04-A. Slavery on Our Doorstep

There are estimated to be more than 20,000 overseas domestic servants working in Britain (the exact figure is not known because the Home Office, the Government department that deals with this, does not keep statistics). Usually, they have been brought over by foreign businessmen, diplomats or Britons returning from abroad. Of these 20,000, just under 2,000 are being exploited and abused by their employers, according to a London-based campaigning group which helps overseas servants working in Britain.

The abuse can take several forms. Often the domestics are not allowed to go out, and they do not receive any payment. They can be physically, sexually and psychologically abused. And they can have their passports removed, making leaving or "escaping" virtually impossible.

The sad condition of women working as domestics around the world received much media attention earlier this year in several highly publicised cases. In one of them, a Filipino maid was executed in Singapore after being convicted of murder, despite protests from various quarters that her guilt had not been adequately established. Groups like Anti-Slavery International say other, less dramatic, cases are equally deserving of attention, such as that of Lydia Garcia, a Filipino maid working in London:

"I was hired by a Saudi diplomat directly from the Philippines to work in London in 1989. I was supposed to be paid $ 120 but I never received that amount. They always threatened that they would send me back to my country.”

Then there is the case of Kumari from Sri Lanka. The main breadwinner in her family, she used to work for a very low wage at a tea factory in Sri Lanka. Because she found it difficult to feed her four children, she accepted a job working as a domestic in London. She says she felt like a prisoner at the London house where she worked:

"No days off -- ever, no breaks at all, no proper food. I didn't have my own room; I slept on a shelf with a spad0 of only three feet above me. I wasn't allowed to talk to anybody. I wasn't even allowed to open the window. My employers always threatened to report me to the Home Office or the police.”

At the end of 1994 the British Government introduced new measures to help protect domestic workers from abuse by their employers. This included increasing the minimum age of employees to 18, getting employees to read and, understand an advice leaflet, getting employers to agree to provide adequate maintenance and conditions, and to put in writing the main terms and conditions of the job (of which the employees should see a copy).

However, many people doubt whether this will successfully reduce the incidence of abuse. For the main problem facing overseas maids and domestics who try to complain about cruel living and working conditions is that they do not have independent immigrant status and so cannot change employer. (They are allowed in the United Kingdom under a special concession in the immigration rules which allows foreigners to bring domestic staff with them.) So if they do complain, they risk being deported.

Allowing domestic workers the freedom to seek the same type of work but with a different employer, if they so choose, is what groups like Anti-Slavery International are campaigning the Government for. It is, they say, the right to change employers which distinguishes employment from slavery.

04-B. Return of The Chain Gang

Eyewitnesses say it was a scene straight out of a black and white movie from the 1950s. As the sun rose over the fields of Huntsville, Alabama, in the American South, the convicts got down from the trucks that had brought them there. Watched over by guards with guns, they raised their legs in unison and made their way to the edge of the highway, Interstate 65. The BBC's Washington correspondent Clare Bolderson was there and she sent this report:

"They wore white uniforms with the words "Chain Gang' on their backs and, in groups of five, were shackled together in leg irons joined by an eight-foot chain. The prisoners will work for up to 90 days on the gang: they'll clear ditches of weeds and mend fences along Alabama's main roads. While they are working on the gang, they抣l also live in some of the harshest prison conditions in the United States. There'll be no televisions or phone calls; many other day-to-day privileges will be denied.”

The authorities in Alabama say there is a lot of support for the re-introduction of chain gangs in the State after a gap of 30 years (the last gangs were abolished in Georgia in the early 1960s). Many people believe it is an effective way to get criminals to pay back their debt to society.

The prisoners stay shackled when they use toilets. They reacted sharply to the treatment they are given:

Prisoner one: "This is like a circus. A zoo. All chained here to a zoo. We're all animals now."

Prisoner two: "It's degrading. It's embarrassing.”

Prisoner three: "In chains. It's slavery!"

Six out of every ten prisoners in chains are black, which is why the chain gangs call up images of slavery in centuries gone by, when black people were brought from Africa in leg irons and made to work in plantations owned by white men. Not surprisingly, although three-quarters of the white population of Alabama supports chain gangs, only a small number of black people do. Don Claxton, spokesman for the State Government of Alabama, insists that the system is not racist:

"This isn't something that's done for racial reasons, for political reasons. This is something that's going to help save the people of Alabama tax money because they don't have to pay as many officers to work on the highways. And it's going to help clean up our highways and it's going to help clean up the State.”

However, the re-introduction of these measures has caused a great deal of strong disagreement. Human rights organizations say that putting prisoners in chains is not only inhumane but also ineffective. Alvin Bronstein, member of the Civil Liberties Union, says that study after study has shown that you cannot prevent people from committing crimes by punishment or the threat of punishment: "What they will do is make prisoners more angry, more hostile, so that when they get out of prison, they will increase the level of their criminal behaviour.”

Civil liberties groups say that chaining people together doesn't solve the causes of crime, such as poverty or disaffection within society. What it does is punish prisoners for the ills of society. They say the practice takes the United States back to the Middle Ages, and that it is a shame to American society. But that抯 not an argument likely to win favour among many people in the Deep South of the United States. Alabama's experiment is to be widened to include more prisoners, and other States, such as Arkansas and Arizona, will very probably introduce their own chain gang schemes.