Barred beggars

.


Editorial November 25, 2024

print-news

In an unusual move that blurs the line between resolve and reaction, Pakistan has added 4,300 names to its Exit Control List (ECL) to curb the influx of beggars into Saudi Arabia under the guise of religious pilgrims. The decision, prompted by Saudi Arabia's warnings over misuse of Hajj and Umrah visas, is being hailed as a crackdown on the so-called beggar mafia. But isn't it a cure for the symptom rather than the disease?

On the surface, the move appears decisive. By restricting travel for individuals involved in these exploitative schemes, Pakistan sends a signal of zero tolerance. Yet, this also raises pressing questions: who are these 4,300 individuals? Are they the orchestrators of the scams or merely the vulnerable faces of a much larger, shadowy network? Tackling the mafia behind such exploitation requires dismantling the socioeconomic roots that fuel such practices. Let us not forget the context. Pakistan, a country grappling with soaring inflation and rising unemployment, has no shortage of desperate individuals willing to gamble on exploitative opportunities abroad. Criminal networks capitalise on this desperation, crafting schemes to exploit the deeply ingrained trust in religious pilgrimages. Moreover, a blanket addition of names to the ECL risks penalising innocent citizens caught in bureaucratic crossfire. If the government hopes to truly make a difference, transparency and accountability must guide this process. Simply barring travel for a few thousand won't break the mafia's back unless its masterminds are prosecuted and their networks dismantled.

The solution lies in a dual approach: crackdowns combined with meaningful reform. Pak-Saudi collaboration on visa vetting and enhanced oversight can stem the abuse of travel channels. Simultaneously, policies aimed at alleviating poverty and creating opportunities at home can diminish the allure of exploitation.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ