Experts of the Committee on the Rights of Migrant Workers Welcome Efforts by São Tomé and Príncipe to Hold the Dialogue, Ask about a National Human Rights Institute and Support Offered to Migrant Workers Abroad

The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families today concluded its consideration of the initial report of São Tomé and Príncipe, with Committee Experts welcoming the State’s efforts to hold the dialogue, and asking about whether the country intended to establish a national human rights institution, and how migrant workers abroad were supported by the State.

Mohammed Charef, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, welcomed the discussion with the delegation, thanked the State for its exceptional collaboration, and appreciated the efforts undertaken in drafting the report and holding the dialogue with the Committee.

A Committee Expert said the international community stood with São Tomé and Príncipe as the State established its legal framework. There was an inter-ministerial human rights commission. Was this a national human rights institution under the Paris Principles? It would be a good thing for São Tomé and Príncipe to set up a national human rights institution.

Another Expert asked if São Tomé and Príncipe provided sufficient support to its migrant workers living abroad? What kind of support was provided in the main destination countries? Did the State have consulates or embassies in the destination countries?

Responding to questions, Georgina Rodrigues, Director of the Human Rights Office of São Tomé and Príncipe and head of the delegation, said the commission adopted by the Government in 2020 was the inter-ministerial human rights commission, coordinated through the Human Rights Office. A draft law was being prepared which calculated the necessary budget and structure to create a national human rights institute. This was one of the priorities for 2024.

The delegation said São Tomé and Príncipe had embassies in various countries. When citizens of São Tomé and Príncipe got into difficulties, they needed to contact their diplomatic representation.

Ginésio Da Mata, Minister of Finance of São Tomé and Príncipe and head of delegation, presenting the report, said the Democratic Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe had ratified the International Convention for the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families in January 2017 and had since engaged in the protection of these rights, promoting the principle of equality in order to eliminate discrimination against foreigners in São Tomé and Príncipe. The Labour Code established the conditions for carrying out work by migrants in the national territory, stating that migrant workers had the right to equal treatment and opportunities with nationals, and were subject to the provisions of the Labour Code. São Tomé and Príncipe faced numerous barriers in preparing the report, such as linguistic issues, a lack of disaggregated statistical data, and the short time for its execution. However, the State was firmly committed to the protection of the rights guaranteed in the various international and regional human rights instruments that it had ratified.

In concluding remarks, Myriam Poussi, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for undergoing the exercise, noting there were numerous challenges. There had been great willingness from São Tomé and Príncipe to uphold their commitments under the Convention, and the State should be congratulated for this. Some of the limitations included a lack of statistical data, a lack of strategic guidance documents, and the visibility of the Convention.

Ms. Rodrigues, in concluding remarks, thanked the Committee profoundly, saying this was a process of discovery. The State had learnt a lot through this exercise, including the need to work more on certain aspects. São Tomé and Príncipe was aware of all the issues raised by the Committee and would seek to address them.

The delegation of São Tomé and Príncipe was comprised of representatives from the Human Rights Office; the Inter-ministerial Commission on Human Rights; the National Electoral Commission; the Migration and Border Services; the Ministry of Health; the Institute of Statistics; the Directorate of Customs; the Directorate of Labour; and the Directorate of Social Protection.

The webcast of Committee meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Committee’s thirty-seventh session can be found here.

The Committee will next meet at 3 p.m. on Monday, 4 December for a joint side event with the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

Report

The Committee has before it the initial report of São Tomé and Príncipe (CMW/C/STP/1).

Presentation of Report

GINÉSIO DA MATA, Minister of Finance of São Tomé and Príncipe, said the Democratic Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe had ratified the International Convention for the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families in January 2017 and had since engaged in the protection of these rights, promoting the principle of equality in order to eliminate discrimination against foreigners in São Tomé and Príncipe. The State had also committed to creating structural conditions and grievance mechanisms, such as legal aid offices, courts, and other public institutions, to ensure that the rights of migrant workers and their families were protected.

The 2003 Constitution of São Tomé and Príncipe established that the norms contained in international conventions, treaties and agreements were in force in the São Tomé legal system after their official publication. The Constitution provided that São Tomé citizens residing abroad enjoyed the same rights and duties as other citizens, and enjoyed the care and protection of the State. These fundamental rights included the right of the children of migrant workers to a birth certificate and to nationality, among others.

The Labour Code established the conditions for carrying out work by migrants in the national territory, stating that migrant workers had the right to equal treatment and opportunities with nationals, and were subject to the provisions of the Labour Code. Therefore, the laws of the São Tomé and Príncipe legal system, especially the Constitution of the Republic, the Labour Code, the Penal Code, and other laws, worked to safeguard the rights of migrant workers in the national territory. São Tomé and Príncipe had guaranteed equitable access to COVID-19 vaccination for all migrants and their family members, regardless of their nationality, migration status or other prohibited grounds of discrimination.

São Tomé and Príncipe faced numerous barriers in preparing the report, such as linguistic issues, a lack of disaggregated statistical data, and the short time for its execution. However, the State was firmly committed to the protection of rights guaranteed in the various international and regional human rights instruments.

Achievements had been made in the adoption of legislative and institutional measures, the creation of structures, and the training of human resources, with support from United Nations agencies. Recognising the need to honour its commitments, the Government of São Tomé and Príncipe had submitted the initial report on the Convention as scheduled.

Questions by Committee Experts

MOHAMMED CHAREF, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, welcomed the discussion with the delegation, thanked the State for its exceptional collaboration, and appreciated the efforts undertaken in drafting the report and holding the dialogue with the Committee. He said he was conscious of the difficulty of gathering reliable statistics of migration patterns to and from the State party. The number of immigrants to São Tomé and Príncipe had not stopped to decrease, from 8,000 at the time of independence to less than 2,500 today, counting for less than 1 per cent of the population. They came mainly from Cabo Verde, as well as from Angola, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea and Portugal. São Tomé and Príncipe had 230,000 inhabitants spread over the archipelago. There are around 45,000 migrants, which was a significant percentage of the population, concentrated in Portugal, Angola, Cabo Verde and Guinea. What were the migration policies and the structures governing migration in São Tomé and Príncipe?

MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the Committee would have preferred to have the meeting in-person in Geneva, but this had not been possible. The ratification of the Convention by São Tomé and Príncipe was a demonstration of the willingness of the country to ensure the protection of migrant workers and their families. The Committee welcomed this development. Another positive development in the area of human rights was that São Tomé and Príncipe had proceeded with the ratification of several other legal instruments which promoted and protected human rights, including the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Convention against Torture, the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. All of these were extremely positive developments, and a testament to the State’s willingness to make the issue of human rights a cornerstone in the country. Did São Tomé and Príncipe intend to ratify some of the International Labour Organization Conventions, including Convention 97 on migrant workers, Convention 143, and the 2011 Convention on domestic migrant workers?

In 2008, the State had adopted a law on domestic violence and a further law consolidating protection for victims of domestic violence. Were there any figures available about labour in the domestic sector? What proportion of women were domestic workers in the country? Did the laws include provisions on the protection of migrant workers? Had there been any convictions following the implementations of these laws? Had the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers been invoked directly in the courts in São Tomé and Príncipe? Was the centre for domestic violence in operation? Was its budget sufficient for funding activities? Could migrant workers benefit from the services of this centre? What services could they receive? What were the official figures of São Tomé citizens living outside the country?

RAYMOND G. ZOUNMATOUN, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked São Tomé and Príncipe for overcoming the challenges to attend the dialogue, and congratulated the State on the efforts made. The Committee would have liked to see some more data in the report. Was there a mechanism or activities specifically developed to protect the rights of migrant workers, even if there was no specific policy document? Was it still the case that there were no resources allocated to its implementation, as stated in the report? How did migrant workers have access to justice? If a migrant did not want to leave the national territory, what exactly happened?

A Committee Expert said the international community stood with São Tomé and Príncipe as they established their legal framework. There was an inter-ministerial human rights commission. Was this a national human rights institution under the Paris Principles? It would be a good thing for São Tomé and Príncipe to set up a national human rights institution. It was expensive to obtain a resident permit in nearby Gabon and Equatorial Guinea. Had São Tomé and Príncipe decided to encourage migration of young people to countries like Cabo Verde?

Another Expert said that recently São Tomé and Príncipe was reviewed by the Committee on the Rights of the Child, who found that the State had ratified relevant Conventions in this area. Did São Tomé and Príncipe intend to put in place a strategy for their implementation? Did the State intend to ratify International Labour Organization Convention 190 on harassment in the workplace, and would it be implemented?

A Committee Expert asked if São Tomé and Príncipe evaluated whether migrant workers who refused to leave the country would be exposed to danger if they returned to their countries of origin? Were there any legislation, regularisation or supervisory measures over companies recruiting migrant workers to ensure they respected the provision of the Convention? In most countries, these recruitment agencies tended to be on the frontline of violations of the rights of migrant workers. Was there a mechanism which regulated employment agencies working with domestic migrant workers? What mechanisms were in place to ensure that most migrant workers within the country had social security through the provisions of a work contract?

An Expert asked if São Tomé and Príncipe provided sufficient support to its migrant workers living abroad? What kind of support was provided in the main destination countries? Did the State have consulates or embassies in the destination countries? Were the workers helped to participate in elections in São Tomé and Príncipe? How was this achieved? How had migrant workers been affected by climate change?

A Committee Expert said climate change was strongly correlated to displacement. How did the Government ensure protection before and after natural disasters? Were there any strategies on how to deal with emergency situations during crises?

Another Expert asked if there were any mechanisms or protocols in place to ensure the protection of a child arriving to the country alone? What kind of consular assistance was provided to facilitate access to regularisation in the host country?

A Committee Expert asked why a national human rights institution had not been created? This would be very useful for the State. It was beneficial to carry out awareness raising initiatives to the public when a new Convention was ratified.

Responses by the Delegation

GEORGINA RODRIGUES, Director of the Human Rights Office of São Tomé and Príncipe and head of delegation, said the commission established by the Government in 2020 was the inter-ministerial human rights commission, and it was coordinated through the Human Rights Office. A draft law was being prepared which calculated the necessary budget and structure to create a national human rights institute. This was one of the priorities for 2024. When a foreigner in São Tomé and Príncipe was in an irregular situation, they were invited to leave the country voluntarily, or to get regularised. To date, there had not been anyone who had refused to become regularised or to leave. São Tomé and Príncipe’s laws prohibited child labour. The State recognised the importance of creating shelters for victims of domestic violence, but unfortunately this had not yet happened. This was something which needed to be dealt with rapidly, as there were cases where victims had been forced to return to live with their abusers. This issue was a priority for São Tomé and Príncipe.

Foreigners in São Tomé and Príncipe usually arrived with contracts. Sometimes São Tomé and Príncipe nationals complained about their treatment at the hands of foreigners in the labour market abroad. However, no foreigner had ever complained about violations of labour rights in São Tomé and Príncipe. There were no policies to encourage immigration or emigration. No minor was allowed to enter São Tomé and Príncipe unaccompanied. Facilities were available with trained staff in embassies abroad for São Tomé and Príncipe citizens to receive information or any assistance.

Questions by Committee Experts

MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked the State party to take the children of migrant workers into account in all measures adopted relating to birth registration, access to health services and education, and the economic exploitation of children, including in the domestic labour sector. It was also important to take the issues of trafficking and child kidnapping into account. The delegation should pursue efforts so that disaggregated statistics would be available for the next reviews.

What statistics existed on trafficking? What challenges had there been in collecting data in this area? What was being done to overcome these challenges? Did the law on trafficking have any provisions which specifically applied to migrant workers who were victims of trafficking? What was the scale of the issue for a country like São Tomé and Príncipe? Had there been cases and prosecutions handed down for sexual exploitation and trafficking, including those in a migration situation? What had been done to protect the victims?

Were immigration offences criminally sanctioned in São Tomé and Príncipe? Were migrants detained in detention centres or in prisons? Did foreign citizens have access to a lawyer in São Tomé and Príncipe? When migrant workers were in conflict with the law, and could not afford a lawyer, could they receive legal assistance? What conditions did they need to meet to receive this assistance?

MOHAMMED CHAREF, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said he would be grateful for further details and more information. It was critical to have data and statistics which would be a useful tool for the country. Remittances contributed to households and social stability so statistics on them must be available.

RAYMOND G. ZOUNMATOUN, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the report had shown that the State party was not ready for the dialogue. What was the percentage of migrant families who benefitted from the programme to help those living in extreme poverty? What was the criteria for considering a diaspora community significant, such as when it came to registering voters?

A Committee Expert said São Tomé and Príncipe was a recently independent State and had gaps to cover. There was a need for support from the international community. The Ombudsman was responsible for the relationship between the administration and users, to oblige the administration to provide quality public services and to settle disputes. There needed to be both a national human rights institution and an Ombudsman’s Office as they had different functions. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was able to assist States in establishing a national human rights institution and helping it achieve A status. The President and the Prime Minister seemed to have the same legitimacy, both elected by universal suffrage, which could make for a difficult co-existence? How did this situation work?

Another Expert said the Committee understood the challenges faced by São Tomé and Príncipe in this process. What efforts had been taken by the State party to mobilise technical assistance from international organizations in order to strengthen capacities? What was the current institutional mechanism for the protection of human rights?

An Expert said São Tomé and Príncipe had ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers, and had therefore committed to protecting children in their own territory, and children abroad. What strategies had been implemented by the Government to prevent girls from dropping out of school, or early marriage? It was essential to have a partnership with civil society. What was the Government’s strategy to promote civil society and work with them to support migrant workers, both in the country of origin and the county of destination? What was being done to disseminate the Convention?

Responses by the Delegation

The delegation said all foreigners in São Tomé and Príncipe were required to obey national laws, and all were treated equally under the Constitution. If foreigners committed an offence, they were liable under criminal proceedings in the same way as nationals. Legal assistance was provided by the Bar Association. Foreign citizens in conflict with the law were detained. There was not a different detention centre for that group as there was only one detention centre in São Tomé. This was where foreign citizens were held, under the same condition as nationals.

São Tomé and Príncipe had embassies and consulates and representations in various countries. When São Tomé and Príncipe nationals got into difficulties, they needed to contact their diplomatic representation. The Civil Code of 1961 stated that all children born in São Tomé and Príncipe would be registered, whether they were nationals or foreigners. There were laws covering foreigners in São Tomé and Príncipe, so there were no major issues in terms of how foreigners were received, or gaps in procedures dealing with issues relating to foreigners. There were embassies, consuls and honorary consuls in a number of countries that would assist São Tomé and Príncipe citizens abroad.

The Vulnerable Families Programme was a broad social programme financed by the World Bank, which started in 2019. To select the beneficiaries, a national company was involved in focusing on the community to select the families and draw up a waiting list of the people who had applied for this assistance. This allowed the State to determine the 2,500 families which would receive this monetary transfer. Last year, the COVID response and recovery programme started, which expanded the number of beneficiaries to 4,500 families. Since last year, the single social register database had been developed to keep track of the beneficiaries. There was no data on foreigners who visited São Tomé and Príncipe for sex tourism with children. There could be isolated cases which were not officially reported.

Questions by Committee Experts

MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the responses provided were not quite up to expectations, given the lack of statistical data. São Tomé and Príncipe was a member of the Central African community, where the mandate was to promote free movement of persons in Central Africa. This had an additional protocol on the rights of the Member States. Had there been difficulties in implementing this protocol? There had also been issues of corruption at border posts; could more information on this be provided? Had São Tomé and Príncipe engaged in advocacy with other States to encourage the ratification of the important migration treaty? An agreement had been signed with Ghana on a visa exemption for diplomatic, official and ordinary passport holders. What were the migration movements between São Tomé and Príncipe and Ghana? What were the main reasons behind signing the treaty? How was the treaty benefitting workers in those two countries?

A Committee Expert asked which countries had embassies belonging to São Tomé and Príncipe and which countries had consulates?

Concluding Remarks

MYRIAM POUSSI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for undergoing the exercise, noting that there were numerous challenges. There had been great willingness from São Tomé and Príncipe to uphold their commitments under the Convention, and the State should be congratulated for this. Some of the limitations included a lack of statistical data, a lack of strategic guidance documents, and the visibility of the Convention. Ms. Poussi reiterated her thanks and congratulations to the São Tomé and Príncipe delegation and encouraged them to continue their efforts.

RAYMOND G. ZOUNMATOUN, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for presenting the initial report despite the challenges faced. He welcomed the transparency and sincerity of the delegation. The role of the Committee was to support São Tomé and Príncipe in doing better. If things were difficult, the State should outline this in the written replies.

MOHAMMED CHAREF, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, noted with satisfaction the willingness of the State party to provide information. There were limitations, but it was hopeful that together with the Committee, something more solid could be built for the next report. Colleagues of the Committee could visit São Tomé and Príncipe and assist the State in implementing the Convention.

GEORGINA RODRIGUES, Director of the Human Rights Office of São Tomé and Príncipe and head of delegation, thanked the Committee profoundly, saying this was a process of discovery. The State had learnt a lot through this exercise, including the need to work more on certain aspects. São Tomé and Príncipe was aware of all the issues raised by the Committee and would seek to address them.

Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media; not an official record.
English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.