 Symposium home |
Programme (with links to each speaker's presentation) |
Report (PDF-274KB) |
Profile of speakers |
ILO and Japan (in Japanese) |
Introduction
Human Security is a perspective on security that focuses on people, as against the traditional state-oriented view of national security. Since the inception of the United Nations in 1945, human-centered perspectives, such as human rights, human environment, and human development have become new trends in international relations. The concept of human security also conforms to this trend. It became popularized especially after the UNDP took up this idea and analyzed it extensively in its "Human Development Report" in 1994.
1. The Concept of Human Security
The concept of human security has already been elaborated by Prof. Dr. Thakur and Mr. Shinyo and I agree with the ideas presented by them. I would therefore like to contribute by underlining the main points only.
Human security is a way of thinking which emphasizes the importance of securing the life, safety, health, freedom and enhanced life of the people by protecting them from various threats. The threats against human security include the following:
Firstly, political threats can translate into oppressive regime, suppression on human rights by the state, genocide, terrorism and failure of state functions, etc.
Secondly, economic threats include economic turmoil (such as hyperinflation, depression), poverty, unemployment, depletion of resources, and destruction of the environment.
Thirdly, as for social threats, we can point out human trafficking and other crimes that threaten the social existence of human beings, communicable diseases, pollution, malnutrition and the lack of water supply and sewerage systems.
Fourthly, cultural threats, - which are not widely discussed - include destruction of traditional cultures especially those of the indigenous and tribal peoples, linguistic discrimination, limitations on cultural and artistic activities, religious suppression, limitations on freedom of thought, expression, conscience and academic freedom.
Lastly, natural threats will include typhoons (also monsoons, hurricanes), earthquakes, tsunami, volcanic eruption, flood and drought.
2. The significance of ILO's tripartite structure
The concept of human security has been in use since the mid 1990's, but within the traditional international system surrounding the main axis of relations between states, this concept that treats problems by removing national barriers and focuses on the people has been nurtured since earlier times in the UN system. In fact, the ILO, inaugurated 26 years before the creation of the UN was the first organization to realize this concept. In the ILO, the representatives of workers and employers as well as governments have been involved in the dialogue for problem resolution. It could be said that the ILO's tripartite system was the first example of the application of a human-focused approach on international relations. Specifically, at the ILO, international deliberations are made on such issues pertaining to workers' rights, livelihood, workplace, and safety and health in a forum that directly reflects the voices of the workers and employers. There is also a mechanism that promotes action to safeguard such matters. The term "human security" was not used back in the times the ILO was founded, but the human-centered approach to international issues that the ILO focused on was an undercurrent that later lead to the culmination within the UN of the broader concept of human security.
Now, let me turn to the question of how to translate the general concept of human security into the functions of the ILO. More concretely, I should like to analyze the threats to workers lives as follows:
First of all, as for political threats, we may point out to repressive policy of the government and the infringement of the workers rights and other suppression of the labour movement. Forced labour under the military regime of Myanmar is one example of such oppression. The notorious apartheid, once practiced in South Africa, is one real example oppression that violates the freedom of labour.
Secondly, as for economic threats, mass unemployment due to economic turmoil could be pointed out. Pressure on workers lives due to inflation and significant rise in public utility charges is another example of an economic threat.
As for social threats, there are discrimination at the workplace based on race, sex, language, religion, family origin and disability, and unequal treatment in finding employment and in daily lives due to such discrimination. We may also point out that inadequate application of health and safety measures by companies, and the injuries and diseases resulting from this are the real example of social threats.
As for cultural threats, political interference in learning and practicing art and literature and thus the violation of the rights of scholars, artists and person of letters is an example.
Natural threats include the loss of fruit of labour due to natural disasters (for instance, damages on crops by typhoon), and unemployment due to loss of workplace.
In countering such threats to the security of workers, the ILO, which enables direct participation of the workers to the discussion under the tripartite structure, can be said that it is an absolutely effective forum for policy making and implementation.
In relation to this, a quarter of the representatives to the International Labour Conference and the ILO Governing Body are from the worker side. These are significant organs in standards setting, which Mr. Tapiola is responsible for in the ILO Office. In fact, the tradition of the ILO goes that the workers and employers discuss and reach an agreement whereas the government representatives do not interfere much before reaching a conclusion. Based on this modality, the workers can be said to have a strong voice, almost equivalent to one half representation. It was ground breaking that this system was created in the ILO in 1919.
3. The significance of the Committee of Experts and the Office
The ILO, apart from its tripartite structure, has mechanisms to focus on individuals, and plays significant roles in activities concerning the standards-setting, supervision, research and technical cooperation of labour standards. One is the ILO Office and the other is the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, which I have the honor to serve as an expert member.
This Committee consists of about 20 experts and meets once a year in the autumn for a period of about two weeks and a half. There are 185 ILO Conventions altogether and the states are obliged to comply with the provisions of the ratified Conventions. In case of violation of such conventions, while the government and the employers are not direct stakeholders and may not make statements on the problems, the workers may be in a situation where their lives, livelihood and safety are threatened, so there is a mechanism through which the workers may file complaints about the violation. The complaints are sent to the ILO Office by the trade unions and the Committee of Experts reviews such cases and may find that there are violations, identify the scope of improving the circumstances, or may comment that it is not necessarily a violation. Assessments are made on a case-by-case basis, compiled into a comprehensive report that would be referred to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards. The tripartite structure of the ILO stands on the balance between the stakeholders in the government, workers and employers, but the Committee of Experts is composed of experts chosen in their individual capacity, not as governmental representatives. This could be cited as one example that the ILO is securing the effectiveness in many layers and the setting and securing compliance of international standards of conduct focusing on the people.
The ILO Office, of which Mr. Tapiola is a senior member for, is one of the oldest with long history among the UN agency secretariats. The ILO Office must ensure its international character and neutrality. They are also expected to display high levels of expertise. I was highly impressed by the expertise of the ILO officials who appropriately respond to the questions raised by the expert members with supporting documents to ensure smooth deliberations by the Committee of Experts. Another unique activity of the ILO Office is the technical cooperation. In many developing countries, especially the newly emerging states and new member states often lack experts who can give advice on the application of ILO labour standards, and the procedures to be taken after ratification. In that case, the ILO Office plays an important role by sending personnel or training officials in the developing countries. My good friend, Prof. Shinichi Ago, has been engaged in this work for a long time at the ILO. The ILO officials, as experts independent of the tripartite constituents, provide advice and guidance to show a better direction for the working population of the beneficiary countries. I highly evaluate this work of the ILO.
4. The challenge of the ILO in the future
At the outset of the 20th century, the ILO introduced an innovative scheme of tripartite structure, the ILO Office and the Committee of Experts and thereby made significant contributions in the human security of the workers. Almost 90 years later, as we stand in the beginning of the 21st century, we see the situation where the workers representatives are chosen on the basis of the trade unions, and the employers representatives are chosen from among the management of the companies. This function has worked very well and I think it will continue to work in the future. However, I am of the view that the conflict relationship that existed between workers and employers in the beginning of the 20th century, and the workers voice that are to be represented by the trade unions are gradually changing today. There are many unorganized workers, many unemployed people who have no place to work. Voices of those are not necessarily represented under the current ILO tripartite system. There may be instances where the workers' representatives and some of the government representatives try as much as they can to speak on behalf of them. But despite the fact that the current tripartite structure nor the Committee of Experts nor the ILO office is organized on the basis of the national representation, not enough systems are in place to listen directly to the voices of the unemployed, the poor, the disabled, or the foreigners and migrant workers. This is a more recent issue. I would like to raise the issue that the ILO is at a turning corner to think about how to reflect the voices of these workers, the unemployed, and the socially vulnerable to the policy planning, standards-setting and technical guidance of the ILO.
Lastly, "the decent work" advocated by the ILO is extremely significant. It goes without saying that it is important for human beings to work in dignity, but until now, the idea of work has been that it is unavoidable in order to earn a living. The people's modern ideas on work is not the same as it used to be in this sense, and it would be a challenge to bring about a situation where people can try to find a self-fulfilling work. I am encouraged that the ILO is taking up this new challenge.