Sri Lanka’s government has come to the defense of a senior diplomat who has been ordered by an Australian court to compensate a former housekeeper with over US$360,000 in back wages. The case, which has garnered international attention, involves allegations that the domestic worker was held under conditions likened to modern-day slavery while employed in Canberra.
The diplomat at the center of the controversy, Himalee Arunatilaka, is currently Sri Lanka’s permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva, which also includes responsibilities with the International Labour Organization. Prior to her current role, Arunatilaka served as Sri Lanka’s Deputy High Commissioner in Canberra for a period of three years, concluding her tenure in 2018.
The Federal Court of Australia, on August 15, found that Arunatilaka had violated the Fair Work Act and ruled that she was not protected by diplomatic immunity in this instance. According to Australian media reports, the court mandated that Arunatilaka pay more than A$540,000 (equivalent to approximately US$360,000) in back wages and accrued interest to Priyanka Danaratna, her former housekeeper.
David Hillard, the attorney representing Danaratna, described the working conditions his client endured as “slavery-type.” Hillard stated that Danaratna worked seven days a week over the course of three years, with only two days off during that entire period. The only reason she was granted those two days off was due to an injury she sustained while cooking.
In addition to the grueling work schedule, Danaratna was reportedly denied unpaid breaks, overtime pay, and penalty rates. Furthermore, she was not paid on a regular basis nor provided with payslips, which are standard practice in Australia’s employment law. Hillard emphasized that these conditions exemplify the exploitation associated with modern slavery.
Court documents revealed that over three years of employment, Danaratna was paid a mere A$11,212. This figure stands in stark contrast to the national minimum wage in Australia at the time, which was set at A$656.90 per week for a standard 38-hour workweek. The stark disparity between the pay received and the legal minimum raised significant concerns about the treatment of domestic workers employed under diplomatic immunity. After fleeing the diplomatic residence, Danaratna sought refuge with the Salvation Army, an organization that often assists victims of human trafficking and exploitation.
In response to the court’s ruling and the ensuing criticism on social media, Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement defending Arunatilaka. The ministry asserted that the wages paid to Danaratna were in accordance with rates approved by the Sri Lankan government. The statement highlighted that the salary provided to the domestic worker was consistent with the allowance sanctioned by the ministry for such employment.
“The ministry is satisfied that the said salary was paid to the domestic assistant by the employer as mutually agreed,” read the official statement from Colombo. This response comes amid growing calls for the Sri Lankan government to address the Australian court’s decision and to clarify its stance on the treatment of domestic workers employed by its diplomats abroad.
The case has sparked a broader discussion on the responsibilities of diplomatic missions regarding the employment of domestic workers. It also raises questions about the protections afforded to these workers under international and domestic law. While diplomatic immunity provides certain legal protections, the Australian court’s ruling underscores that such immunity may not shield individuals from accountability in cases of severe labor rights violations.
As the situation continues to unfold, it is likely to influence future diplomatic practices and the monitoring of employment conditions for domestic workers. The case may prompt both sending and receiving countries to reassess the guidelines and regulations governing the employment of domestic staff by diplomats to prevent exploitation and ensure compliance with labor standards.
