�Barbados notified of second suspected case�
PHILIPSBURG--Prosecutor Hans Mos says the case of Mumbai India native Yenshin Chang is now a "civil conflict" between an employer and an employee, as there is no evidence that the woman had been enslaved by her employers as she reported to authorities.
He said too that authorities had recently held "for a few days" an Indian native travelling to Barbados via St. Maarten, as it was suspected that she could possibly be a potential victim of human slavery in that country.
"The lady came in last Friday by airplane via the Netherlands from India on her way to Barbados. She hadn't any money and didn't speak any English. There were all kinds of indicators ? she only had about US $20 and [it was-Ed.] thought that she could have been a victim," Mos said on Monday.
The woman was held in St. Maarten for a few days and she was later allowed to continue her journey to Barbados, as she possessed the visa and other documentation to enter that country legally. However, Mos said authorities there have been notified that she could be a victim. "The Barbadians are aware and I hope they keep it under surveillance," Mos said.
Regarding the case of Chang, he said that after having interviewed the employer, authorities concluded that there was no evidence that she had been held against her will and that it was now an employer-employee matter.
"There has been a change in the case. We don't have any evidence that Chang was involved in a modern-day slavery case. Her employer was questioned and he said something different was going on and from day one she didn't do what they had agreed and that they didn't pay her anymore.
"This is what we call a civil conflict about contracting a worker. It's a worker- employer problem. She said she was unable to leave the house, but there are anonymous neighbours who said she was able to sit in their house and went back [to her employer's home-Ed.] each time.
"We find it difficult to prove that what she said was going on is really a case to be called human-trafficking. We don't have a case here."
Mos said the employer in question said they had not paid Chang. "He said he didn't pay her and he tried to send her back and, because she didn't want to go back, they reported her to immigration. It's not a clear-cut case as what it was in the beginning.
"There is no evidence. She said she was in a difficult situation, that she was not free to go and that she was owed a lot of money. We looked at it from the other side and found some corroboration that she was free to leave the home," said Mos, adding that "the books are closed with this one."
In an interview with this newspaper, Chang acknowledged that she had gone to the home of a neighbour, who had been instrumental in helping her to escape. She said that she had done this when the woman who she had been caring for had been asleep and when the other family members had not been at home. It was this family that had helped to contact local organisations to help her to move from her employer's home and escape what she said had been a horrific working experience.
A local person who was instrumental in contacting the local organisation to help Chang also told this newspaper that her first encounter with the woman had been very emotional. "She was crying a lot. The writing was on the wall and I was shocked that something like this is still happening. I remember her telling me that if we helped her she would be kissing my feet for life."
Chang told this newspaper that her employer had taken her passport, that she had been barred from leaving her place of employment, that she was not paid and that she had been tied to a huge debt-bondage when she had told her employer that she wanted to leave. She said she had escaped her employer's home in St. Johns in February. Several individuals and organisations have since condemned the case.
St Lucia TV ratings Roy Hodgson Canada Tony Cottee Peter Beardsley
No comments:
Post a Comment