A/HRC/26/35/Add.1 for the transfer of sponsorship by the Ministry of Interior in the event of abuse by the employer, in practice this provision is applied in relatively few cases. 28. The majority of the migrants the Special Rapporteur met, including construction workers and domestic workers, had had their passports confiscated by their employer, in violation of the Sponsorship Law. This included many migrants in the deportation centre, who had allegedly absconded from abusive employers. The explanation provided by the authorities, that most migrants prefer to let their employers keep their passports for them out of fear of loss or theft, contrasts with the testimonies the Special Rapporteur heard from migrants. 29. It has been argued that the kafala system is necessary because of the large number of migrants in Qatar. This cannot be used as an excuse for maintaining legislation that renders migrants vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. The Qatari authorities decide on the number of migrants they wish to admit to their territory. The demographic situation in Qatar is thus a result of Government policies and decisions, a nationwide choice of rapid development and a high level of household services. 30. The kafala system has been said to balance the interests of both parties, namely the employer and the migrant. Employers pay for the recruitment of the migrant and therefore feel that the migrant is an investment they need to hold on to. One way to solve this would be to reduce the costs of recruitment, inter alia by reducing the fees employers pay recruitment agencies and reducing the cost of visas. That way, employers could no longer argue that hiring a migrant is such a big investment that they need to keep them for an extended period of time. 31. Many of the persons the Special Rapporteur met, including Government representatives, were of the opinion that the kafala system is problematic and a source of abuse against migrants. The National Development Strategy provides for “review and revision as may be necessary, of Qatar’s sponsorship system”. The Special Rapporteur was informed that the Sponsorship Law is currently under review and that the Ministry of Interior will be granted broader powers to revoke sponsorship. The Special Rapporteur urges the authorities to make it easier for migrants to change sponsor and that this should happen automatically in all cases of alleged abuse by the sponsor. In the longer term, abolishing the kafala system and replacing it by a regulated open labour market, where the work permit allows the worker to change employer, would reduce the level of exploitation of migrants and at the same time ensure the mobility of labour and a better match of needs and skills. 32. Another problematic element of the kafala system is the exit permit requirement under the Sponsorship Law: migrants can only leave the country with an exit permit issued by their sponsor. This requirement violates the freedom of movement guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial Discrimination. The claim that it is meant to prevent the flight of migrants after committing crimes can only apply to a few individuals and does not justify the pre-emptive punishment of thousands. It is a source of abuse and there is no valid justification for maintaining this system. B. The recruitment process 33. Migrants who come to Qatar to work have often suffered abuse and exploitation in their home countries during the recruitment process. Recruitment fees are forbidden by Qatari law, yet many migrants the Special Rapporteur met had taken out a loan to pay recruitment fees in their home countries, a loan that may take months or years to be repaid. Some lacked information about their jobs and salaries before they left their countries. 8