Who benefits from migration bans?

August 12, 2024

KATHMANDU – In 1998, the tragic and sensationalised suicide of Kani Sherpa, a Nepali domestic worker in Kuwait, ignited outrage and cast a shadow over domestic work migration from Nepal. In response, the Government of Nepal enacted various forms of bans on migration to protect its citizens abroad, culminating in an umbrella ban on domestic work migration in 2017.

Yet, the demand for Nepali domestic workers remains high, as evidenced by the visas issued by employers abroad. As a result, many poor Nepali citizens, predominantly lower caste women, continue to seek work abroad without proper labour permits, facing increased vulnerability to exploitation. The government refuses to acknowledge that domestic workers could achieve better migration outcomes and ignores the actors benefiting from these restrictions. Unlicensed agents, licensed recruitment agencies, employers, politicians, government agencies, civil society organisations, insurance agencies, travel agents and research consultancies recognise that lifting the ban would empower Nepal’s poorest women but disrupt their businesses.

The fact that this ban has endured for eight years—solidified by the government’s imposition of seven pre-conditions in 2020 with no clear timeline—reveals a disturbing truth: These actors prioritise their interests over the well-being of Nepal’s most vulnerable.

In this article, drawing on research conducted in Sindhupalchowk and Jhapa, we invert the dominant narrative by exploring: If migrant domestic workers aren’t benefiting from Nepal’s migration ban on domestic work migration, who is reaping the benefits at the expense of thousands of Nepali domestic workers?

The recruitment industry

The actual beneficiaries of the