I wish to speak to you today about the political plight of our fellow Filipino compatriots abroad. There are millions of migrant Filipinos whose basic social, economic and political rights are constantly in peril and subject to abuse because these rights are not protected under existing laws and agreements. The universal right of suffrage, enshrined in the Constitution for over a decade now, is not enjoyed by migrant Filipino citizens simply because there is no law on overseas voting. It is for this reason that we consulted migrant Filipinos in various cities of Europe these past two weeks.

Let me put in perspective the sad plight of these compatriots of ours by quoting from a statement made by one of them, Filomenita Mongoya Hogsholm, who now resides in Sweden:

"Perhaps it is high time for Philippine nationalism to be infused with new blood, new insights from a sector in Philippine society that has been disenfranchised long enough. It is about time that Filipinos abroad participated in the body politic on equal footing with the rest of the nation: small gains from the Filipino diaspora."

Who are these Filipinos? There are seven million of them residing in some 146 countries all over the world. They constitute 10% of our population and almost 20% of our productive age population. According to POEA data, 4.2 million are classified as overseas contract workers (OCWs) who work on fixed terms of six months to two years. These constitute the bulk of excess labor which the Philippine economy cannot absorb. Add these to the 3 million unemployed in 1999, you now have a total estimate of over seven million Filipinos who cannot be absorbed by the current faltering Philippine economy.

Outside of migrant labor, there are now 2.5 million Filipino-Americans who comprise the largest Asian minority group in the United States. While half a million Filipinos have found their workplace in Europe, the bulk of migrant workers are still to be located in the Middle East and increasingly in the Asian region. According to studies presented in the First National Convention of the Philippine Migrant Research Network last 6 February 1997, on the deployment of overseas Filipinos, migration to Asian countries in the top ten destinations has increased by 553.4% from the period 1980 - 1984 to the period 1990 - 1994. In the same period covered, deployment of overseas workers to the Middle East decreased by 44.6% (Stella P. Go "Towards the 21st Century: Whither Philippine Labor Migration?").

With the increase in millions of overseas contract workers over these past years, official bank remittance receipts of 1997 from the migrant labor market amounted to $6.2 billion.

Thus, despite strong denials to the contrary, the Ramos administration clearly did pursue an active overseas employment program as a "strategy for poverty alleviation and employment generation". It was on this basis that the 1998 Bangkok Conference on Labor Migration amidst the Asian Crisis aptly described Philippine overseas migration as having evolved into "a pair of crutches for the local economy, serving two main objectives - to ease the unemployment situation and to generate foreign incomes to fuel a faltering economy."

While close to a million Filipinos now live in Europe and the United States, the large majority have found work in the more severe workplaces of the Middle East and of the Asia and Pacific region. They are largely women whose ages range from their early teens to the late forties or fifties. They work as domestic employees, care-givers, au pairs. 35,000 of them have ended up as mail-order brides in Australia and New Zealand. Among the men are seafarers, oil riggers, construction workers, engineers. As many as five hundred seafarers on different ships dock daily at Rotterdam, the largest port throughout the continent of Europe.

It has been the common experience of numerous Filipino migrants, who start off starry-eyed in their travels abroad, to end up as near-slaves in their adopted residences and workplaces.

Mail-order brides naively envision life with Westerners as emancipation from economic distress. Many find out too late that their main function as bride to a Western or perhaps Australian husband is to make life comfortable for him as housemaid, sex object and slave all rolled into one.

Au pairs are young Filipino migrants who are made to understand that living with families abroad would enable them to enhance their cultural consciousness by learning their language and customs. A fair exchange would be to help in routine domestic work in their families of choice for a limited period. Quite a number later complain that the cultural exchange agreement serves solely as entry point for the European family to gain regular unpaid housework in exchange for free board and lodging by the au pair victim. Still other young Filipino girls in Greece, they say, are recruited as seafarers and quite easily end up as lowly paid housemaids.

When you visit them in their workplaces, they are no different from Filipinos you find working in department stores like Shoemart or in the factories of Pasig and Marikina. You only realize that they are somehow different when they start rattling off figures or discussing their issues in Italian or German or Spanish or Dutch. They are slightly different from us, you notice, as they discuss with sensitivity the differences or similarities between the cultures of their host countries and that of ours.

On the other hand, seafarers who are mostly sea-based, are constantly in peril not only of losing their rights but of losing their lives. It is not rare that stories are told of ships that are grounded by local authorities because of anomalies committed against the policies of the arresting governments. Since Filipino seafarers are quite ubiquitous, you almost always encounter a number of them caught in these situations. The obvious consequence would often be the abandonment of the ship by their owners, leaving the crew of Filipinos and other foreign workers to languish for months on end on the ship without food, without pay, without protection. When caught and imprisoned by local authorities, Filipino overseas workers end up in jail with hardly any protection against very harsh and severe convictions that often result in death penalty. There are an estimated number of 108 Filipino migrants convicted of all sorts of crimes and sentenced to death in detention cells of around 8 countries in the Middle East and Asia.

By and large, migrant Filipinos are vibrant and filled with energy. They are hardworking and have been called by our political leaders, past and present, as the bagong bayanis because of the huge amount of dollars they contribute to our economy. It is said that their contribution to our GNP reaches almost 18% or practically the same percentage measure derived from our agricultural output which is 20% of GNP.

Yet, despite the glowing stories of their heroism in helping our recession-burdened economy, migrant Filipinos, in whatever social and economic status abroad, are unjustly deprived of their right to suffrage; to elect leaders of their choice. Leaders who would have the wisdom to make decisions that would, in the immediate, work for migrant protection in their adopted communities abroad and, in the long term, work for their return to their loved ones in an enhanced and developed community, nurtured by billions of dollar remittances soundly invested in the productive sectors of the national economy.

But this basic constitutional right of theirs can only be exercised if we in the 11th Congress realize the wisdom of working for the immediate passage of the overseas voting law in time for the millenium where national elections shall be held in the year 2001.

Let it not be said that the 11th Congress failed to heed the clamor and cry of our migrant Filipinos whose collective voice came out loud and clear in the Congressional consultations that we held in the cities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Barcelona and Rome and in informal consultations in Utrecht and den Hague.

While wary of the pitfalls of election fraud and terrorism that meet Philippine elections traditionally, they have, however, expressed enthusiasm, while initially guarded, for their right to elect their high officials of government. This enthusiasm was bolstered by a number of breakthroughs that were experienced by the series of consultations throughout the two weeks.

• It was the first time migrant Filipinos experienced official participation in the consultation process where NGO and PO representatives and officials of the Philippine Embassy actively discussed with members of the Subcommittee on Absentee Voting issues surrounding their right of suffrage.
• This was also the first time that the NGO and PO communities met with officials of the Philippine Embassy in formal and collective discussion regarding their right to vote and several other issues.
• For those within the NGO community, this was the first time joint projects were held together, especially in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht.
• Equally important, the Congressional Consultations was organized because of the initiative of the network of migrant Filipinos in Europe under the umbrella of PLATFORM whose members came to the Philippines to hold initial dialogues with the President and with the House of Representatives on their issues, including their right to vote. The Majority Floor Leader, the Chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Chair of the Subcommittee on Migrant Filipinos and party list representatives met with the delegation.

In conclusion, the success of the Congressional Consultations was felt more strongly as an initial expression of a continuing policy of democratization inspired by the uprising in EDSA. The empowerment of migrant Filipino citizens, simultaneous with that of their compatriots at home, can only find full meaning in the free and fair exercise of their right to vote and participate in the election of their leaders. Only thus can our millions of migrant Filipinos stake their claim to the building of a progressive society that can once more absorb and employ its Filipino citizens in gainful work through a vibrant economy responsive to their interests and democratic welfare.

See also: Materials on Overseas Voting