The High Court has quashed a legal challenge against the mandatory requirement that maids live with their employers.
Filipina domestic helper Nancy Lubiano had asked the court to declare the rule unconstitutional and give helpers the option of living away from their employer.
Her case for a judicial review argued that mandating where 370,00 foreign workers could live was an overstep of power by the Director of Immigration.
Through her lawyer Mark Daly, Lubiano also said the arrangement, which began in 2003, increased the risk of violations of domestic helpers’ fundamental rights.
The requirement has been criticized by rights activists, who say it leaves domestic helpers vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.
However ruling yesterday, High Court Judge Anderson Chow rejected the arguments, reported RTHK, saying it did not violate fundamental rights.
He said was that if maids didn’t like it, they could quit, or not come to Hong Kong in the first place.
Recent research has highlighted the “appalling” living conditions of many maids who are forced to sleep in toilets, showers, storage rooms and on balconies.
Another, government-backed, report revealed that more than 70 percent of employment agencies charge exorbitant fees, withhold passports, or act as de facto loan sharks, ensnaring maids in debt.
One year-long study found a “significant proportion” of the maids it interviewed were working in conditions that would constitute “forced labor”.
According to Ming Pao, a government spokesman welcomed the judgement, adding that if any domestic helper feels they are being exploited they can contact the Immigration Department and Labor Department.
