National 6 (Spotlight Weekly)

“I Took A Decision That No Ministers In The Past Had Dared To Take”

— Raghuji Panta

Following his controversial instruction on the selection of workers for jobs in South Korea, Minister for Labor and Transport Management RAGHUJI PANTA, an emerging youth leader of CPN-UML, has landed into a trouble. Despite the stay order of the apex court against the implementation of his instruction to the manpower agency to use lottery system in selecting the workers, minister Panta sticks to his stand. Former journalist Panta spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on various issues regarding the legality of his decision and controversies surrounding it. Excerpts:

Since you are known as an emerging and capable youth leader of CPN-UML who has been working hard, how did you find yourself amid this controversy generated by your instructions to select the workers for South Korea on the basis of lottery?

Instead of terming it as controversy, don’t you see that my decision was right? I think it is, in fact, a bold step. I have taken a decision, which no ministers in the past had dared to take. I have taken the decision to give to the people a feeling of transparency and impartiality in the process of selection. There have always been allegations that politicians, ministers, political leaders and political parties secured money by sending workers to South Korea. I want to prove that these allegations are wrong. To provide a sense of fairness, I had no other option than to go for lucky draw system. How can I impartially select 500 workers among 15,000 applicants who have equal qualifications?

The Foreign Employment (First Amendment) Act 2049(1992) clause 10 (A) clearly lays down the criteria on how to prepare the merit list as the said clause states that the workers shall be selected ‘on the basis of their professional qualifications and experiences.’ How can you say that your order to select the workers on the basis of lottery is legal?

Look, this is wrong. The manpower company advertised requiring basic qualifications like physical features, experiences and academic qualifications. The agency accepted the applications of 15,000 youths after checking all these requirements. It means that all 15,000 are equally qualified for the positions in question. When there are such a large number of applicants, I don’t see any other better way of impartially selecting the candidates. Do you mean those who pay more money should be selected or do you think they ought to be selected on the basis of recommendation of ministers, political leaders or political parties? Don’t you think all 15,000 should be convinced that the selection process has been impartial and fair?

What made you take this decision?

I had issued instructions to two employment agencies saying that they have to draw the lottery among applicants to select 960 workers so that all the workers can secure equal opportunity. The lottery process will end the discrimination giving fair chances for competition among the applicants. The lottery system will also protect the rights of workers who don’t have to pay hefty money to go to South Korea. Even among the 960 that would be selected in the final list, the Korean company will select only the half of them, again on the basis of lottery. If Koreans can use the system of lottery, why can’t we?

Who are demanding the workers? Is it South Korean companies or Nepali companies?

South Korean company is demanding the workers and the applications of all 15,000 candidates. The ministry will have nothing to do with the lottery system as the two manpower companies will decide it itself.

Don’t you think your order will make the criteria like ‘professional qualifications and experiences’ for the selections of workers as laid down in the Foreign Employment Act ineffective?

Look, I think I need to clarify this further. When the company first accepts the applications, it will look at all those qualifications and experiences as you have mentioned. There is no question of violation of this provision. If a manpower company accepts applications of inexperienced person, it is the company’s fault.

Being a journalist, you had a quality of persuasiveness but your recent actions seem to be more arrogant. Couldn’t you have been more persuasive?

I am still persuasive. The agencies have made all out efforts to pressure me but I am still persuading them. They even filed the case at the Supreme Court.

How can you say you are still right when the apex court has already challenged your decision issuing an interim order stopping the execution of your instruction?

The court is yet to take the final decisions. I am also knocking the door of the court. I believe that the court will give me justice.

Then, don’t you see your actions violate the laws and regulations?

I have taken the decision after reading the clauses of existing law several times. This decision was taken following the meeting of minister of state, secretary and director and senior officials of the ministry. Clause 20 of Foreign Employment Act 2042 gives government the right to issue the directives to the manpower agencies. I exercised the right given by the law. The Foreign Employment Regulations also gives me right to issue directives. The clause 10 and 11 of the Regulation authorizes the government to direct agencies to decide on the basis of qualification. I am against the two manpower companies - which are sending workers to South Korea by exploiting common Nepali youths. I am also against all kinds of mishandling in the manpower business. I hold the view that lottery system is the best way to make the selection process fair and impartial.

If there are rampant corruption and mishandling, why does not the Ministry take necessary action against such manpower companies and individuals involved?

We are taking actions against the manpower companies that violate the law. This is also a part of actions against the companies. In fact, if we require an amendment (to take such action), we can amend the law through an ordinance.

The mandate of your government is to hold the elections. How can you take a decision to amend the act through the ordinance, which would have a long-term implication on the foreign employment sector?

This is not a decision of long-term implication. It is not an important decision but just a part of normal day-to-day work of the government.

Do you mean the act will be amended just to pave the way to select workers on the basis of lottery?

We will not hesitate to amend the act in order to make the selection process more transparent and open.

At a time when the government is not in a position to offer the employment to Nepalese youth back home, the foreign employment has been the only source of employment to many youths. Don’t you think the present controversy will circulate the message that Nepal is not a state strictly following the rule of law?

Foreign employment is playing important role in the country’s economy. Our government is also trying to open many other new areas and to increase the number of overseas workers. So far as recent decision is concerned, it has sent a good message. The decision of the ministry came when Korean companies also took action against two Nepalese companies on the charges that they demanded excessive money from workers. The Korean company has written a letter to us urging to make our selection criteria more transparent. Tell me if there is a better way to do so than lottery?

Do you mean you will prefer to implement the lottery system rather than follow the criteria laid down by the act?

Lottery is the only transparent way in selection process where every one stands equally qualified. It is the ministry’s responsibility to take actions against the two companies – which have been doing unfair business. If we cannot take decision and act against such companies, what is the use of law and Ministry? I am taking the decision based on laws and regulations. An individual minister cannot take a decision on his own; he must follow the laws and rules. I am a law-abiding minister.

If you are law-abiding, which clause of the law permits you to direct for the use of lottery system in selection process?

The law has given enormous authority to the ministry to regulate the labor related issues. The Ministry is here to ensure that the system of selecting foreign workers is transparent. My judgment is also based on the report of a high level committee – which was set up following the complaints of misuse and corruption in the selection process. Following its investigation, the committee had demanded suggestions from the Commission of Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) to make the selection process more transparent and fair. The CIAA had recommended the lottery system as a fair and impartial system in selecting the workers for South Korea. Do you think I should have refused to implement the recommendation of the CIAA and the committee? The act and regulations authorize me to take such decision. I am confident that I have taken a right decision.

Do you want to introduce lottery system in other sector as well?

We don’t have any plan to do so right now. We are instructing the use of lottery in sending workers to South Korea since the number of applicants for jobs in Korea is very high.

Just three weeks before your appointment to the ministry, the Department of Labor had issued permission to send the workers to Korea and now the ministry is said to be issuing another directive. Is it not contradictory?

The Department had issued the permission in order to utilize the quotas received from South Korea. This permission had opened up the process of receiving applications. The recent directives were related to the specific selection process of the applicants. There is no question of any contradiction here. I have received hundreds of complaints regarding the mal-practices by the manpower companies. Even deputy speaker of House of Representatives phoned me complaining that some of her people were denied the application forms. In such a situation, do you think I should have remained a silent spectator? In fact, I have the backing of many manpower agencies and common people. I don’t care what my opponents think or do. In the past, the ministers used to avoid confrontation and support the manpower agencies.

Even as you directed the manpower agencies to use lottery system, the Revenue Investigation Department under your party leader and deputy prime minister Bharat Mohan Adhikari moved to take actions against them and the CIAA, too, has moved against the same companies. How do you look at it?

The government has nothing to do with it. The CIAA is an independent anti-corruption constitutional watchdog and the Department of Revenue Investigation, too, has its own role to play. Since alleged scandal in selecting manpower to Korea has become a major issue now, these agencies might have been independently motivated to probe on the issue.