainee's expense, before it can be
sent or received.
A Thai NGO worker interviewed by Human Rights
Watch recounted her experience of trying to visit a female Thai prisoner in
Japan in 1997:
I went to Japan two years ago for six weeks, and
while I was there I tried to visit a Thai woman in jail. But I was not allowed
to speak in any language except Japanese, so I was not able to say anything -
because I don't speak any Japanese. I went with a Japanese NGO that visits
prisoners every week and brings them Thai language books and other things. They
are allowed to leave these books as long as they explain what they are and the
guards approve them. I just wanted to say "sawadee-ka" [hello] but I
couldn't. So the Thai woman and I sat looking at each other with a window
separating us and couldn't even say hello. A guard was there the whole time
too, and recorded everything that was said [by the Japanese NGO staff] with a
tape recorder.(297)
Sister Ando, a Japanese woman who is also fluent
in Thai, confirmed that when she visited a Thai woman in prison, in principle
they could only speak in Japanese, "though
sometimes the guard would allow us to speak in Thai if I translated right away
into Japanese for the guard."(298)
During the trial of the three Thai women
arrested in the "Shimodate Incident" described above, even
conversations with simultaneous interpretation were prohibited. Members of the
support group that had organized on the women's behalf tried to visit the
defendants in detention to discuss their cases, but were told that all
conversation in Thai was prohibited in order to allow "the trial to
progress smoothly." The group offered to bring a court-approved legal
interpreter to the meeting, but their request was still denied.(299)
Questioned about this policy, a Ministry of Justice spokesperson said that
meetings could be held in a language not understood by detention center
officials if the meeting is regarded as "important" by the detention
center and a "reliable" person is available to translate the
conversation, such as a diplomat from the detainee's country.(300)
Denied the ability to discuss their cases orally, the defendants described
their recollections of the snack bar, the day of the murder, and the manner of
their arrest and interrogation in letters addressed to their lawyers. But these
letters could only be sent after being translated and censored by the detention
house. Not only did this constitute a breach of lawyer-client confidentiality,
it also delayed correspondence, as a Thai translator only came to the detention
center once or twice a month. In a letter to a support group member, one of the
defendants wrote, "A letter arrived from Thailand the other day, but the
translator is busy so I cannot read it."(301)
The common use of solitary confinement in
Japanese prisons further isolates detainees. Human Rights Watch interviewed a
Thai woman who was arrested during a police raid on a snack bar where she was
working in debt bondage. The woman, Nuch, was kept in solitary confinement
during the entire two to three month period that she was detained in prison
before being transferred to an immigration facility in 1993. She described the
extreme isolation and otherwise abusive treatment that she was subjected to:
I was allowed out to exercise every few days for
one hour. I was taken out alone and was never allowed to meet or talk with
others. I was not allowed to write. I was only allowed to look at Japanese
books. I was not allowed to sleep or lie down during the day. I had to sit up
and read Japanese books or find something else to do in the little room. I had
my meals alone in my room. . . . Once during my stay, I was taken to a big
court with four other women from my snack bar. We were handcuffed with a rope
around our waists tied to a guard at the end of the rope, like criminals. . . .
When I saw the others I tried to speak to them. The guards kept forbidding us,
but we kept sneaking in conversation with each other.
Nuch was never told why she was separated from
other detainees, but she believes it was because she was HIV positive.(302)
1.
Note that though the terms agent and broker are often used interchangeably, in
this report we will refer to the person in the sending country as the agent and
to the person in the receiving country as the broker.
2.
Note that though we spoke to girls under the age of 18, we use the term
"woman/women" throughout this report.
3.
In one of these cases, the researchers spoke to the woman's parents, not the
woman herself.
4.
This is a nongovernmental organization that was founded as a shelter for
foreign women in 1992. The results of its interviews with shelter residents
were published in 1995: Nobuyo Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan: The
Reality of Trafficking in Women, Voices from a Shelter," in Women's
Research and Action Committee [ed.], NGOs' Report on the Situation of
Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement, 1995, pp.
23-28.
5.
Human Rights Watch interview, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, April 27, 1999.
6.
Only one woman, Gap, arranged her travel documents and plane tickets herself,
though she was still in debt to her aunt, who ran a snack bar in Japan, when
she arrived. Furthermore, when Gap went to Japan a second time, after being
deported for immigration violations, she did go through an agent who prepared
false documentation for her and then placed her into indebted sex work at a snack
bar. (Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October 12 and 17,
1997.)
7.
There are many different types of snack bars in Japan, many of which do not
offer sexual services. See the next chapter for a brief discussion of these
establishments.
8.
There may be some repetition of women's testimonies as different abuses
associated with trafficking and forced labor are discussed. In particular,
elements of the cases described in the "Profiles" chapter are referenced
in this chapter to illustrate specific human rights violations.
9.
Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan . . .," p. 25.
10.
Saalaa's findings support this. See Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan . .
.," p. 27.
11.
See the "Deportation as 'Illegal Aliens'" and "Thai Government
Response" chapters for a more detailed discussion of these populations and
the problem of "statelessness."
12.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
13.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October
5, 1995.
14.
Here and below, we use an exchange rate of 25 baht to the U.S. dollar for all
dates before July 1997. For converting amounts to and from Japanese yen, we use
the average exchange rate for the relevant years and then round off. Where the
year cannot be easily determined from the context, a footnote will specify
which year's average rate was used.
15.
Human Rights Watch interview, Japan, March 1994.
16.
Interview by M. N., Phayao province, Thailand, October 15, 1997.
17.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, conducted during a number of meetings,
Tokyo, Japan, early 1995.
18.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Chiang Mai province, Thailand, October
3-4, 1995.
19.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October
5, 1995.
20.
Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan . . .," p.28.
21.
Siriporn Skrobanek is also the Coordinator of the Global Alliance Against
Trafficking in Women (GAATW), which was formed at the International Workshop on
Migration and Traffic in Women organized by the Foundation for Women in Chiang
Mai, Thailand, in October 1994 and has over 150 individual and organizational
members.
22.
Human Rights Watch interview, Bangkok, Thailand, April 23, 1999.
23.
The same pattern was confirmed in the findings published by Saalaa.
24.
Interview by M. N., Phayao province, Thailand, September 1997.
25.
Interview by M. N., Phayao province, Thailand, September 28, 1997.
26.
Interview by M. N., Phayao province, Thailand, October 8, 1997.
27.
Human Rights Watch interview with Chitraporn Vanaspong, Information Officer at
ECPAT International (End Child Prostitution, Pornography and Trafficking in
Children for Sexual Purposes), Bangkok, Thailand, April 22, 1999.
28.
Interview by M. N., Phayao province, Thailand, October 1997 and December 1997.
29.
Human Rights Watch interview, Naiyana Supapong, Bangkok, Thailand, April 28,
1999.
30.
Human Rights Watch interview with Chitraporn Vanaspong, Information Officer at
ECPAT International, Bangkok, Thailand, April 22, 1999.
31.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
32.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
33.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Chiang Mai province, Thailand, October
3-4, 1995.
34.
Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province, Thailand, August 4, 1997.
35.
This dollar amount was calculated using the average yen-dollar exchange rate
for 1993.
36. Human
Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Bangkok, Thailand, March 2, 1995.
37.
Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan . . .," p. 27.
38.
"Three men arrested for supplying sex workers," Bangkok Post,
February 9, 1994.
39.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
40.
Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
41.
The same breakdown was found among women from Thailand at the Saalaa shelter
for foreign women. Out
of 158 women, seventy-seven had entered Japan using false passports, and
seventy-four had entered using authentic ones with their own names (the
remaining seven cases are unknown). Tomita,"From Thailand to Japan . . .,"
p.28.
42. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
43. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA telephone
interviews, Kanagawa prefecture, Japan, May 1995.
44. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
45. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 16, 1999.
46. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiba prefecture, Japan, May 20, 1995.
47. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Tokyo, Japan, May 19, 1995.
48. In 1994, newspaper reports revealed that
officials from Thailand's Commerce Ministry and Foreign Ministry had been
investigated for providing false documents to Thailand's Passport Division and
the Japanese Embassy. The scam was discovered by a Japanese Embassy official who
became suspicious when he received visa applications from about ten young Thai
women under a document issued by the Commerce Ministry's Export Promotion
Department stating that the women would be going on an "educational
tour" in Japan. The official called the Commerce Ministry to verify the
authenticity of the document, speaking first to a junior officer who verified
the document, and then to a senior official who said that he had never approved
such a trip. A police investigation was subsequently launched by the Police
Department's Crime Suppression Division (CSD), and after a three-month
investigation warrants were issued for the arrest of seven junior officials
from the Commerce Ministry as well as three Foreign Ministry officials.
Investigators found that each of the ten officials was paid at least 5,000 baht
(US$200) for his assistance in delivering a woman to Japan, for a total of
50,000 baht (US$2,000) paid per women. The investigation also uncovered a
second scam used by traffickers to obtain Japanese visas: a Thai police captain
responsible for overseeing the security of the Japanese Embassy was accused of
using his ties with embassy staff to get visas for Thai women. He married the
women one at a time, applied for their visas, and then filed for divorce, and
he was paid about 50,000 baht (US$2,000) for each women who successfully
obtained a visa. And investigators further alleged that agents paid immigration
police at Don Muang airport to stamp women's passports without checking the
validity of the passport or visa, and they concluded that agents trafficking
women from Thailand to Japan pay a total of at least 70,000 baht (US$2800) per
woman: 10,000 baht (US$400) to the initial recruiter, 50,000 baht (US$2000) for
the visa, and 10,000 baht (US$400) to the airport immigration police. (Preecha
Sa-ardsorn, "Flesh Trade export gang falls victim to its own greed," The
Nation (Bangkok, Thailand), September 7, 1994.)
49. This dollar amount was calculated using the
average yen-dollar exchange rate over the nine year period from 1990-1998: 119
yen to the U.S. dollar.
50. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
51. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, August 5, 1997. Since it is unclear what year Wanna went to Japan
from her testimony, this dollar amount was calculated using the average
yen-dollar exchange rate over the nine year period from 1990-1998: 119 yen to
the U.S. dollar.
52. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, August 6, 1997.
53. Interview by M. N., Phayao province,
Thailand, September 28, 1997.
54. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
conducted during a number of meetings, Tokyo, Japan, early 1995.
55. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 24, 1999.
56. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October 5, 1995.
57. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
58. Human Rights Watch interview,
Tokyo, Japan, March 14, 1994.
59. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, September 3, 1997.
60. Human Rights Watch interview,
Tokyo, Japan, April 16, 1999.
61. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
62. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
63. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Ibaraki prefecture, Japan, June 1, 1995.
64. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Bangkok, Thailand, March 1995.
65. See interviews with Nat, Nid,
Sean, Phan, Faa, and Sri.
66. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Tokyo, Japan, May 20, 1995.
67. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Nagano prefecture, Japan, May 24, 1995.
68. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, September 3, 1997.
69. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA
interview, Tokyo, Japan, May 19, 1995.
70. Chaiyakorn Bai-ngern,
"Yakuza links may have led to flesh trade gang leader's killing," The
Nation (Bangkok, Thailand), March 8, 1995, p. A5.
In another case, The Nation reported
that in an interview with a Special Branch policeman in the Thai border city of
Hat Yai, "The policeman said flesh trade gangs cannot work alone. Some
legal travel couriers, tourist police and immigration police are also involved
in the business, providing cooperation to the gangs. An immigration policeman
at Hat Yai Airport who is involved in the flesh trade would receive
Bt3,000-5,000 [US$140-200] from the gangs for each woman sent out of Thailand,
the policeman said. If the woman was sent to Singapore, the immigration
official would get Bt3,000. But, if she was sent to Taiwan or Japan, he would
get Bt5,000. The policeman said tourism police involved in the business would
receive monthly financial support from the gangs, as would some local
policemen. According to the police officer, some of the gangs have connections
with senior government officials, especially officials in the Foreign
Ministry." ("Thai border a haven for illegal immigrant trade," The
Nation (Bangkok, Thailand), September 7, 1994.)
71. Pasuk Phongpaichit, Sungsidh Piriyarangsan,
and Nualnoi Treerat, Guns, Girls, Gambling, Ganja: Thailand's Illegal
Economy and Public Policy (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 1998), p. 157.
72. We also interviewed a woman who was forced
to work in a low-end "brothel." These establishments are at the
bottom rung of the sex industry. Customers at these establishments pay for very
brief periods of time--as little as eight minutes -- and women must serve
numerous men each night.
73. Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan . .
.," p. 23.
74. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October 5, 1995.
75. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 24, 1999.
76. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
77. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Ibaraki prefecture, Japan, June 1, 1995.
78. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
conducted during a number of meetings, Tokyo, Japan, early 1995.
79. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview with
Sri, Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
80. Interview by M. N., Phayao province,
Thailand, September 1997.
81. Note that given fluctuations the exchange rate
during the 1990's, U.S. dollar equivalents for amounts calculated in terms of
Japanese yen may vary substantially. Throughout this report, when converting
Japanese yen into U.S. dollars, we use the average exchange rate for the
relevant year(s) and then round off. Where the year cannot be easily determined
from the context, a footnote will specify which year's average rate was used.
82. Whether or not someone has entered into debt
"voluntarily," when the amount of debt, the conditions of work,
and/or the terms of debt repayment are defined--or can be changed--at the
employers' discretion, it is debt bondage labor, a practice strictly proscribed
by international law. See the chapter on "International Legal
Standards" for more details.
83. The only exception is Bun who said she had
to dance on a table at the snack bar and play strip games with the customers,
but does not mention going out of the bar with clients. (Human Rights Watch and
FOWIA interview, conducted during a number of meetings, Tokyo, Japan, early
1995).
84. "Hostess" is the term commonly
used to refer to the women who work as prostitutes in the snack bars.
85. These dollar amounts were calculated using
the average yen-dollar exchange rate over the nine year period from 1990-1998.
86. "Yakuza" refers to organized crime
groups that are now officially known as the "Boryokudan."
87. In particular, see Human Rights Watch
interviews with Rutsuko Shoji, Director, HELP Asian Women's Shelter, at shelter
office, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999, and with Kinhide Mushakoji, Director,
IMADR, at restaurant, Tokyo, Japan, April 9, 1999.
88. This dollar amount was calculated using the
average exchange rate from 1992.
89. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
90. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Ibaraki prefecture, Japan, June 1, 1995.
91. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 2, 1995.
92. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
March 14, 1994.
93. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, August 6, 1997.
94. Of the fifty-eight women who described their
initial job placement in Japan, fifty-four reported having to repay a debt
after they arrived in Japan, including the two women who were placed in brothels,
one who worked in a massage parlor, one who did exotic dancing, and one woman
who worked in a factory (the other factory worker paid 200,000 baht in advance
and was not in debt when she arrived in Japan).
95. These dollar amounts were calculated using the
average yen-dollar exchange rate over the nine year period from 1990-1998.
96. See, for example, Human Rights Watch
interview with Rutsuko Shoji, Director of HELP Asian Women's Shelter, Tokyo,
Japan, April 8, 1999; Human Rights Watch interview with Rieko Aoki, Secretary
of Kyoto YWCA, Kyoto, Japan, April 11-13, 1999; Human Rights Watch interview
with Nopporn Ratchawej, First Secretary of the Royal Thai Embassy, Tokyo,
Japan, April 15, 1999. See also Human Rights Watch interview with Suriya
Samutkupt, Professor of Anthropology at Suranaree University of Technology,
Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, April 27, 1999.
97. This dollar amount was calculated using the
average yen-dollar exchange rate over the five year period from 1990-1994.
98. Nobuyo Tomita, "From Thailand to Japan:
The Reality of Trafficking in Women, Voices from a Shelter," in Women's
Research and Action Committee [ed.], NGOs' Report on the Situation of
Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement, 1995, pp.
23, 25, 28.
99. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA telephone
interviews, Kanagawa prefecture, Japan, May 1995.
100. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 2, 1995.
101. This dollar amount was calculated using the
average yen-dollar exchange rate from 1993.
102. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Nagano prefecture, Japan, May 24, 1995.
103. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October 5, 1995.
104. These dollar amounts were calculated using
the average yen-dollar exchange rate during the first four months of 1999: 117
yen to the U.S. dollar. Due to rounding, the numbers do not add up precisely.
105. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 16, 1999.
106. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
107. It was not clear from Faa's testimony
whether she arrived in Japan in 1991 or 1992, so this dollar amount is
calculated using the average exchange rate for those two years, 131 yen to the
U.S. dollar.
108. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiang Mai province, Thailand, October 3-4, 1995.
109. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Ibaraki prefecture, Japan, June 1, 1995.
110. Human Rights Watch interview with Teruko
Enomoto, Kyoto, Japan, April 11, 1999.
111. Letter written from Tsuchiura Prison,
Ibaraki prefecture, October 14, 1993 (original translated from Thai to Japanese
by Yuriko Fukushima).
112. Human Rights Watch interview, Suranaree
University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, April 27, 1999.
113. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
114. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 2, 1995.
115. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiba prefecture, Japan, May 20, 1995.
116. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, September 8, 1997.
117. This dollar amount was calculated using the
average yen-dollar exchange rate from the first four months of 1999.
118. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 16, 1999.
119. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 2, 1995.
120. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
121. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 16, 1999.
122. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
March 14, 1994.
123. Human Rights Watch interview, Suranaree
University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, April 27, 1999.
124. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
125. "Chapter 2: Questions to Japan," Today's
Japan, April 26, 1994, p. 21.
In
reality, women can return home with Certificates of Identity issued by the Thai
Embassy, but obtaining such documentation can be a prolonged and difficult
task.
126.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Ibaraki prefecture, Japan, June 1,
1995.
127.
Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province, Thailand, September 3, 1997.
128.
Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan, April 16, 1999.
129.
Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview, Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
130.
Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai province, Thailand, April 24, 1999.
131.
The father
who received this letter went to Japan to look for his daughter and could not
find her. An international NGO assisted him and translated this letter from
Thai into English. On file with Human Rights Watch.
132. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
133. Interview by M. N., Phayao province,
Thailand, September 1997.
134. Interview transcript provided by a staff
member at a women's shelter in Japan, who worked with Phon in April 1993.
135. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
136. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 16, 1999.
137. Human Rights Watch interview, Suranaree
University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, April 27, 1999.
138. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA telephone interviews,
Kanagawa prefecture, Japan, May 1995.
139. Human Rights Watch interview with Rutsuko
Shoji, Director, HELP Asia Women's Shelter, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999; Human
Rights Watch interview with Rieko Aoki, Kyoto YWCA, Kyoto, Japan, April 11-13, 1999;
Human Rights Watch interview with Sumalee Tokthong, Foundation for Women,
Bangkok, Thailand, April 23, 1999.
140. An exception is Nung, who was given two
days off each month and was not forced to work when she was sick (Interview by
M. N., Chiang Rai province, Thailand, August 6, 1997).
141. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
142. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 1995.
143. Interview transcript provided by a staff
member at a women's shelter in Japan, who worked with Lai D. during 1993.
144. This dollar amount was calculated using the
average yen-dollar exchange rate from 1992.
145. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995. The Senior Medical Consultant to
Physicians for Human Rights, Vincent Iacopino, M.D., PhD., explained that if
contraceptive pills are taken without days off for menstruation, a woman's
uterus lining builds up beyond what is normal, so excessive menstrual bleeding
would be expected when she stopped taking the pills. (Human Rights Watch
telephone interview, Nevada, United States, September 8, 1999).
146. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
147. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
148. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
149. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
150. Interview by M. N., Phayao province, Thailand,
October 8, 1997.
151. Human Rights Watch interview with shelter
staff, Tokyo, Japan, June 11, 1999.
152. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
153. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, August 4, 1997.
154. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
155. Human Rights Watch interview, Kanagawa
prefecture, Japan, March 17, 1994.
A survey of (non-indebted) Thai female sex
workers in Japan conducted in 1994 found similar results. The Thai women
interviewed for this study explained that when they worked as sex workers in
Japan, many of their clients preferred not to use condoms. The study indicated
that the majority of Thai female sex workers were aware of the risk involved in
unprotected sex and made some attempt to protect themselves, but that due to
clients' reluctance to use condoms, unprotected sex was common. Sex workers
reported being afraid to even suggest condom use to some of their clients, for
fear of disappointing them, and they explained that if they insisted on condom
use, they risked being punished by their managers for failing to satisfy their
clients. (Nigoon Jitthai, "HIV in Japan: in Relation to Foreign Female
CSWs," presented at the 12th World Congress of Sexology, Symposia on
"HIV, AIDS, STD" in Yokohama, Japan, August 15, 1995.)
156. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, August 2, 1997.
157. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
158. Human Rights Watch interview, Japan, March
1994.
159. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
160. Human Rights Watch interview, Japan, March
18, 1994.
161. Human Rights Watch interview, Kanagawa
prefecture, Japan, March 17, 1994.
162. Electronic mail communication, October 11,
1999. See also Human Rights Watch interview, physician at the Minatomachi
Medical Clinic, Yokohama, Japan, June 2, 1995.
163. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
164. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, September 12, 1997.
165. Human Rights Watch interviews with Faa and
with hospital staff, Chiang Mai province, Thailand, October 3-4, 1995.
166. Takashi Sawada, e-mails to Human Rights
Watch, October 9, 11, and 16, 1999.
167. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, September 1997.
168. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, August 5, 1997.
169. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interviews,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 10 and 26, 1995.
170. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, January 17, 1995.
171. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Tokyo, Japan, May 20, 1995.
172. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA telephone
interviews, Tokyo, Japan, 1995.
173. Jiraporn Jarerndej, "What Price
Freedom?" Bangkok Post, January 29, 1994.
174. Human Rights Watch interview with Nopporn
Ratchawej, First Secretary, Royal Thai Embassy, Japan, April 15, 1999; Human
Rights Watch telephone interview with Maliwan, Japan Desk Officer, Division for
the Protection of Thai Nationals Abroad, Consular Affairs Department, Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok, Thailand, April 30, 1999.
175. "Tact" is an abbreviated term for
the English word "contract" and "dat" means
"cut," so "dat tact" refers to breaking the contract.
176. This name has been changed to protect the
identity of the man and Soi H.
177. Human Rights Watch interview, Japan, March
1994.
178. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
179. Human Rights Watch interview, Suranaree
University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, April 27, 1999.
180. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
181. In some cases, the likelihood of eventual
release from debt, coupled with the unpredictable length of the debt repayment
period, provided another incentive for women to endure the terrible conditions
and hope for a relatively early release, rather than take the dangerous risk of
trying to escape.
182. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, September 1997.
183. Interview by M. N., Phayao province,
Thailand, October 1997.
184. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiba prefecture, Japan, May 20, 1995.
185. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October 5, 1995.
186. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
187. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
188. Human Rights Watch interview with Sugiura,
International Network of Engaged Buddhists, Aichi prefecture, Japan, March 22,
1994. See also "Mie Police Admit Their Secret Trade: Disposition of Suzuka
Police Chief and a Lieutenant," Yomiuri Shimbun, July 25, 1991
(translated from Japanese).
189. Human Rights Watch interview with Yukiko
Oshima, Tokyo, Japan, March 17, 1994.
190. Human Rights Watch also interviewed one
woman, and received an interview transcript of another, who had escaped from
debt bondage in Japanese brothels (Thip, and Hom, respectively). Both had
escaped with assistance from Thai or Japanese authorities and were interviewed
in women's shelters in Japan.
191. It is likely that a disproportionately high
percentage of the women interviewed for this report escaped (as opposed to
completing their "contract"). Women who escape with the help of Thai
Embassy officials or Japanese authorities are generally placed into privately
run women's shelters, and in three of the eight escape cases described here,
the interviews were conducted at such shelters (Lai, Phon, and Miew)
Furthermore, two of the other five women who escaped (Korn and Gaew) were
contacted through staff at a women's shelter where the women had stayed after
their escape from debt bondage.
192. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 2, 1995.
193. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 16, 1999.
194. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA telephone
interviews, Kanagawa prefecture, Japan, May 1995.
195. Ibid.
196. Human Rights Watch interview with Thip,
Tokyo, Japan, April 16, 1999.
197. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, September 12, 1997.
198. Pong explained that she could call the
snack bar because the owner there was not directly connected to her mama. Many
mamas brought "their women" to this bar to work.
199. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 24, 1999.
200. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
201. "Changes in deportation process
planned," Kalabaw newsletter, no. 29, December 1995, p. 3.
202. Human Rights Watch interview, Bangkok,
Thailand, March 2, 1995.
203. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 14, 1999.
204. According to Japan's Immigration Control
Act, "when an alien who has been issued a written deportation order
determines to return to his/her country of origin via personal burden of
expenses, an IDC warden or a chief Inspection officer may permit the alien to
do so based on a petition for return submitted by the alien." (Article
52(4)). The law does not say who will cover travel expenses if the alien
cannot.
205. Human Rights Watch interview, Kyoto, Japan,
April 13, 1999.
206. Human Rights Watch telephone interview with
Maliwan, Japan Desk Officer, Division of Protection of Thai Nationals Abroad,
Consular Affairs Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok, Thailand,
April 30, 1999; Human Rights Watch interview, Royal Thai Embassy, Tokyo, Japan,
April 15, 1999.
The Thai Embassy's policy of issuing CI papers
has greatly facilitated the repatriation of thousands of Thai migrants,
including victims of trafficking and debt bondage. Embassy statistics for the
period from January 1996 through March 1999 indicate that CI papers are issued
to more than 2500 Thai nationals each year; of these, about sixty percent were
issued to women.
207. Human Rights Watch interview, Royal Thai
Embassy, Tokyo, Japan, April 15, 1999; Human Rights Watch telephone interview
with Maliwan, Japan Desk Officer, Division of Protection of Thai Nationals
Abroad, Consular Affairs Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bangkok,
Thailand, April 30, 1999.
208. Human Rights Watch interview, Kyoto, Japan,
April 11, 1999.
209. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 27, 1995.
210. Ibid.
211. Thailand's treatment of hilltribe people
and refugees will be discussed in greater detail in the "Thai Government
Response" chapter.
212. See the "Japanese Government
Response" chapter for a further discussion of these policies.
213. Human Rights Watch interview with Rutsuko
Shoji, Director, HELP Asian Women's Shelter, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999.
Information supplemented by e-mail, facsimile, and telephone communication to
Human Rights Watch by Rutsuko Shoji and her staff over a several month period
from August 1999 to March 2000.
214. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Chiang Rai province, Thailand, October 5, 1995.
215. Immigration Control Act, Article 5(9).
216. It is unclear from her testimony what year
she returned to Thailand, so this dollar amount has been calculated using the
average exchange rate over the nine year period from 1990 through 1998.
217. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, August 6, 1997.
218. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 24, 1999.
219. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 1995.
220. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Osaka prefecture, Japan, May 26, 1995.
221. In a recent example, seventy people were
arrested in early 1999 in a major crackdown on the trafficking of Colombian
women into the Japanese sex industry. The Metropolitan Police Department in
Tokyo also obtained arrest warrants for several brokers in Colombia, and they
classified the illegal brokers into three sectors: those who recruit women in
Colombia; those who accompany the Colombian women to help them enter Japan; and
those who coerce the women to work in prostitution clubs and striptease
theaters. Despite officials' seeming understanding of the coercive practices
involved in the operations, however, they also arrested fourteen Colombian
women who were working as prostitutes or strippers. Moreover, reports indicated
that the three brokers who were arrested in the crackdown were charged on
suspicion of violating the prostitution prevention law and the immigration
control law; there was no mention of charges related to the abuse they
inflicted on the women. ("70 held in move to stem prostitution,"
Asahi Shimbun (English edition), June 17, 1999.)
For other examples of arrests, see: "Nagoya
Immigration Control Bureau accosted 6 foreign women," Asahi Shimbun (Japanese
edition), July 10, 1999; "Date club owner arrested in Yokohama," Kanagawa
Shimbun (Japanese edition), June 15, 1994; "Prosecution
in Yokohama," Kanagawa Shimbun (Japanese edition), November
13, 1993; "Police Arrest Two Japanese Accused of Trading Women," Yomiuri
Shimbun, October 9, 1992. Note that these articles do not always provide
enough information to determine whether or not the women were working in
coercive conditions.
222. Interview transcript provided by a staff
member at a women's shelter in Japan, who worked with Orn during 1993.
223. See interviews with Nuch, Kaew, Jo, Ane,
and Gap.
224. According to the ICCPR, Article 9(1,4):
"No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in
accordance with such procedure as are established by law. . . . Anyone who is
deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take
proceedings before a court, in order that court may decide without delay on the
lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not
lawful." Prolonged detention without judicial review is also contrary to
the standards enunciated in the United Nations Body of Principles for the
Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, which
demands that all detainees be afforded prompt judicial review of their cases,
as well as judicial review for the continuance of detention (Principles 11,
37).
225. The period of detention for accused is
generally limited to thirty days under Article 41 of the Immigration Control
Act, but it may be extended for another thirty days if "a Supervising
Immigration Inspector finds that there are unavoidable circumstances."
There is no discussion of what does and does not qualify as
"unavoidable," and there are no checks on the SII's power to make
this determination.
226. According to Article 52, a deportee shall
be deported without delay, but if this is not possible, then an Immigration
Control Officer may detain him in an Immigration Center, detention house, or
other places designated by the Minister of Justice or by a Supervising
Immigration Inspector commissioned by the Minister of Justice until such time
as deportation becomes possible." There is no elaboration of the valid or
invalid reasons why "a deportee cannot be deported immediately," and
there are no limits put on the time that can pass before "deportation
becomes possible."
227. Quoted in Immigration Review Task Force
(IRTF), "The Actual Status of the Deportation Procedures and Immigration
Detention Facilities in Japan," Japan, 1998, p. 3. Note that as explained
above, foreigners who voluntarily surrender to immigration authorities are
exempted from this policy.
228. Article 52 allows ICOs to detain deportees
until deportation becomes possible, but it also allows IDC Directors and SIIs
to release such persons "under conditions deems necessary such as
restrictions on place of residence and area of movement and duty of appearing
at a summons."
229. IRTF, "The Actual Status of the
Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in Japan," pp.
14-15.
230. Human Rights Watch interview, Kyoto, Japan,
April 13, 1999.
231. Human Rights Watch interview, Kyoto, Japan,
April 13, 1999.
232. Human Rights Watch interview with Rutsuko
Shoji, Director, HELP Asian Women's Shelter, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999. See
also Attorney Tadanori Onitsuka, The situation of Alien Deportation
Procedures in Japan (1995), p. 5. See also Human Rights Committee,
"Concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee : Japan,"
November 19, 1998 (CCPR/C/79/Add.102).
233. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
234. Human Rights Watch interview with Rutsuko
Shoji, Director, HELP Asian Women's Shelter, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999. See
also Onitsuka, The situation of Alien Deportation Procedures in Japan,
p. 5.
235. IRTF, "The Actual Status of the
Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in Japan," p.
15.
236. Onitsuka, The situation of Alien
Deportation Procedures in Japan, p. 5. As will be discussed below, this
money has been used in at least two incidences to expedite the deportation of
detainees who had filed civil suits against the government for compensation for
abuses suffered in detention.
237. Arbitrary detention has been defined not
only as contrary to law but as including elements of inappropriateness,
injustice and lack of predictability (Van Alphen v. Netherlands (U.N.
Human Rights Committee, Communication No. 305) 1988. See also discussion in
Human Rights Watch, "Locked Away: Immigration Detainees in Jails in the
United States," A Human Rights Watch Report, vol. 10, no. 1,
September 1998, pp. 24-26).
238. These non-binding, but authoritative standards
are established by the Body of Principles for the Protection of all Persons
under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment and the United Nations Standard
Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. They apply to all
individuals in detention for any reason.
239. Article 46.
240. Article 48, which refers to Article
10(3-5).
241. Japanese law does not guarantee immigration
detainees the right to not to testify against themselves or the right to
counsel, despite the protections established under the Japanese Constitution.
Article 38-1 of the Constitution states: "No person shall be compelled to
testify against himself;" and Article 34 provides: "No person shall
be arrested or detained without being at once informed of the charges against him
or without the immediate privilege of counsel." The Constitution makes no
distinction between different types of detention, indicating that these
protections should apply to detainees in both immigration and criminal cases,
but immigration laws and regulations do not make any reference to such rights.
A Japanese court ruled on May 26, 1960 that, while the right to counsel applies
to criminal procedures, it is not guaranteed during immigration procedures. In
reference to this ruling, a Japanese immigration attorney noted that:
"Constitutional law scholars have concluded that this provision is
applicable to administrative procedures where by such procedures entail the
prolonged physical confinement of an individual. In this sense, such
administrative confinement differs only very slightly from arrests and moreover
poses little conflict to the need for administrative expediency."
(Onitsuka, The Situation of Alien Deportation Procedures in Japan, p.
4.)
242. According to IRTF, "Even if a lawyer
is appointed, he or she is not considered a formal representative under the
immigration procedures. Communication with the appointed lawyer by telephone or
mail is restricted; documents from the lawyer are censored; and guards often
monitor meetings between detainees and their lawyers." (IRTF, "The
Actual Status of the Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention
Facilities in Japan," p. 5.) One member of IRTF explained to Human Rights
Watch that while the criminal procedure code states that lawyers "can meet"
with clients without the attendance of guards, even this weak
"guarantee" does not apply under immigration law and guards typically
attend all lawyer-client meetings. ( Human Rights Watch interview with Toru
Takahashi, member of IRTF, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999.)
243. Human Rights Watch interview with Toru
Takahashi, member of IRTF, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999.
244. Exceptions may be made for persons with
absolutely no knowledge of Japanese. See IRTF, "The Actual Status of the
Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in Japan," p.
19; Onitsuka, The situation of Alien Deportation Procedures in Japan,
pp. 2-3.
245. Immigration Review Task Force (IRTF),
"Fact-finding Mission on Human Rights Violations against Foreign Nationals
by Japanese Immigration Officers, 26-31 Manila, Philippines," July 31,
1995.
246. Human Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan,
April 15, 1999.
247. International standards provide that
prisoners be allowed under necessary supervision to communicate with their
family and reputable friends at regular intervals, both by correspondence and
by receiving visits; that prisoners have at least one hour of suitable exercise
in the open air daily if the weather permits; and that medical care be
provided, including psychiatric services, pre-natal and post-natal care and
treatment, and other medical services.
248. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 10, 1995 and March 26, 1995.
249. Ibid.
250. Interview by M. N., Chiang Rai province,
Thailand, October 1997.
251. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
252. IRTF, "Fact-Finding Mission on Human
Rights Violations against Foreign Nationals by Japanese Immigration Officers,
26-31, Manila, Philippines."
253. The prolonged detention of a small child is
particularly intolerable. According to the Convention on the Rights of the
Child, "The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in
conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and
for the shortest appropriate period of time" (Article 37(b)).
254. IRTF, "The Actual Status of the
Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in Japan," p.
12.
255. "More detainees claim abuse by
officials," The Japan Times, December 30, 1994, p. 3. See also
Kalabaw, "Record of Human Rights Abuses Against Aliens by Immigration
Control, Police and Courts of Justice," in Women's Research and Action
Committee [ed.], NGOs' Report on the Situation of Foreign Migrant Women in
Japan and Strategies for Improvement (1995); Onitsuka, The situation
of Alien Deportation Procedures in Japan, p. 7; Toru Takahashi [translated
by Masumi Azu and Elson Boles], "Violence at Japan's immigration detention
centers," Women in Action, DATE?, p.58; Toru Takahashi,
"Violence Against Female Detainees by the Immigration Control Bureau
Officers," in Women's Research and Action Committee [ed.], NGOs'
Report on the Situation of Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for
Improvement (1995), p. 47.
256. As evidence, he cited the death of an
Iranian national in the Tokyo Regional Immigration Control Bureau Detention
Center (TRIB) in August 1997. Mousavi Abarbekouh Mir Hossein died from a
dislocation of the cervical vertebra after receiving a hard blow to the head.
The circumstances surrounding his death have never been explained. (Human
Rights Watch interview, Tokyo, Japan, April 8, 1999; IRTF, "The Actual
Status of the Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in
Japan," pp. 2 - 3.)
257. IRTF, "Fact-finding Mission on Human
Rights Violations against Foreign Nationals by Japanese Immigration Officers,
26-31 Manila, Philippines."
258. Takahashi, "Violence Against Female
Detainees by the Immigration Control Bureau Officers," NGOs' Report on
the Situation of Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement,
p. 46.
259. "Ex-Japanese guard: Immigration
officials beat alien detainees," Bangkok Post, December 25, 1994,
p. 4.
260. Naomi Hirakawa, "Assaults on detained
foreigners denied by officials," Mainichi Daily News, December
23, 1994.
261. "Ex-Japanese guard . . .,"
Bangkok Post, p. 4.
262. "More detainees claim abuse by
officials," The Japan Times, December 30, 1994, p. 3.
263. Hirakawa, "Assaults on detained
foreigners denied by officials," Mainichi Daily News.
264. See Amnesty International, "Japan's
human rights record must be challenged," October 27, 1998 (Available:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news/press/releases/27_october_1998-1.shtml. June
2000); and Stephanie Coop, "Detention Abuses," The New Observer, February
1999.
265. Attorney Tadanori Onitsuka and Attorney
Ayako Mizuno, "Summary Report on the Physical Abuses and Assaults by
Immigration Control Enforcement Officers against Foreign Nationals in Japan at
Various Stages of Compulsory Deportation Procedures, with Legal
Commentary," Tokyo, March 1995, p.3; Takahashi, "Violence Against
Female Detainees by the Immigration Control Bureau Officers," NGOs'
Report on the Situation of Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for
Improvement, pp. 44-45.
266. Takahashi, "Violence Against Female
Detainees by the Immigration Control Bureau Officers," NGOs' Report on
the Situation of Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement,
p. 45.
267. Onitsuka and Mizuno, "Summary Report
on the Physical Abuses and Assaults by Immigration Control Enforcement Officers
against Foreign Nationals in Japan at Various Stages of Compulsory Deportation
Procedures with Legal Commentary," pp. 3-4.
268. "Assaults on detained foreigners
denied by officials," Mainichi Daily News, December 23, 1994.
269. 269 Onitsuka and Mizuno,
"Summary Report on the Physical Abuses and Assaults by Immigration Control
Enforcement Officers against Foreign Nationals in Japan at Various Stages of
Compulsory Deportation Procedures with Legal Commentary," p.4.
270. 270 Takahashi, "Violence at
Japan's immigration detention centers," Women in Action, pp.
58-59; IRTF, "The Actual Status of the Deportation Procedures and
Immigration Detention Facilities in Japan," p. 15.
Tao's lawyers pursued her case in absentia,
seeking six million yen in compensation for the abuse she suffered at the hands
of the immigration officers, and in July 1996 a settlement was finally reached
for damages of one million yen (US$9200). (National Network in Solidarity with
Migrant Workers-Japan, "The Rights of the Migrants and their
Families in Japan and the ICCPR: A Report Concerning the Rights of the Migrants
and their Families in Japan for the Consideration of the Fourth Periodic Report
Submitted by Japan in Accordance with Article 40 of the ICCPR," 1998, p.
24.)
271. 271 IRTF, "The Actual
Status of the Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in
Japan," pp. 2, 4.
272. 272 See IRTF, "The Actual
Status of the Deportation Procedures and Immigration Detention Facilities in
Japan," pp. 10, 15; Takahashi, "Violence Against Female Detainees by
the Immigration Control Bureau Officers," NGOs' Report on the
Situation of Foreign Migrant Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement, p.
47; Luke Thomas, "Immigration vs. Foreigners: Abuses in Need of
Solutions," Tokyo Underground, no. 2, February 1995, p. 2.
273. 273 Principle 19. See also Principles
16 and 18.
274. When Human Rights Watch conducted an
investigation of Japanese prison conditions in 1994, we were unable to visit
any immigration detention facilities and only permitted extremely limited
access to select prisons. (Human Rights Watch/Asia and Human Rights Watch
Prison Project, Prison Conditions in Japan (New York: Human Rights
Watch, 1995), p. viii.)
275. 275 "MP Inspect IDC," Mainichi
Shimbun, December 8, 1994.
276. Article 61-7(4, 5).
277. Article 37; quoted in Onitsuka, The situation
of Alien Deportation Procedures in Japan, p. 8.
278. 278 Onitsuka, The situation
of Alien Deportation Procedures in Japan.
279. Human Rights Watch interview, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, April 25, 1999.
280. Onitsuka, The situation of Alien Deportation
Procedures in Japan, p. 8.
281. Lawyers Group for Burmese Asylum Seekers -
Japan, "Censorship in Immigration Detention Center: Violation of the right
of freedom of expression," Migrant Network News, no. 11, January
1999, p. 1.
282. Article 14(3).
283. See Japan Civil Liberties Union, 1998
Report Concerning the Present Status of Human Rights in Japan (Third
Counter Report), October 1998; Japan Federation of Bar Associations, "A
Report on the Application and Practice in Japan of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights," April 1993.
284. Human Rights Committee, "Concluding
observations of the Human Rights Committee: Japan," November 19, 1998
(CCPR/C/79/Add.102).
285. Human Rights Watch and FOWIA interview,
Bangkok, Thailand, March 1995.
286. Toako Matsushiro (Hand-in-Hand Chiba),
"Problems in Legal Procedures: The Murder Trial of Trafficked Thai
Women," in Women's Research and
Action Committee [ed.], NGOs' Report on the Situation of Foreign Migrant
Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement (1995), p. 42.
The initial period of police detention, before
to a suspect's indictment, is called daiyo kangoku. It can last up to
twenty-three days, and questioning is always conducted without the presence of
a lawyer, even though the primary purpose of the interrogation is to obtain a
confession. Both the Japan Civil Liberties Union and the Japan Federation of
Bar Associations have identified the daiyo kangoku period as "a hotbed"
of violence and coerced confessions. ( Japan Civil Liberties Union,
"1998 Report Concerning the Present Status of Human Rights in Japan (Third
Counter Report)"; Japan Federation of Bar Associations, "Prisons in
Japan," October 1992.)
287. Interview by M. N. with Gap, Chiang Rai
province, Thailand, October 1997.
288. National Network in Solidarity with Migrant
Workers - Japan, "The Rights of the Migrants and their Families in Japan
and the ICCPR: A Report Concerning the Rights of the Migrants and their Families
in Japan for the Consideration of the Fourth Periodic Report Submitted by Japan
in Accordance with Article 40 of the ICCPR," 1998, p. 16.
289. Toako Matsushiro (Hand-in-Hand Chiba),
"Problems in Legal Procedures: The Murder Trial of Trafficked Thai
Women," in Women's Research and
Action Committee [ed.], NGOs' Report on the Situation of Foreign Migrant
Women in Japan and Strategies for Improvement (1995), p. 41.
290.
Ibid., pp. 41-42.
291.
Murder with the intent to commit robbery is a more serious crime than simply
murder.
292.
Human Rights Watch interview with Attorney Kazuko Kawaguchi, Japan, March 9,
1994.
293.
Abigail Haworth and Kyoko Matsuda, "Flesh and Blood: part two," Tokyo
Journal, August 1994, p. 37. See also "The Shimodate Incident: From
an interview with Takahashi Hiromichi," AMPO Japan-Asia Quarterly
Review, vol. 25, no. 2, 1994, p. 4.
294.
See Haworth and Matsuda, "Flesh and Blood: part two," Tokyo
Journal; and "Thai women get 10-year jail for murder in Japan," The
Nation (Bangkok, Thailand), May 23, 1994.
295.
Yuriko Saito, "Shimodate Case: Judgement of Appeal Hearing," 1996;
Yuriko Saito, "Trafficking in women: the Shimodate case and human rights
abuses," Tokyo Kaleidoscope (weekly online journal), July 22,
1996. Available: http://202.239.42.30/topics/0094p01e.html. June 2000.
296.
As in
immigration facilities, regulations governing conditions in prisons and
detention houses are vague, giving individual prison directors wide discretion
to formulate and implement internal rules regulating the day-to-day operations
of the prison, and these internal rules are kept secret, ostensibly in the
interest of protecting the institution's security. The abusive conditions in
these facilities have been widely publicized and criticized, both by domestic
and international human rights organizations. See Japan Civil Liberties Union,
"1998 Report Concerning the Present Status of Human Rights in Japan (Third
Counter Report)"; Japan Federation of Bar Associations, "Prisons in
Japan"; Human Rights Watch/Asia and Human Rights Watch Prison Project, Prison
Conditions in Japan; and Amnesty International, Japan: Abusive
Punishments in Japanese Prisons, June 1998.
297. Human Rights Watch interview, Catholic
Commission on Migration: Women's Desk, Bangkok, Thailand, April 30, 1999.
298. Human Rights Watch interview, Kyoto, Japan,
April 12, 1999.
299. "Chapter 2: Questions to Japan," Today's
Japan, April 26, 1994, p. 29.
300. Forum on Asian Immigrant Workers,
"Citizen's Report on the Human Rights of Foreign Workers in Japan (with a
special emphasis on male workers)," April 17, 1993, p. 29.
301. "Chapter 2: Questions to Japan," Today's
Japan, pp. 30-32.
302. Human Rights Watch interview, Bangkok,
Thailand, March 1995.
Subjecting a detainee to solitary confinement
without cause--and/or without informing the detainee of the cause--contravenes
the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Articles 27, 29,
30).