Introduction
The kafala system is a legal framework that has for decades defined the relationship between migrant workers and their employers in Jordan, Lebanon, and all Arab Gulf states except for Iraq. Created to supply cheap, plentiful labor during an era of booming economic growth, defenders of the system argue that it benefits local businesses and drives development.
However, the system has become increasingly controversial, with a growing recognition of its exploitative nature. The absence of robust regulations and protections for migrant workers’ rights leads to low wages, poor working conditions, and widespread abuse. Moreover, racial discrimination and gender-based violence are rampant within this framework. Global movements advocating anti-racism, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the exertion of pressure surrounding the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar have exposed the serious flaws within the kafala system, leading to ongoing discussions about the prospects for reform.
What is the kafala system?
The kafala, or sponsorship system, delineates the relationship between foreign workers and their local sponsor, or kafeel, generally their employer. Employed in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries—Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—as well as Jordan and Lebanon, the system has become notorious for its exploitative practices. Although both Bahrain and Qatar claim to have abolished the kafala system, critics argue that the enforcement of reforms has been weak, effectively maintaining the status quo.
Under this system, local individuals or companies are granted sponsorship permits to employ foreign laborers (with the exception of Bahrain, where a government agency sponsors workers). The sponsors typically cover travel expenses and housing, which may range from dormitory-style accommodations to cramped quarters in employers’ homes. Often, sponsors procure workers through private recruitment agencies in the workers’ home countries, facilitating their entry into the host nation.
The system falls primarily under the jurisdiction of interior ministries rather than labor ministries, leaving many workers without protection under the host country’s labor laws. Consequently, this lack of legal safeguards makes workers vulnerable to exploitation, denying them rights such as participating in labor disputes or forming unions. Because employment and residency visas are dependent on sponsors, workers find themselves in a precarious situation—often dependent on their employers for their legal status in the country.
In most cases, workers require their sponsor’s approval to switch jobs, terminate their employment, or enter or exit the host country. Leaving the workplace without permission can result in losing legal status, imprisonment, or deportation—even if the worker is fleeing abuse. This systemic imbalance leads many experts to describe the kafala system as a facilitator of modern slavery.
What are its origins?
The term kafala stems from Islamic jurisprudence regarding legal guardianship and other matters. The contemporary kafala system originated in the Gulf states to provide oversight on the treatment of foreign workers in the pearl diving industry and other commercial trades in the early twentieth century.
The system saw considerable expansion in the 1950s as newly oil-rich Gulf nations sought foreign laborers for monumental infrastructure projects. With relatively small local populations, these nations needed temporary, flexible labor solutions to cope with economic fluctuations. Initially, the kafala system primarily benefited Arab workers, such as those from Egypt, before shifting to prefer non-Arab laborers—particularly from South Asia—due to the desire for cheaper labor and apprehension about pan-Arab ideologies potentially destabilizing Gulf monarchies.
Demographic changes stemming from the kafala system have been profound. The population of the Gulf region has surged tenfold over fifty years, with expatriates now outnumbering locals in all GCC states except Saudi Arabia. The aftermath of the 2014 oil price crash, along with COVID-19-related austerity measures, has prompted renewed scrutiny on migrant labor and spurred local hiring initiatives.
Who are the workers?
The kafala system encompasses almost all foreigners working in host countries, regardless of nationality, economic class, or profession. Currently, most of these workers hail from Africa and South Asia, often filling jobs that local nationals either cannot or refuse to fill for financial or cultural reasons, such as construction, domestic work, and service industries.
Moreover, migrant workers typically earn less than their local counterparts. For instance, in Jordan, the minimum wage for foreign workers is $350 monthly, while local nationals are entitled to at least $367. White-collar professionals and those originating from Western countries frequently receive better treatment and remuneration. According to data from the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, there were 36 million international migrants in GCC countries, Jordan, and Lebanon in 2020—nearly half the combined population of these nations.
What risks do workers face?
Critics often label the kafala system as entrenched in “modern slavery,” with mistreatment arising from the significant power imbalance between sponsors and employees, coupled with a lack of legal accountability for sponsors. Notably, the Middle East lags behind other regions in ratifying international agreements meant to protect workers, such as the ILO’s Domestic Workers Convention.
Given these systemic shortcomings, workers endure various forms of abuse, including:
- Restricted movement and communications: Employers frequently confiscate passports and visas, limiting domestic workers’ movements. Non-domestic laborers often find themselves crammed into overcrowded dormitories, increasing their susceptibility to illness—especially during events like the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Debt bondage: While host countries mandate that employers absorb recruitment costs, these expenses often shift to workers, who may incur debts to cover fees. Employers can leverage this situation to reduce or withhold wages.
- Forced labor: The deceptive practices of recruiters may lead to forced labor scenarios, characterized by contract substitutions that change terms of employment without workers’ knowledge.
- Visa trading: Sponsors may illegally sell a worker’s visa to other employers, often imposing different, less favorable terms than those outlined in the original contract.
- Irregular residency status: Workers find their residency status legally tied to their employers, rendering them vulnerable to arbitrary termination of employment.
How do race and gender play into this?
Racial dynamics further complicate the already dire circumstances of migrant workers. A report pointedly illustrated that the treatment of foreign workers varies dramatically based on their skin color, with darker-skinned African and South Asian workers facing compounded discrimination.
Gender-based violence adds another layer of risk; domestic workers, predominantly female, are often subjected to various forms of abuse, including sexual violence. Reporting such abuses can be fraught with legal and social risks, with victims apprehensive about consequences that might arise from speaking out.
Who does the kafala system profit?
Despite the potential for exploitation, many workers pursue jobs in kafala host countries due to the promise of higher wages than those available at home. Many of these workers send remittances back to their families, which the World Bank indicates can help alleviate poverty in their native countries. In fact, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE consistently rank among the world’s leading sources of remittance flows.
Supporters of the kafala system frequently contend that creating legal pathways for entry into these countries decreases the likelihood of vulnerable individuals falling prey to human smuggling. In contrast, opponents argue that the absence of meaningful protections still leaves workers at significant risk.
Some critics deem the system ineffective, asserting it hampers broader economic growth. World Bank economist Zahid Hussein noted that the short-term contracts associated with the system suppress incentives for migrant workers to invest in skill development and engage in more productive activities.
Do any other parts of the world use such a system?
While various guest-worker programs around the globe experience issues such as withholding passports and forcing migrants to pay extortionate recruitment fees, these systems do not afford employers the same level of unchecked power over workers as the kafala system does. This exceptional degree of control over workers’ lives and their exclusion from societal integration remains largely unchallenged elsewhere.
How has the rest of the world responded?
Labor rights activists have long campaigned for reforms or the abolition of the kafala system—a movement that gained urgency in the wake of global anti-racism protests in 2020. The international scrutiny surrounding the 2022 FIFA World Cup also brought attention to Qatar, where workers faced brutal conditions while preparing for the event. Reports indicated that many laborers labored under extreme heat, contributing to numerous fatalities.
In response to burgeoning criticism, Qatar initiated several reforms regarding labor protections, such as instituting mandatory hydration breaks for workers. Doha has also pledged to dismantle the kafala system entirely—a claim met with skepticism, given the historical shortcomings in enforcement.
Countries that supply large numbers of kafala workers, including Indonesia and Nepal, have criticized the system, even implementing bans on workers emigrating to GCC states at times. However, such restrictions often backfire, driving desperate individuals toward illegal human smuggling networks.
Though multinational organizations like the EU and the United Nations have voiced criticism of the kafala framework, tangible actions against it remain absent.
What are the prospects for reform?
International pressure has prodded most host countries into action, with several implementing reforms aimed at improving workers’ conditions. These changes range from standardizing employment contracts to facilitating job transfers post-employment.
For instance, Saudi Arabia recently permitted migrant workers to leave the country without obtaining sponsorship approval, an important, albeit limited, step toward mitigating the abuses inherent in the kafala system. Nevertheless, even these reforms face significant enforcement problems, as many host nations either lack the political will or the means to ensure compliance.
While Qatar’s reforms have been hailed as a model for progress—instituting a minimum wage and creating an online platform to streamline employment changes—many experts caution that systemic issues remain unaddressed. Concerns around implementation and a lack of major institutional backing for policies in other host countries remain obstacles to meaningful change.
Countries of origin can assist their nationals by negotiating bilateral labor agreements that incorporate provisions for better working conditions. For instance, the Philippines has taken proactive steps, allowing workers to lodge complaints via its embassies and providing shelter if needed.
However, many stakeholders believe full abolition of the kafala system is the only way forward. Recent protests in Lebanon have spotlighted the system’s injustices and highlighted the necessity for comprehensive reform. Yet economic concerns add another layer of complexity: nations reliant on remittances are often baulking at the prospect of discarding a system that forms the backbone of their foreign labor economy.
