| Home | |
About | |
News | |
Publications | |
How to Assist? |  |
Contact Us | |
 |
 |
| By Ruth Sinai | "Haaretz", 25 April, 2007 |
State must justify tough stance on foreign workers who give birth
The state must explain why foreign workers are deported after giving birth instead of being allowed to complete their five-year employment period. On Sunday, a High Court of Justice panel gave the state 90 days to respond to an appeal by five social welfare organiziations against the Interior Ministry. In late 2004, a rights group petitioned the court, demanding that the ministry set a clear policy regarding pregnant foreign workers, rather than allowing individual officials to decide on a case-by-case basis, usually forcing the women to leave the country. The ministry responded by requiring the foreign workers to choose between their livelihoods and their babies, deciding that the infants be sent abroad if the mothers wanted to continue to work. Kav La'Oved called the policy cruel, and the ministry again changed course, this time mandating that the women leave the country with the babies. In December 2005, five organizations - the Kav La'Oved hotline for protecting workers' rights, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, women's organization Na'amat, the Moked hotline for migrant workers, and Physicians for Human Rights - petitioned against the policies. One of their central arguments was that the policies contradict laws that protect women from being fired due to becoming pregnant or giving birth. In a September 2006 hearing, the justices recommended that the Interior Ministry reconsider its policy, but the ministry refused. In the hearing at the beginning of this week, the prosecution argued that the appeal should be thrown out because it does not represent a specific pregnant foreign worker. Kav La'Oved attorney Yuval Livnat explained that foreign workers are unwilling to appeal because they prefer to have an abortion or give birth at East Jerusalem institutions and hide the baby, to avoid losing their livelihoods. The organizations also argued that this is a matter of principle - the right to parenthood - so a High Court hearing should be held, a position the court accepted. The court also rejected the state's argument that the women should not be allowed to stay in Israel with their children for fear they will refuse to leave at the end of their terms of employment, claiming this would mean "cultural exile" for their children who know no other country. The court agreed with the human rights advocates, who said someone cannot be punished out of fear they might violate a law in the future.
