By: Henry Smith, Junior Research Associate, PILPG-NL
In March 2021, during the qualifying matches for the 2022 Football World Cup organized by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), players of the national football teams of the Netherlands, Germany, Norway, and Denmark walked onto the fields in shirts with messages such as “human rights on and off the pitch”, and “football supports change”. The on-field protests were aimed at the alleged human rights violations committed against migrants working on the construction of stadiums and facilities for the next World Cup in Qatar.
Both Qatar and FIFA have recently come under heavy criticism for not taking action against those allegations. Although Qatar has adopted measures aimed at addressing the issue, it has failed to implement them, and migrant workers continue to report dire conditions.
This article examines Qatar’s obligations under international human rights law and assesses whether victims can seek remedies before human rights institutions, or, alternatively, whether it would be possible to hold FIFA accountable.
The alleged violations
According to Amnesty International, since the beginning of the construction of facilities for the 2022 World Cup, workers from Bangladesh, India, and Nepal have been subjected to forced labor, received low and delayed salaries, and have lived in appalling conditions. Workers were hired under the kafala system, in which their working visas were tied to their employers, and they would have to request permission to change jobs or leave Qatar. Furthermore, migrants do not have the right to join trade unions or to go on strike. Moreover, there are estimates that indicate that, in that period, more than six thousand migrant workers have died as a result of the precarious work conditions.
While Qatar has adopted significant reforms to its labor laws, including the abolishment of the kafala system, and the adoption of a basic minimum wage, a recent report by Human Rights Watch indicates that the violations have continued in practice.
Human rights related to labor are protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Article 8 of the ICCPR prohibits forced labor, and Article 22 provides the rights of association and of forming trade unions. As for the ICESCR, according to Article 7, states should ensure fair wages, decent living standards, safe and healthy working conditions, and reasonable limitations of working hours. Article 8 provides the rights to form trade unions and strike.
Seeking remedies
Although Qatar became a party to the Covenants in 2018, it has not signed or ratified the Optional Protocol to either of them.. As a result, it has not consented to the jurisdiction of the United Nations Human Rights Committee or the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which are the monitoring mechanisms of these Conventions. Consequently, the international human rights framework does not provide migrant workers with effective means for seeking remedies against Qatar for the human rights abuses they have been subjected to.
Migrant workers will also be unable to seek remediation from FIFA through international mechanisms. The international human rights framework only creates obligations for states. Although FIFA has included a commitment to respect “internationally recognized human rights'' in its Statute, as a non-state actor, it cannot be held responsible under international law. Moreover, the international human rights framework applicable to businesses merely consists of guidelines and codes of conduct, such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which are not legally binding instruments.
Alternatively, a possible avenue for seeking remediation from FIFA may be through the state in which it is domiciled: Switzerland. In accordance with the nationality principle of jurisdiction, domestic courts have jurisdiction over cases where the perpetrator of a violation is a national of the state. In fact, a claim was brought to a Swiss commercial court in Zurich in 2014 by a Bangladeshi worker. According to the claimant, by awarding the World Cup to Qatar without compelling it to secure migrant worker’s rights, FIFA had knowingly put those people in danger, breaching Swiss law. The claimant requested the court to order FIFA to press Qatari authorities to ensure the fundamental rights of migrant workers, to declare the unlawfulness of FIFA’s negligent conduct towards human rights, and to award a compensation of 4,000 US dollars to the victim. The court held that the claims were too vague and failed to indicate exactly which of FIFA’s acts constituted human rights violations. Consequently, the case was dismissed on admissibility grounds.
As the court did not issue a decision on the merits of the case, other cases related to the abuses in the preparations for the World Cup can still be filed against FIFA. However, the court noted in the decision that FIFA did not have the capacity to ensure the observance of human rights, as this is the responsibility of Qatar. In effect, the Swiss court indicated that it would be very difficult for victims to claim remedies effectively from FIFA for the abuse they suffered while working in Qatar.
Concluding remarks
Under current circumstances, it is difficult to see how migrant workers could effectively request remedies for the human rights abuses suffered in the preparations for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. As long as Qatar does not consent to the jurisdiction of a human rights body, it cannot be held responsible for those abuses through an international mechanism. And, as long as there is no international framework that imposes binding obligations on corporations, there is little reason to believe that FIFA could be held responsible for human rights violations. Until then, it is likely that human rights will remain only “on the pitch”.