A/HRC/43/45 H. Debt bondage 78. Millions of people in all regions of the world continue to be subject to bonded labour or debt bondage, a form of human exploitation that is close and often tantamount to slavery. In 2016, debt bondage affected half of the total victims of forced labour imposed by private actors around the world;92 it was furthermore estimated that 4.8 million of the 24.9 million victims of forced labour were sexually exploited.93 79. According to the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences, debt bondage can be found in various sectors of the economy, and is disproportionally endured by people in a vulnerable situation, such as those belonging to minority groups, indigenous people, women, children, people determined as being of low caste, and migrant workers. She found that many victims of debt bondage faced multiple and intersecting sources of discrimination, which made them vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. The Special Rapporteur pointed out that migrant workers represented a significant portion of the labour force in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, particularly in the private sector, where the kafalah system, which allowed employers to sponsor workers, provided fertile ground for dependency towards employers, potential abuses and debt bondage, because it linked workers’ employment and residency status to their employers. 94 80. Recruitment agencies often charge illegal costs and fees when recruiting foreign workers. Cases of identity documents being confiscated by recruiters until full repayment of debts have been reported.95 Such practices are considered to contribute to debt bondage, 96 together with the non-payment, underpayment or delayed payment of wages, and contract substitution. Because of the pressure applied by recruitment agencies to secure new working contracts, domestic workers sometimes see their contract abruptly end after they have finally paid off their debt and begun to receive a salary.97 V. Conclusions 81. There are two drivers of the increase in private indebtedness: first, the flourishing supply side of finance, with deregulation and increasing financialization being its facilitating instruments, which also includes the commodification and financialization of essential components to the realization of economic, social and cultural rights; second, the reconfiguration of many human needs for social reproduction that become unmet financial needs. While the past century has witnessed the establishment and expansion of social safety nets, the gaps that remain provide fertile ground for private debt to flourish. Paradoxically, the social protection measures taken by States, via cash transfers, have been identified as a form of potential lending collateral, guaranteeing creditor’s loans or allowing for lower interests instead of serving their original purpose.98 82. Accounting for a significant portion of private debt in most countries, high individual and household debt has been associated with inequality, macroeconomic instability, unsustainable sovereign debt and financial crises. Low wages, poverty and inequality, exacerbated by such policies as privatization, austerity measures and labour market flexibilization, have pushed millions of people into debt, which in turn has pushed millions of people into poverty and informality, making them vulnerable to all kinds of abuse. At the core of this phenomenon lies so-called “financial inclusion”, the colossal failure of States to ensure the realization of economic, social and cultural rights 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 ILO, Global Estimates of Modern Slavery, Geneva, 2017, p. 5. Ibid., p. 10. A/HRC/33/46, paras. 9 and 29. Submission by the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development. A/HRC/33/46. Submission by the Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development. See Lena Lavinas de Morais, The Takeover of Social Policy by Financialization: The Brazilian Paradox (Palgrave MacMillan, New York, 2017). 17