fishing_vessel_640w
By Joshua Chiang
The last time Eril Morales Andrade contacted his family was through SMS telling them that he was safely in Singapore – “To c Eril da, iya eon ako sa Singapore owas ka text ka ina naobosan ako it load “Donato” (English translation: “I am in Singapore. I will not be replying to your text messages anymore, because I have used up all my credit on my SIM card.”). It was sent shortly before he boarded the Taiwanese fishing vessel where he would be working presumably for the next 3 years.
Eril died 5 months later on 22 February 2011 on board the vessel when it was fishing in the Bay of Bengal. But it was only 6 weeks later on 16 April, when the ship docked in Singapore that his family was notified of his death. (His body was placed in the ship’s cold store to prevent decomposition.)
The post-mortem performed in Singapore concluded that the cause of death was “consistent with acute myocarditis” (inflammation of the heart due to infection). According to Eril’s elder brother Julius, a secondary post-mortem performed in the Philippines concluded that Eril had died of a heart attack, and that he had sustained several injuries before his death. He also said that the Philippine pathologist told him that the pancreas and one of Eril’s eyes were missing, without any written explanation.
[Editor’s note: the Philippine post-mortem report seen by TOC did not mention these matters.] Julius believes Eril had died of unnatural causes. “He was 32 years of age when he died. He did not smoke or drink and he did not have any ailment when he left here,” he tells TOC in an email interview. Julius also suspects that Eril had been subjected to physical abuse while on the ship.
When contacted by TOC, the Philippine Embassy in Singapore declined to comment on Eril’s case, as it is currently still working on the case with both the Singapore and Philippine authorities. However, the Embassy revealed that in 2009 and 2010, it had received over 70 complaints by Filipino fishermen about harsh working conditions onboard their vessels, and non-payment of salaries. As most of these Filipinos did not have work passes in Singapore, they have had difficulties filing cases here.
According to Shelley Thio, a volunteer with migrant workers’ rights NGO Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2), the problems faced by these fishermen are exacerbated by the lack of legal protection for abuses committed against fishermen out at sea. Many countries are not legally obliged to help fishermen in trouble, and Singapore is no exception.
An article published on TOC last year documented how a fisherman onboard a fishing vessel docked in Singapore nearly couldn’t escape his harsh work conditions because of bureaucratic red-tape caused by an absence of legislation. But in Eril’s case, the Singapore connection may well have gone much deeper.
The Singapore connection
According to Julius, Eril first learnt about an opening for a job as a fisherman in Singapore in May last year when his cousin told him that a certain Mrs. Celia Flores-Robelo was recruiting workers to work abroad. When they eventually met up, Flores-Robelo apparently promised Eril a monthly salary of US$500 (S$652) plus US$50 (S$65) allowance if he would take up the offer. There was no mention of the work conditions or working hours. Eril eventually took up the offer and his family claimed they paid Flores-Robelo 10,000 pesos (S$297) for the ‘processing.
The Taiwanese vessel “Hung Yu #212”.
Tuna-fishing-vessels-carrying-the-Taiwanese-flagIn late August 2010, Eril went to Manila (he was living in the province of Aklan at that time) to finish his application, and was asked to pay a further 15,000 pesos (S$446), which he did. He was then offered an employment contract by a Singapore firm called Step Up Marine Enterprise, to work onboard the Taiwanese vessel “Hung Yu #212”.
After Eril died, representatives from Step Up Marine got in touch with his family to offer ‘limited compensation’. The company offered 100,000 pesos (S$2,942), but Eril’s family asked for 1,000,000 pesos (S$29,000). After 6 months of negotiations, the talks fell through. In November 2011, Julius lodged a formal complaint to Singapore’s Ministry of Manpower against Step Up Marine.
In the letter, Julius wrote: “We believe that hundreds of Filipinos, most of them unqualified as seamen, have been illegally recruited from all over the country by Step Up Marine Enterprise and their agents located in Manila and the provinces.”
An illegal business?
The Philippine Embassy in Singapore believes that the Filipinos, who had sought help from it, had been illegally recruited in the Philippines and trafficked into Singapore. They would arrive in Singapore as tourists, and upon arrival, Singaporean agents would facilitate their employment as fishermen. The Embassy named Step Up Marine Enterprise, the Singapore firm that had acted on Eril’s employment, as one such agent.
The Embassy also noted that many of these Filipinos were former farmers without any seamanship training or experience. The fishermen would be subjected to harsh and dangerous working conditions, and would be made to work up to 18 to 20 hours a day.
When in Singapore, the men would be made to sign onerous contracts with salaries or as low as US$200 per month. These contracts would also stipulate that the men would have to pay a certain amount if they tried to terminate the contracts and ask to return to the Philippines. The contracts would usually not be properly explained to the fishermen, as they would be immediately asked to board the fishing ships.
The Embassy has seen contracts signed only by the fishermen, without any signatures from the employers or agents, which raised questions about the validity of any employment relationship.
Shelley from TWC2 has been working on Eril’s case. She told TOC that Eril’s case was not the first time complaints have been lodged against Step Up Marine. Since May 2011, TWC2 has assisted with the repatriation of 5 fishermen recruited by Step Up Marine. Shelley said that the fishermen complained about unpaid wages and that Step Up Marine did not inform them of the long working hours and the dangerous working conditions, which exposed them to life-threatening situations at seas.
Shelley had met Step Up Marine’s director Victor Lim several times, but he insisted that he runs a legitimate manning agency sourcing for workers for customers. He has also threatened lawsuits against Shelley. (When TOC approached Mr. Lim for an interview, he declined, and similarly threatened to sue TOC for defamation if it published a story on this case.)
Nonetheless, Shelley says that Victor Lim had admitted to her that he had to recruit Filipino workers through illegal channels because his clients didn’t want to pay the fees to lawfully hire workers who are registered with The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration. And yet, in spite of the numerous complaints lodged against Step Up Marine, one of which resulting in a raid by MOM on Step Up Marine’s premises in May this year (for an unrelated case), TWC2 believes that the company has not yet been charged with any offenses.
Who watches out for fishermen?
Shelley explains that part of the difficulty NGOs face in getting the authorities to act, arises from a lack of concrete evidence to substantiate complaints. In salary disputes for example, the manning agencies were often able to produce contracts signed by complainants – who often allege they were not allowed to first read the contents – to show that they had entered into the agreements willingly. But Shelley says that there are also legislative loopholes that leave fishermen unprotected.
MOM had advised the NGOs that the fishermen are not covered under Singapore laws as they are not holders of Singapore work passes, since they are performing work outside Singapore; the fishing vessels they worked on are usually not registered in Singapore and are usually foreign-owned; and finally, Singapore has yet to ratify the International Labor Organisation’s (ILO) Work in Fishing Convention. While Singapore has ratified the ILO’s Maritime Labor Convention (which obligates Singapore to apply provisions in the Convention for decent work for seafarers), this Convention does not apply to crew working on fishing vessels.
Presently, there is no system in place in Singapore for fishermen to address their grievances and seek assistance to settle their disputes with the ship owners and manning agents. This is in contrast to seafarers, who have a right to appeal to the Director of Shipping Division of the Maritime Port Authority (MPA) of Singapore. The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore Act covers the employment of seafarers only.
The only recourse is for the complainants to lodge a civil suit, but the legal fees and court charges involved make this an unlikely option for impoverished families such as Eril’s.
“We want justice for my brother, Eril,” Julius tells TOC.
But until the State ensures that manning agencies for fishermen are, at a minimum, abiding by the same set of rules and principles that apply to manning agencies for seafarers, ‘justice’ for fishermen like Eril will be hard to come by.


Update 22/09/2014

Victor Lim is now facing charges of trafficking and illegal recruitment in the Philippines.
The case went to trial last Monday at the Aklan Regional Trial Court. He faces up to 40 years in prison if convicted.
Victor Lim’s alleged recruiter, Filipina Celia Robelo, has also been charged. Robelo had allegedly promised them US$550 ($700) a month to work as fishermen.
Victor Lim  denies the allegations, saying he was only a middleman and that he was a victim of a conspiracy. He did not comment if he would be facing trial in Philippines.
There is no extradition treaty between Singapore and the Philippines.
The Manpower Ministry investigated the agency in 2011 but found that it handled only administrative work for overseas clients. Mr Kandhavel Periyasamy, director of MOM’s Joint Ops Directorate, also added: “We cannot take action based on bad HR practices.”

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Execution of Singaporean Tamil condemned by UN Experts: Call for moratorium on death penalty

United Nations experts strongly condemn Singapore’s recent execution of Tangaraju s/o Suppiah, calling for an immediate moratorium on capital punishment. They express concerns over inadequate interpretation during police interrogations in his conviction and the high rate of execution notices for drug-related offenses. The experts criticize Singapore’s mandatory sentencing law, discriminatory treatment of minorities, and the suspension of the death penalty moratorium. They urge Singapore to review the death penalty’s scope, limit it to cases involving intentional killing, and abolish it to protect the right to life. Tangaraju represented himself in court as no lawyers in Singapore were willing to take up his case. Human rights lawyer Mr Ravi highlighted the fear of cost orders and disciplinary actions faced by lawyers who take up such cases.

前艺人黄奕良涉持械打客工 反指遭执法人员无礼对待

新传媒前艺人黄奕良,涉嫌持械殴打客工的头部和腹部,案件昨日(7月27日)开审,他在庭上自行抗辩,并指事发后执法人员并没有给予他解释机会,还把他当狗一般使唤对待。 依据控状,经营装修公司的黄奕良(59岁)于2018年12月11日下午4时20分,在新加坡回教综合大厦(Singapore Islamic Hub)的食堂,持着刮刀打伤所雇佣的客工贾希都(Jahidul)。他因此面对两项控状,即持武器蓄意伤人罪和滋事打架罪状。 指控受害人只是在演戏 昨日在国家法院,控方就持武器蓄意伤人罪开审,被告选择自行抗辩,并且不认罪,更指客工只是在演戏,自己才是被陷害的。而下午在法庭上,被告则表示,抵达现场调查的高级调查员对他非常“不客气”,且到了案发隔日才能够做出解释。 基于受害人目前入住被隔离的客工宿舍,因此这两日都无法出庭供证。 控方在昨日传召了三名证人,分别是事发现场的报案阿克达尔,以及两名到场调查的警员张耀文和林荣豪。 保安表示,事发时他接获大厦内发生打斗事件的投报,于是到事发地点了解情况,却见受害者向他哭诉遭上司(即被告)殴打。受害者还向他展示头部、腹部和手肘的伤处,他立刻拍下照片取证。 保安表示,受害者透露遭上司辱骂愚笨等,而被告当时忽然介入,并大声说话。他表示已经不记得被告说什么了,但是劝请后者离开。 被告在被询问时否认辱骂受害者,反指受害者就是在“做戏”,并模仿受害者的举动。“他伤势没这么严重,但是表现出来的伤痛程度却增加了百倍,表演成分很高,你记得吗?” 他指出,整个过程中,受害者根本就是在陷害他。…

取消分流制旨在消除歧视 媒体人默乐促勿打击好学生士气

在2019年国会中宣布将取消分流制度,改为因材施教,让学生们根据强项选读不同科目的水平,引起国民纷纷按赞,更要求尽快实施。但媒体人默乐呼吁,教育部此举是为了消除学习上的歧视,但不要打击了学生努力上进的士气。 资深媒体人兼《海峡时报》前副总编辑默乐(Bertha Henson)指出,在他的学生时代并没有分流制度,至少不是非常精细的那一种。当时的学生只要完成了六年的小学生涯,然后就是四年的中学生涯,而中学时期只分为文科和理科。“所谓聪明学生就读理科班。然后我们必须决定是否能够在两年或三年内,完成大学先修班的课程。学习的最高峰就是能够被我们当时拥有的大学所接纳。” 她指出,分流制度就像漏斗一样“在我们被分配源流、被过滤、被灌输以及重挫之前,所以它就像漏斗一样,将范围不断地缩小、再缩小” 。他甚至打趣说,曾经对他的本科学生说道,随便丢块石头就可以打中一名大学生。 歧视从分流制度开始就有了 她庆幸自己的学生生涯简单明了,但也感叹弟弟就没这么幸运了。“我的学校生涯远没有我弟弟来的复杂,他是普通源流和快捷源流制度落实后的最早一批学生。”她说,当弟弟被送入普通源流时,有许多人哭泣和咬牙切齿。而无论官员们如何削减时间,“普通”是不普通的,因为它意味着需要完成五年的中学生涯,而不是四年。 默乐表示,自从落实小学的天才教育计划(Gifted Education Programme)以及双语教学1/2/3后,已经出现了很多差异。普通源流的教育再被分为学术和工艺班,而普遍上认为普通(技术)源流接收了无论是成绩或性格都是最差的学生。 “现在,小学有基础和标准科目,不久,中学也会有三个水平的学科选项。我的侄儿将在2021年成为第一批根据小六会考(PSLE)选读不同程度的科目。我的弟弟和我都不知道,成为教育系统的白老鼠到底是好还是坏。” 她披露,教育部长王乙康宣布的最新变动,旨在消除自他弟弟那个时代开始,就没有消失过的分流制度歧视心态。尽管这种情况在最近,仍然获得媒体不断报导有关前普通源流学生的成功人生,并赞颂教育节奏缓慢的优点。但是为了取得平衡,她促请媒体也能一视同仁地对待前快捷源流的学生,报导一些他们的失败事迹。“这至少说明,并非有好的开始,就能保障未来光明前程。”…

警:已接获18宗投诉 WhatsApp沦为行骗工具

诈骗分子无孔不入,连WhatsApp也沦为行骗工具了。 警方昨日(2月19日)发文告指出,指2019年12月至今,已经接获18宗涉及即时通讯应用程序WhatsApp的诈骗投诉。 歹徒入侵到他人账号中,然后发出WhatsApp简讯给受害者,要求受害者转发六个数字的验证码。一旦受害者转发了该验证码,其账号就会被侵入,而受害者则无法在使用该账号。 歹徒会入侵友人的WhatsApp账户,以各网络商店如Lazada、Shopee或Qoo10的假幸运抽奖游戏,要求受害者协助签署或索取奖金奖品,以便骗取受害者的联络电话、信用卡或提款卡的照片,并要求受害者转发一次性密码。当受害者照做后,不久就会发现自己的信用卡或提款卡遭盗用了。 根据之前报导,也曾有诈骗分子利用类似的策略,通过脸书和Instagram等社交媒体平台行骗。 警方建议民众不要与他人分享账户验证码,并且对通过WhatsApp平台收到的异常请求提高警惕,即便有关的请求是发自自己的联络人。 WhatsApp用户也受促启用该程序的双层验证功能,以防止账户遭他人侵入破坏。